# Civil Discussions



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

I agree with many that a healthy discussion of policies that impact our access to quality outdoor experiences isn't just appropriate here, but vital to the protection of our resources. As the mods and others have said, political topics like immigration, abortion, etc, have no place here. Name calling, personal insults, etc, are counterproductive and inhibit meaningful communication.

So, perhaps we could come up with some guidelines as to what topics will help us further our common interests. For instance, I brought up the EPA in a non threatening way because I think it's supposed to protect our air, water and land from pollution. Certainly this is critical to sportsmen, but those threads were nipped in the bud. Still scratching my head over that. Public land issues, stream access issues, endangered species issues, development, the GSL ecosystem, monies paid to unaccountable lobbyists (BGF) that could have been put into habitat, all seem appropriate to me. However, I posted up the votes on the Bears Ears resolution without editorializing, because I think it's important to shine the light of day on the actions of our elected representatives. Each of us can draw his own conclusions. 

Or, perhaps we shouldn't talk about any issues or threats to our common interests. In that case, we'll only be able to look at ourselves and ask, "Where were you?" when our opportunities dry up or are sold to the highest bidder. Thoughts?


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Paddler,

well said. We are all supportive of discussions about the environment and proposed legislation / political moves and encourage all perspectives so long as they are on topic.

You are right, there are just those subjects that are not pertinent to this forum that (although interesting) should not be discussed here.

History has proven time and time again that politics get people riled up and someone takes offense and so forth. So please do your best to keep things civil. Agree to disagree. That is what America is about.

I think we can all agree that we care about our resources. We just have different views of how to protect them.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Maybe a good approach would be if you think a thread topic could be highly explosive, run it by the mods via PM first...?


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

I think that the biggest slippery slope regarding the discussion of political issues is that the Internet is a horrible venue for rational discussions. I believe that it is human nature to act less than civil under the guise and protection of an invisible audience and an anonymous screen name. I myself have been guilty of this. In fact I have received feedback from those who I've met in person from this forum that I am different than they expected based on my online behavior. This has given me pause and caused reflection in the hopes of raising the standards of my personal conduct. 

-I think that info on issues, legislation, and meetings should absolutely be posted on the forum. 
-I think that forum members should voice their concerns related to outdoor and wildlife issues.
-I don't think that members should use the forum as an opportunity for their own personal op-Ed.
-I don't think forum members should belabor any certain issue with repeated posts or continued reposting of links from other news sources. 
-I don't think that this forum is the right place to 'debate' the issues or specifically endorse or disclaim any specific candidate or political party. These types of sensitive debates are much more effective and useful in a more personal setting where people are more in line to mind their manners. 


This is just my opinion and these reasons represent why I personally will no longer participate in political discussions on this forum. I really don't think that it is feasible that there will be continued political discussion without the need for continual moderation and oversight, all of which are likely beyond the scope of the purpose of this forum anyway. 

I'd hate to see this forum lowered to the level of the news comments but some days they look very similar. Heaven knows that we have unlimited opportunity to receive political messages all around us. Maybe it would be good if this was a place where we could just share a hunting tale or pick up a new jerky recipe? My $.02.---------SS


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Springville Shooter said:


> I think that the biggest slippery slope regarding the discussion of political issues is that the Internet is a horrible venue for rational discussions. I believe that it is human nature to act less than civil under the guise and protection of an invisible audience and an anonymous screen name. I myself have been guilty of this. In fact I have received feedback from those who I've met in person from this forum that I am different than they expected based on my online behavior. This has given me pause and caused reflection in the hopes of raising the standards of my personal conduct.
> 
> -I think that info on issues, legislation, and meetings should absolutely be posted on the forum.
> -I think that forum members should voice their concerns related to outdoor and wildlife issues.
> ...


I agree with the part in red almost exclusively. But would add that without debate of some of these issues, we may end up very limited in our ability to be posting pictures and recipes down the road. If it has an impact on wildlife and hunting, then it has a place being discussed among those of us that it impacts.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

While a lot of the political topics are important and need to be addressed, I think it is a big reason this forum has been "dead meat" for months. Most users want to talk about hunting and fishing, not politics.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Fowlmouth said:


> While a lot of the political topics are important and need to be addressed, I think it is a big reason this forum has been "dead meat" for months. Most users want to talk about hunting and fishing, not politics.


Numbers: The vast majority of the topics here are hunting and fishing related. With really only a few topics(big game for example), some being some what political, driving the majority of traffic. Participation and viewership of online forums are two very different things. I routinely view about 12 online forums over a single weeks time frame, I participate in two with any regularity, with this one the most frequent for participation.

You would have to look at the larger numbers, but with certain kinds of viewership numbers, you are looking at people that come for information or entertainment, but not participation. That would make this a destination, at least on some fronts. what do the mods and admin have to say about those numbers?


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

We don't get traffic details from VS so it's hard to say what the driving force of traffic is. It it is interesting to note that Big Game is the primary motivator for most people. 

Education seemed to be driving traffic for some time but now many new members join to comment on a topic they are either passionate about or know a little about. 

I see less and less members trying to learn something about topics they aren't familiar with which is a shame because I feel that this should be a learning forum as much as a sharing forum.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

I think politics is a tough issue, if it can be done in a civil way then fine, if it starts to go down the road of bashing, name calling, muddied up then it needs to be halted. If we stay on subject and respect others opinions then fine. You all are correct in the message we need to be concerned about our future, but in the same breath we need to be concerned about the beliefs of others. We don't like to lock threads, and do so only when the issue has become a violation of rules.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

We owe it to ourselves and to the resources that we all depend on to have a civil and respectful dialogue amongst sportsmen and women. It is truly sad, but the future direction of our outdoor sports will depend almost exclusively on political actions by folks that we elected...so in order to talk about our sports (hunting, fishing, hiking, biking, birding, recipes, etc) we will find ourselves discussing threats to those pursuits. I hope that public discussion never ends, or abates, because it is what makes America great. 
R


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Dunkem said:


> I think politics is a tough issue, if it can be done in a civil way then fine, if it starts to go down the road of bashing, name calling, muddied up then it needs to be halted. If we stay on subject and respect others opinions then fine. You all are correct in the message we need to be concerned about our future, but in the same breath we need to be concerned about the beliefs of others. We don't like to lock threads, and do so only when the issue has become a violation of rules.


So let me get this right you are calling for and end to all US elections?.......Oh wait, you meant just here......got it.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

I would be all for an area established on the UWN where future town hall meetings, pending HB's, service projects, and bulletins about things that affect our wildlife could be posted as an FYI only - no responses would be allowed. 

There is no way that a political thread, land grab thread, etc. will ever stay civil. Don't believe me? Check monstermuleys.com and look at the general hunting forum or the political forum. 

Also, I would love it if someone could please show me where debating a topic on a forum actually accomplished anything in the real world - I am being sincere on this. If the WB or DNR listened to all the threads regarding the current status of the wildlife in this state, the expo wouldn't even exist. 

#keepuwnabouthuntingandfishing


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

There is nothing more important about hunting and fishing than the access to do so. Nothing. Inhibiting the discussion of the most important issues concerning access to hunting and fishing and shooting is a mistake, imho. 

I agree that these topics should be discussed with civility. SS said it well that people need to see each side and that is hard to do on the interweb. But people are being educated. Links to valid stories have educated me. 

Let the threads start and keep them civil. If someone doesn't want to click on it then that is their choice.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Lonetree said:


> So let me get this right you are calling for and end to all US elections?.......Oh wait, you meant just here......got it.


 Ummmmm, huh?:noidea:


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Dunkem said:


> Ummmmm, huh?:noidea:


"I think politics is a tough issue, if it can be done in a civil way then fine, if it starts to go down the road of bashing, name calling, muddied up then it needs to be halted."--Dunkem


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

CPAjeff said:


> I would be all for an area established on the UWN where future town hall meetings, pending HB's, service projects, and bulletins about things that affect our wildlife could be posted as an FYI only - no responses would be allowed.
> 
> There is no way that a political thread, land grab thread, etc. will ever stay civil. Don't believe me? Check monstermuleys.com and look at the general hunting forum or the political forum.
> 
> ...


A few guys talking on a river, or in the field have more than once changed significant parts of the world. Forums are no different, they are conversations, and exchanges of ideas and information. You might feel that _our_ voices carry no weight in such a public forum, but some of us know otherwise. No, not every conversation has immense gravity, but some of them do, and that is why they need to be had.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Lonetree said:


> A few guys talking on a river, or in the field have more than once changed significant parts of the world. Forums are no different, they are conversations, and exchanges of ideas and information. You might feel that _our_ voices carry no weight in such a public forum, but some of us know otherwise. No, not every conversation has immense gravity, but some of them do, and that is why they need to be had.


 A few guys met to discuss why the English were making it hard to live in the colonies....


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Lonetree said:


> A few guys talking on a river, or in the field have more than once changed significant parts of the world. Forums are no different, they are conversations, and exchanges of ideas and information. You might feel that _our_ voices carry no weight in such a public forum, but some of us know otherwise. No, not every conversation has immense gravity, but some of them do, and that is why they need to be had.


 This is a good point. I think it would be great if people could keep their cool and not drag other superfluous details into the conversation and state their point of view in a calm collected manner that lays out their opinion on the matter to help others learn another perspective and make judgment from there. All too often politics bring out the worst in people.

Right or left. Blue or Red (except in sports). There aren't always absolutes.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Bax* said:


> A few guys met to discuss why the English were making it hard to live in the colonies....


And then my great, great, great....... you get the idea. Said "sure you can land and hay your stock on my island......" And with Abigale watching from across the sound, the first ambush was set, and sprung.......

The real confusion, and a whole lot of talking, came when cask after cask had to be rolled out to appease the masses. They meant well, but did not always fully understand what was happening, or who was doing what.


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

As a personal rule on here I try to stay out of talks that are of a political nature. Simply because I am one of the bad ones that really just doesn't like politics and I don't stay up to date on some of the issues that threaten the things I love the most and that is on me. As such, I cant intelligently discuss these matters anyway. However, that doesn't mean I don't care about the issues I see on here. Hell, I wouldn't even know about any of these issues if I didn't read about on here. 

I think they definitely should be discussed and one reason why is that recently I received a personal text from a buddy of mine on here Mike -MWscott72 encouraging me to forward a text to everybody I know to encourage the end to HB621 or something like that? Well, I sent that text as Mike requested to everyone in my contact list on my phone. I was surprised by how many people text me back asking what the hell is this about and how insane it was?? They all followed suit and forwarded it on an on and so on. Well, the next day what happens 621 is hosed. 

I'm not saying UWN did that but it certainly helped. 

Lets talk about these things for sure but keep it outdoor related and civil.


----------



## OriginalOscar (Sep 5, 2016)

Transparency good. Drop the screen names and require actual name and location. 

Troy Rushton - Riverton


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

I think this is going well, don't you? Civil exchange of ideas and all that. I firmly believe we can discuss those issues that affect sportsmen and educate them about threats to their treasured heritage. I think we can identify those threats and those responsible for them and be an agent of change. Those who threaten us rely on our ignorance and apathy to further their agenda. 

Imagine what would happen if those responsible for giving money to BGF with no accountability got an earful from sportsmen in their district. Activism works, and we can make it work for us.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Lots of thoughts on this, but here are a few points I suppose I will make.

1.


CPAjeff said:


> I would love it if someone could please show me where debating a topic on a forum actually accomplished anything in the real world - I am being sincere on this.


I have one example where it did accomplish a lot. The stream access movement started from a bunch of fly anglers discussing the Conatser decision and the legislatures reaction to it on a couple of message forums. It seemed to start on another forum and eventually spread to this one. I have long maintained that the States stream anglers owe a debt of gratitude to UOTF for starting our now vigorous stream access movement.

2. I kind of became more involved as a member here because some of these issues could be freely discussed and not shunted to some peripheral part of the forum, like some other forums do. I guess I've never left. (some may wish I did.  ) I agree that there are some issues so important to sportsmen that they should be discussed thoroughly.

3. Right now, I think a lot of us, regardless of which side of the aisle we lean, are a bit "on edge" about the nations political situation. As we've seen, this quickly spills over into the outdoor pursuits we love. Disagreement should be expected but hopefully is respectful. Forgiving others may be helpful too. Considering the nation at large is struggling with these concepts, it is not surprising that we might have an issue here from time to time.

4. Some issues that fall under discussion here have been beaten to death on UWN. I just try to tune the excessive rants out, but I certainly can see how some would be notably irritated.

5. The Mods have a tough and thankless job. Deciding what is too much is a tough call to make. Accepting the decision with a smile is probably the best policy to keep the forum a functioning, useful place to waste our time.  (I have seen some forums implode otherwise) It also saddens me to see longtime members go off in a huff or just disappear. I would hope they come back but people gotta do what they gotta do. Life goes on.


----------



## OriginalOscar (Sep 5, 2016)

paddler said:


> Imagine what would happen if those responsible for giving money to BGF with no accountability got an earful from sportsmen in their district. Activism works, and we can make it work for us.


Great point. I'm surprised at how many people look beyond their local representatives and look straight to state offices as the problem. It's good to speak with your local representatives and senators.

Everyone wanted to go yell at Chaffetz but the legislature is what approves budget and state legislative action.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

OriginalOscar said:


> Great point. I'm surprised at how many people look beyond their local representatives and look straight to state offices as the problem. It's good to speak with your local representatives and senators.
> 
> Everyone wanted to go yell at Chaffetz but the legislature is what approves budget and state legislative action.


We're yelling at (and emailing, and calling) Chaffetz about a host of other issues. Can't go into it here, of course.


----------



## OriginalOscar (Sep 5, 2016)

paddler said:


> We're yelling at (and emailing, and calling) Chaffetz about a host of other issues. Can't go into it here, of course.


Anyone who shows up at a rally and can't demonstrate civility is a bigger problem than who they are protesting.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

OriginalOscar said:


> Anyone who shows up at a rally and can't demonstrate civility is a bigger problem than who they are protesting.


Actually, that's not exactly clear. Good oped on this topic in today's Trib.


----------

