Fix The Site Or Shut It Down

[The Gleam]

I haven’t been having any problems with this site lately. I’m beginning to think there is a lot of user error here. Some of you guys probably need to learn how to use a computer and run your home networks.

Oh, there you are Karine - everyone has been wondering where you would turn up after your spin stint at the White House.

Welcome to Calguns!

---

[OlderThanDirt]

You're kidding, correct?

Correct. Just trolling.

[Garand Hunter]

So far so good for about 6 days now.

[CALI-gula]

So far so good for about 6 days now.

6 days of what?

504 Gateway Errors half the day today. There were outages for hours yesterday.

.

[mblat]

What makes that other site “better” is that it actually works as far as being able to gain access when this site does not.

This. I am totally floored by the ability of otherwise intelligent people to refuse to see reality if they do not like it.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

This. I am totally floored by the ability of otherwise intelligent people to refuse to see reality if they do not like it.

Sadly, far too many adopt a blindered and unfortunately narrow definition for things like 'better' simply because their priorities differ from others. Then they throw about accusations, theories, and even insults to 'make their case' or 'sell it.'

The word 'better' has multiple definitions... greater than half, improved in health or mental attitude, more attractive, favorable, or commendable, more advantageous or effective, improved in accuracy or performance

All of those are based on subjective, not objective, criteria. Subjectively and objectively, 24/7/365 access, for the most part (we get posts indicating that even the other site is occasionally down, just for shorter periods) isn't the be all, end all of how most define 'better.' The fact that you're posting here indicates that this site DOES WORK. Maybe not as 'conveniently' as you'd like it to vis a vis your schedule, but it IS working; otherwise, you couldn't have posted. We've already briefly discussed some of the problems many here see/have with the other site and the limitations the owner of that site imposes. Many here don't care for that owner's 'style' when it comes to business/marketing and some even have trouble with the claims he makes with regard to his shooting credentials. Just the fact that he doesn't allow an OT due to what he claims would be moderation requirements, then 'advertises' for moderators, coupled with his already displayed penchant for shutting down and/or deleting posts/threads he disagrees with or thinks will make his site look bad leaves a bad taste for many. That's without getting into how he has described the membership here and his feelings regarding OT threads posted here.

Reality? Those issues have an impact on attractiveness, favorability, commendability, effectiveness, advantageousness, and, therefore, how those factors play into mental attitudes regarding the two sites and how 'healthy' the information and exchanges are or will be perceived as. All of those play into how one defines 'better.'

If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

[saudadeii]

<snip>

If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

This 1,000 time over. (the rest is directed to the others in the thread).

Nobody is forcing any of us to stick around here (or maybe they haven't gotten to me yet). Yet here we all are, still! So exactly who is refusing to see reality and what reality is that?

[ikeo]

Sadly, far too many adopt a blindered and unfortunately narrow definition for things like 'better' simply because their priorities differ from others. Then they throw about accusations, theories, and even insults to 'make their case' or 'sell it.'

The word 'better' has multiple definitions... greater than half, improved in health or mental attitude, more attractive, favorable, or commendable, more advantageous or effective, improved in accuracy or performance

All of those are based on subjective, not objective, criteria. Subjectively and objectively, 24/7/365 access, for the most part (we get posts indicating that even the other site is occasionally down, just for shorter periods) isn't the be all, end all of how most define 'better.' The fact that you're posting here indicates that this site DOES WORK. Maybe not as 'conveniently' as you'd like it to vis a vis your schedule, but it IS working; otherwise, you couldn't have posted. We've already briefly discussed some of the problems many here see/have with the other site and the limitations the owner of that site imposes. Many here don't care for that owner's 'style' when it comes to business/marketing and some even have trouble with the claims he makes with regard to his shooting credentials. Just the fact that he doesn't allow an OT due to what he claims would be moderation requirements, then 'advertises' for moderators, coupled with his already displayed penchant for shutting down and/or deleting posts/threads he disagrees with or thinks will make his site look bad leaves a bad taste for many. That's without getting into how he has described the membership here and his feelings regarding OT threads posted here.

Reality? Those issues have an impact on attractiveness, favorability, commendability, effectiveness, advantageousness, and, therefore, how those factors play into mental attitudes regarding the two sites and how 'healthy' the information and exchanges are or will be perceived as. All of those play into how one defines 'better.'

If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

I see you're still continuing with your smear campaign of lies and twisting facts to fit your narrative. The fact that you are singing the same song from over a year ago is admirable. It seems your story of how i do things continues to evolve over time. I think I've proven now, that when I offered to fix or acquire this place, I was both serious and capable. You don't seem to understand that operating a site like this isn't easy for one person, you give me a hard time about strategic planning for the community, but make every excuse you can think of here.

I hope you understand that I have criteria to any entity that would be interested in acquiring or partnering, not to dissimilar to the criteria for when help was offered here. You seem to ignore the sheer amount of work that I put into the site to scale it to where it is. There's been several migrations of database, web, and search servers. If I kept track, it's a couple thousand hours of work roughly. I even work on it on my vacation & travel.

Sometimes you guys celebrate when I upgrade and its down for like 1-2 hours but since i've improved the time to < 10 minutes after refining the upgrade process. My hope is to pass this on to a larger organization who has the resources so that a site that's critical to 2A Californians doesn't collapse. You also seem to ignore the only thing i don't allow are things that are unrelated AND cause distractions, both conditions must be met. Specifically to reduce work for mods. You make it sound like a bad thing to build a community and pass it off to capable hands, hands that would need to be vetted to ensure continuity. I've always said I started this site as a hobby to fix a problem. I never thought, I'd have more traffic than CGN when i started. Though people like yourself gave me motivation to keep building, instead of complaining and arguing. Now we serve nearly 20k users. Keep in mind this site was bought from Ramon, it was not started by Kestryll and my career is not in the 2A space. In a way, I can relate to Ramon and set up everything in a very organized way thinking someone better can eventually guide it to another level.

When it comes to censorship, you don't seem to care that more people have been banned here for much less, where I've only banned 1 person (who happened to originate from a VPN in Mexico) in over a year since I started the site for that specific troublemaker. Otherwise, we ban daily for scammers and fake listings.

Also ironically, you don't really realize that you have been one of the best sources for guerilla marketing. If you notice, I've only responded to people, I never started threads. It stopped being worth guerilla marketing here long ago, but you fail to realize you are still one of my sites strongest advocates because you talk about it whenever someone mentions their frustration with this sites availability. 😉 So thank you for that.

I've been a member here a long time, with several trades, and contributed. TBH, i'll contribute annually here too. I wanted to see this site get better like everyone else and had skills to do something about it. In addition to volunteer work and acquisition, i also later offered contract work too. Fix it and keep the same management but again, but you twist things to fit your narrative and only focused on what fit your storyline. I've always said both sites can and should coexist in the 2A space. Why would I want to acquire this site and sell my own? Have you ever thought about that? I wanted to fix this site and get it running smoothly and do my small part, that many of you deem unworthy because thou art holier politically. I'm just trying to keep 2A alive. Can you imagine, if i didn't make my site at the time, what excuse would you have?

[davidj]

I see you're still continuing with your smear campaign of lies and twisting facts to fit your narrative. The fact that you are singing the same song from over a year ago is admirable. It seems your story of how i do things continues to evolve over time. I think I've proven now, that when I offered to fix or acquire this place, I was both serious and capable. You don't seem to understand that operating a site like this isn't easy for one person, you give me a hard time about strategic planning for the community, but make every excuse you can think of here.

I hope you understand that I have criteria to any entity that would be interested in acquiring or partnering, not to dissimilar to the criteria for when help was offered here. You seem to ignore the sheer amount of work that I put into the site to scale it to where it is. There's been several migrations of database, web, and search servers. If I kept track, it's a couple thousand hours of work roughly. I even work on it on my vacation & travel.

Sometimes you guys celebrate when I upgrade and its down for like 1-2 hours but since i've improved the time to < 10 minutes after refining the upgrade process. My hope is to pass this on to a larger organization who has the resources so that a site that's critical to 2A Californians doesn't collapse. You also seem to ignore the only thing i don't allow are things that are unrelated AND cause distractions, both conditions must be met. Specifically to reduce work for mods. You make it sound like a bad thing to build a community and pass it off to capable hands, hands that would need to be vetted to ensure continuity. I've always said I started this site as a hobby to fix a problem. I never thought, I'd have more traffic than CGN when i started. Though people like yourself gave me motivation to keep building, instead of complaining and arguing. Now we serve nearly 20k users. Keep in mind this site was bought from Ramon, it was not started by Kestryll and my career is not in the 2A space. In a way, I can relate to Ramon and set up everything in a very organized way thinking someone better can eventually guide it to another level.

When it comes to censorship, you don't seem to care that more people have been banned here for much less, where I've only banned 1 person (who happened to originate from a VPN in Mexico) in over a year since I started the site for that specific troublemaker. Otherwise, we ban daily for scammers and fake listings.

Also ironically, you don't really realize that you have been one of the best sources for guerilla marketing. If you notice, I've only responded to people, I never started threads. It stopped being worth guerilla marketing here long ago, but you fail to realize you are still one of my sites strongest advocates because you talk about it whenever someone mentions their frustration with this sites availability. 😉 So thank you for that.

I've been a member here a long time, with several trades, and contributed. TBH, i'll contribute annually here too. I wanted to see this site get better like everyone else and had skills to do something about it. In addition to volunteer work and acquisition, i also later offered contract work too. Fix it and keep the same management but again, but you twist things to fit your narrative and only focused on what fit your storyline. I've always said both sites can and should coexist in the 2A space. Why would I want to acquire this site and sell my own? Have you ever thought about that? I wanted to fix this site and get it running smoothly and do my small part, that many of you deem unworthy because thou art holier politically. I'm just trying to keep 2A alive. Can you imagine, if i didn't make my site at the time, what excuse would you have?

Why is this Tim Walz impersonator constantly trying to code talk to white men.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I see you're still continuing with your smear campaign of lies and twisting facts to fit your narrative. The fact that you are singing the same song from over a year ago is admirable. It seems your story of how i do things continues to evolve over time. I think I've proven now, that when I offered to fix or acquire this place, I was both serious and capable. You don't seem to understand that operating a site like this isn't easy for one person, you give me a hard time about strategic planning for the community, but make every excuse you can think of here.

Gimme a break. This is a prime example of what YOU do; i.e., don't like a post, can't delete it, so you try to spin it into something nefarious from the other person and positive for you.

I understand far better than I've let on what it takes to run a site. Do you really want me to go back and dig out, then quote your intentions for this site? Serious and capable? Perhaps in a technical sense. In a gun owning, educational sense, you've got quite a ways to go before most here would feel any 'strategic' plan you come up with has merit. Not to mention you've got an even longer way to go to match the content which, even with our current issues, can still be found on this site; though you can never replicate the historical content by dint of knowledge or volume, at least not for years to come. Using California as a 'test case,' all the while demanding access, then chivvying to get it, not to mention your self-proclaimed guerrilla marketing campaign, and expressing the idea that you wish to expand this to all 50 states, as if you and only you have the 'correct' idea as to what a website about guns and gun related topics (which involves more than just the 2nd Amendment, as we've shown you) is... well... I could go into an host of descriptors, but suffice to say you've still got some studying to do.

I hope you understand that I have criteria to any entity that would be interested in acquiring or partnering, not to dissimilar to the criteria for when help was offered here. You seem to ignore the sheer amount of work that I put into the site to scale it to where it is. There's been several migrations of database, web, and search servers. If I kept track, it's a couple thousand hours of work roughly. I even work on it on my vacation & travel.

Oh, you've made it quite clear that your primary interest is in ROI, not actually running such a site. The sheer amount of work and the hours you've dedicated? Welcome to the world of work and, in particular, what it takes to create something, or in this case, replicate something, during a 'down time' for what you're replicating. Yes, replicating. There's no secret that while you're utilizing different software, much of the layout for your site was duplicated, in many respects, from this one. We've gone into the history of the name of your site and we've seen your posts with regard to wanting to turn it into a joint venture, where you dictate which site does what; i.e., there's not much by way of 'originality' to your site other than the current state of the software you are utilizing. (Not to mention concern over how long until you decide the portions of content you leave for this site are no longer worth the time, money, and work in maintaining, particularly given your expressed loathing for that content.)

Want to throw Reddit out there? Fine. Then you shouldn't have needed the membership of this site or this site's layout or this site's vendors to create a sense of legitimacy. Just bear in mind that the resemblance, not to mention, even by your own admission, the types of content and projects are "not TOO dissimilar" (ahem) to what this site is and some of the things it went through years ago. Again, you haven't reinvented the wheel and your continued campaign to convince people you've created a 'better' one has simply worn thin. Just like your database migrations, et al., as you've been repeatedly told, get back to us when you have more than a fraction of the content this site has, not to mention 20 years plus of data to move through several iterations of updated software.

Sometimes you guys celebrate when I upgrade and its down for like 1-2 hours but since i've improved the time to < 10 minutes after refining the upgrade process. My hope is to pass this on to a larger organization who has the resources so that a site that's critical to 2A Californians doesn't collapse. You also seem to ignore the only thing i don't allow are things that are unrelated AND cause distractions, both conditions must be met. Specifically to reduce work for mods. You make it sound like a bad thing to build a community and pass it off to capable hands, hands that would need to be vetted to ensure continuity. I've always said I started this site as a hobby to fix a problem. I never thought, I'd have more traffic than CGN when i started. Though people like yourself gave me motivation to keep building, instead of complaining and arguing. Now we serve nearly 20k users. Keep in mind this site was bought from Ramon, it was not started by Kestryll and my career is not in the 2A space. In a way, I can relate to Ramon and set up everything in a very organized way thinking someone better can eventually guide it to another level.

If you're reading what I wrote as a 'celebration'... Gee... You must be a 'blast' (ahem) at partying. By the way, how is what you wrote different than what I wrote... the other site is occasionally down, just for shorter periods?

Insofar as the history of this site, many of us know how it came to be Kestryll’s and we also know that Kestryll has been the Head Janitor for around two decades. We also know that your “20K users” is, in many respects, just as misleading as this site’s 352,400 members. Being a member and being an active user are two different things. As I told you before, your metrics don’t compare to this site’s, even though you keep claiming they do. You’ve got a long way to go and even some of your metrics are generated by members who are also active here. In short, it’s not a ‘bad’ thing to pass a site off to capable hands; but, it’s something different when that was your actual, self-proclaimed motivation for starting it and then the tactics you’ve used to build it.

When it comes to censorship, you don't seem to care that more people have been banned here for much less, where I've only banned 1 person (who happened to originate from a VPN in Mexico) in over a year since I started the site for that specific troublemaker. Otherwise, we ban daily for scammers and fake listings.

More spin? Censorship isn’t solely defined by how many people you ban and, by the way, many here still don’t see what that guy did as ‘ban worthy’ on your site. Yes. He pressed things, making inconvenient observations and asking inconvenient questions; but, so far as we could tell, they all had merit. Was he a troublemaker? Apparently for you and your plans.

Censorship also involves the deletion of posts, the premature closing of threads, the rewording of members’ posts, etc. All of which you’ve done and still do; doing so under the guise of making things more palatable being a ruse and we all know it. It’s about reworking things to salve your personal sensibilities and those of a portion of your membership. As I said, people have to judge what they’re allowed to post on this site vs. what is/isn’t allowed on yours.

Also ironically, you don't really realize that you have been one of the best sources for guerilla marketing. If you notice, I've only responded to people, I never started threads. It stopped being worth guerilla marketing here long ago, but you fail to realize you are still one of my sites strongest advocates because you talk about it whenever someone mentions their frustration with this sites availability. 😉 So thank you for that.

That doesn’t even count as a fair try. How many threads did you start which you subsequently deleted?!?! How many people and/or posts have you responded to and tried to spin to make us out to be the bad guys and yourself out to be the superior hero who is being victimized? Stopped being guerrilla marketing long ago? Why did we hear about it all that time and show me where I said you were STILL engaging in it?

By the way, as I’ve said, you either need to understand a great many things or you need to develop a better hand at what you’re attempting. You’re still engaged in guerrilla marketing to one degree or another. Why do I say that? Guerrilla marketing is defined as: Guerrilla marketing involves unconventional and creative strategies to reach a target audience and generate excitement for a brand, product, or service . What did I say to start this reply off? That you try to spin posts you view as negative regarding you and/or your site into something nefarious from the poster and positive for you. How many times in the post I’m responding to have you proclaimed how much ‘better’ and ‘more advanced’ (technologically) that your site is? How many times have you done that in the past, having subsequently deleted the majority of your posts so as to proclaim innocence? (Most here already know and, in fact, I’m not even among those who’ve speculated as to why you did it.)

An advocate for your site? I guess you could stretch a point and call it that. What I’ve said and made very plain is that I don’t have a problem with another site; something which I suppose you could term ‘advocacy’ in comparison to some of the other responses you’ve engendered. Insofar as our discussion about your site here, as I’ve said, it pales in comparison to the amount of bashing and discourse on your site about this one. (In case you hadn’t noticed, the only people who even mention your site by name are those pushing it and, typically, denigrating this site in the process.) In fact, you have a thread on your Recent Threads list on your home page right now with a post…

Let's just say calguns has issues... One of which is simply functioning. Never mind all the deranged, angry rhetoric over there. That site just needs to die with dignity. It's embarrassing watching it writhing around like a Russian hit by a Ukrainian drone. Calguns is seriously in need of euthanization.

I defy you to show me any of my posts which even come close to that level of vitriol regarding your site.

I've been a member here a long time, with several trades, and contributed. TBH, i'll contribute annually here too. I wanted to see this site get better like everyone else and had skills to do something about it. In addition to volunteer work and acquisition, i also later offered contract work too. Fix it and keep the same management but again, but you twist things to fit your narrative and only focused on what fit your storyline. I've always said both sites can and should coexist in the 2A space. Why would I want to acquire this site and sell my own? Have you ever thought about that? I wanted to fix this site and get it running smoothly and do my small part, that many of you deem unworthy because thou art holier politically. I'm just trying to keep 2A alive. Can you imagine, if i didn't make my site at the time, what excuse would you have?

The problem was and still is that your motives weren’t simply ‘making the site work/better.’ You made it very plain that you wanted access behind the curtain, even proclaiming that you were considering making a buy out offer. You then posted on your own site that you wanted to utilize the information you gleaned to improve your own site. In fact, that’s how you and I came to making exchanges; i.e., you kept posting that Kestryll wasn’t responding to you. Three guesses as to why that might have been and the first two and half don’t count.

Why would you want to acquire this site and sell your own? You’ve answered that in posts here and your own site. Return on Investment (ROI). You’ve openly declared you’d like to have or have control over both sites, dividing the content between them where each has their own emphasis. As I said, one of the concerns is how you intended to divide that content between the sites and how you’ve openly posted not only your disdain, but your outright loathing for a goodly amount of the content on this site. That’s without even delving into the limitations you’ve placed on the content allowed on your own site.

You’ve just proven you don’t even read my posts and/or that you actually do what you project me as doing. How many times have I said that I don’t have a problem with both sites and that individual members need to make up their own minds as to where they want to spend their time? Many have and a goodly number of them have returned here, not liking what they found on your site.

What would I and the World have done without your site? Well… I could answer that, but many of the things I would list would violate the rules. You’re not the ‘savior of the 2^nd Amendment’ you proclaim yourself to be or try to project yourself as in that you clearly don’t even grasp the 2^nd Amendment fully and how it needs to be taught, discussed, etc. in this State, something a number here used to try and educate you about. It might make for a selling point for your site (something you’ve repeatedly posted as your intent), but that’s the reason you keep responding to posts you view as detrimental to perceptions of your site or perceive as an opportunity to market by spinning; i.e., you’re trying to convince people it’s something many here don’t see it as and you even have members from your site, disgruntled with membership here or other, who attempt to aid you in that regard. What was that again about guerrilla marketing?

In case you forgot, early on in our exchanges, I told you I wasn’t the enemy, but that the course you were pursuing was likely to make me one. Now that you’re down to name calling and projecting on to me what you are, in fact, doing, you’re teetering on accomplishing just that. If you’ve paid any attention, I’m one of the last people on here you want as an enemy. I don’t have the power to ban you or modify/delete posts. However, I do have the ability to take apart your posts and show them for what they are.

Very few here welcome your posts at this point and those who do have their own issues with this site and are active on your site. By and large, most of us choose this one and have issues with the timbre of yours. To each their own. However, as I’ve told you, if you wish to advertise, then pay for it like the other advertisers and stop attempting to spin reality to ‘market’ and discontinue with the ‘any publicity is good publicity so long as they spell your name right’ in that, in case you hadn’t notice, we don’t even mention your site or you by name for the most part.

[mblat]

Sadly, far too many adopt a blindered and unfortunately narrow definition for things like 'better' simply because their priorities differ from others. Then they throw about accusations, theories, and even insults to 'make their case' or 'sell it.'

The word 'better' has multiple definitions... greater than half, improved in health or mental attitude, more attractive, favorable, or commendable, more advantageous or effective, improved in accuracy or performance

All of those are based on subjective, not objective, criteria. Subjectively and objectively, 24/7/365 access, for the most part (we get posts indicating that even the other site is occasionally down, just for shorter periods) isn't the be all, end all of how most define 'better.' The fact that you're posting here indicates that this site DOES WORK. Maybe not as 'conveniently' as you'd like it to vis a vis your schedule, but it IS working; otherwise, you couldn't have posted. We've already briefly discussed some of the problems many here see/have with the other site and the limitations the owner of that site imposes. Many here don't care for that owner's 'style' when it comes to business/marketing and some even have trouble with the claims he makes with regard to his shooting credentials. Just the fact that he doesn't allow an OT due to what he claims would be moderation requirements, then 'advertises' for moderators, coupled with his already displayed penchant for shutting down and/or deleting posts/threads he disagrees with or thinks will make his site look bad leaves a bad taste for many. That's without getting into how he has described the membership here and his feelings regarding OT threads posted here.

Reality? Those issues have an impact on attractiveness, favorability, commendability, effectiveness, advantageousness, and, therefore, how those factors play into mental attitudes regarding the two sites and how 'healthy' the information and exchanges are or will be perceived as. All of those play into how one defines 'better.'

If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

It is a small wonder to find a follower of French New Modernist Philosophy on gun related site. "The truth is relative". The World never stop to surprise.


So..... You have a gun that you have had for 20 years, that came down to you from your parents, but after serving you so well it fails to eject about 10% of the time ( corresponding of amount of time per day calguns seems to be down in average ). And there is another one you have from a guy that you really can' stand, generally shady character ( not like I accept that owner of caguns is shady), but it works 99% of the time.

You really will have a discussion on the subject which gun is "better"?

[TrappedinCalifornia]

It is a small wonder to find a follower of French New Modernist Philosophy on gun related site. "The truth is relative". The World never stop to surprise.


So..... You have a gun that you have had for 20 years, that came down to you from your parents, but after serving you so well it fails to eject about 10% of the time ( corresponding of amount of time per day calguns seems to be down in average ). And there is another one you have from a guy that you really can' stand, generally shady character ( not like I accept that owner of caguns is shady), but it works 99% of the time.

You really will have a discussion on the subject which gun is "better"?

Reading comprehension seems to be a problem for you here.

It's not a discussion about 'which gun' (or which site) is... 'better.' It's about how one defines the concept of 'better' and tries to push that definition as the relevant one for everybody else, as if that definition is what 'reality' and 'truth' hinges upon. If you wish to discuss absolute vs relative truth, we're gonna be here awhile as that concept is actually a difficult one.

As an example, does God exist, yes or no? Is the answer a truth or a belief? If the answer is 'yes,' what is the nature of God? Is the answer a truth or a belief? Are those answers 'truth' for the individual and the like-minded, but a belief to those who believe differently? It's something that religious leaders from around the World have 'struggled' to deal with over the eons and still end up with 'context' being the crucial element. Context?

The Christian (i.e., the Western image of) religion didn't come about until roughly 2,000 years ago and there are numerous versions of it. Which one is the Truth? The Christian religion stemmed from, in part, the Jewish religion and its various forms? Which is the Truth? Now add in the various other religions over space and time. Which is the Truth? Oh... You mean you can't define it as religion, then how do you define it? As a set of similar beliefs held by various peoples throughout History? Would that be a declaration of relativism or absoluteness if you then contextualized it by the idea that the beliefs were the only ones known to individuals in the regions they occupied and there was no cross cultural exposure?

Wasn't that what the Bible declared about witnessing and spreading the Word? Isn't the Bible based a deductive premise; i.e., an absolute? "In the beginning, God..." When Moses asked who he should say sent him... "I AM..." Short version, God exists, period. An absolute.

What are His rules? You must worship on Saturday or is it Sunday or is it at all times, with special recognition set aside for one day a week? If the last, which day or is it any, given day? Ask around and you're gonna get a variety of answers presented as 'absolute.' But, doesn't that make them 'relative' to the beliefs held regionally and culturally? Doesn't the Bible even note that 'eating meat' and the prohibitions placed upon it by Jews is a matter of relativism; i.e., one of context? If it makes a brother 'stumble,' it's bad? How do you define 'brother?' Is that definition universally accepted?

The Truth is that we're all a mixture of absolutist and relativist, but what falls under those headings is dependent upon the context and context is dependent upon... Thus, absolute Truth is unknowable by humans and humans operate based on beliefs, whether personally or culturally derived.

Just like your belief that this was an exchange about which site is 'better' when it is, in fact, a discussion about what attributes individual readers use to define 'better;' i.e., useful and usable. The idea is that many/most of us still find Calguns useful and, to whatever degree, usable, where we hope the usability improves. Others find the other site more usable, with varying degrees of what they believe regarding Calguns. What is the absolute Truth? We don't know. None of us do. What that means is we choose which site to frequent or we choose both sites to frequent based on personal druthers and those (i.e., the context) can change on a given day, for various reasons. Does that make the Truth relative or does it make our individual beliefs relative?

Now, what did I say? If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

[mblat]

"Which is the Truth?"

Let me help you with that. If one gun feeds reliably and another doesn't, the first is better. If one site is up 99% of the time and another only 80%, then the former is better. Simple.

Which brings me to:
"It's not a discussion about 'which gun' (or which site) is... 'better.'"
Says who, kemosabe?

The truth behind the original post was: "This site doesn't work. So either fix it, or find someone who can." That’s the point I’m interested in exploring.

I’m not here to debate the meaning of the word "is is." (c) Bill Clinton. Those kinds of conversations are intellectually fascinating, sure—but not useful right now. If I wanted a philosophical debate, I’d visit a philosophy blog. What I want is to view the history of messages I’ve sent—and I can’t, because that feature seems to be permanently broken.

I get why you're trying to shift the discussion away from the actual issue. I grew up in the Soviet Union—this is familiar stuff:

“There’s no food in the stores.”
“Well, in America they discriminate against Black people.”

When you can't win on facts, you change the subject.

So, if you want to have a separate thread about the meaning of "better," go ahead—I might drop in with a snarky comment or two. But don’t try to hijack this thread to shut down the conversation the original poster actually wanted to have. That’s insulting.

This whole exchange reminds me why I quit social media 15 years ago. Absolutely useless.

This is my final post in this thread.

If the site’s owners come up with a reasonable plan to fix the issue—and need help, even financial—reach out. I’ll try to assist.

Over.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

"Which is the Truth?"

Let me help you with that. If one gun feeds reliably and another doesn't, the first is better. If one site is up 99% of the time and another only 80%, then the former is better. Simple.

That's YOUR criterion, not necessarily an universal without more information. Why? The one you said works 80% of the time is a family heirloom. Do you need it for food gathering or self-defense? If not, then 'functionality' is only a single criterion and may not be the sole one in a decision of retention. You also never mentioned getting the 'functionality' looked at and/or repaired. As something handed down by your parents, it might be worth the investment. Likewise, a Browning SA-22 is inherently more valuable than a Ruger 10/22 Takedown, so which is more valuable monetarily.

I could go on, but you get the point. A single criterion does not an 'universal' judgment make.

Which brings me to:
"It's not a discussion about 'which gun' (or which site) is... 'better.'"
Says who, kemosabe?

Me. Go back and read what was posted. You want to change the subject to something you can address, start your own thread. You want to critique what I said, then you have to address what I was talking about.

The truth behind the original post was: "This site doesn't work. So either fix it, or find someone who can." That’s the point I’m interested in exploring.

As I've said and as you have acknowledged, the site DOES work. It just doesn't work as consistently/conveniently as you'd like or demand. You went down the track of 'better.' This is the FULL post you were responding to...

What makes that other site “better” is that it actually works as far as being able to gain access when this site does not. I can only get on here in the morning, but at no other time. And that’s about all the other site has going for it. I have come to view the Racoon as some sort of pacifist who wants to “bring together” people who are gun owners, without regard to politics. Well sorry to tell ya, politics is deeply intertwined with gun ownership and the 2A. Leftists will NEVER be good for the constitution, no matter what some site admin type tells you.
If anyone wants a better alternative to Calguns, The High Road seems to be the only logical choice.

Your response?

This. I am totally floored by the ability of otherwise intelligent people to refuse to see reality if they do not like it.

You don't get to truncate what someone posted, claim a different meaning/intent, then respond to your proposed, different meaning/intent, then try to castigate those who take the context for what it is rather than what you want it to be to make your argument.

I’m not here to debate the meaning of the word "is is." (c) Bill Clinton. Those kinds of conversations are intellectually fascinating, sure—but not useful right now. If I wanted a philosophical debate, I’d visit a philosophy blog. What I want is to view the history of messages I’ve sent—and I can’t, because that feature seems to be permanently broken.

And therein lies your problem. You want to discuss something personally irritating, but are disparaging the site in doing it. You don't want to engage in the actual conversation occurring and want to bring your personal issue to the fore. In that sense, what you are projecting on to me is what you're actually doing...

I get why you're trying to shift the discussion away from the actual issue. I grew up in the Soviet Union—this is familiar stuff:

“There’s no food in the stores.”
“Well, in America they discriminate against Black people.”

When you can't win on facts, you change the subject.

You're the one wanting to shift the focus of the discussion. Go back and read my response again...

Sadly, far too many adopt a blindered and unfortunately narrow definition for things like 'better' simply because their priorities differ from others. Then they throw about accusations, theories, and even insults to 'make their case' or 'sell it.'

The word 'better' has multiple definitions... greater than half, improved in health or mental attitude, more attractive, favorable, or commendable, more advantageous or effective, improved in accuracy or performance

All of those are based on subjective, not objective, criteria. Subjectively and objectively, 24/7/365 access, for the most part (we get posts indicating that even the other site is occasionally down, just for shorter periods) isn't the be all, end all of how most define 'better.' The fact that you're posting here indicates that this site DOES WORK. Maybe not as 'conveniently' as you'd like it to vis a vis your schedule, but it IS working; otherwise, you couldn't have posted. We've already briefly discussed some of the problems many here see/have with the other site and the limitations the owner of that site imposes. Many here don't care for that owner's 'style' when it comes to business/marketing and some even have trouble with the claims he makes with regard to his shooting credentials. Just the fact that he doesn't allow an OT due to what he claims would be moderation requirements, then 'advertises' for moderators, coupled with his already displayed penchant for shutting down and/or deleting posts/threads he disagrees with or thinks will make his site look bad leaves a bad taste for many. That's without getting into how he has described the membership here and his feelings regarding OT threads posted here.

Reality? Those issues have an impact on attractiveness, favorability, commendability, effectiveness, advantageousness, and, therefore, how those factors play into mental attitudes regarding the two sites and how 'healthy' the information and exchanges are or will be perceived as. All of those play into how one defines 'better.'

If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

Yep. I just said the same thing; i.e., the site IS working, just not at a level YOU personally find usable/useful or acceptable. THAT is reality. Another reality... You're the one who shifted into philosophical/hypothetical mode by way of response to make your argument...

It is a small wonder to find a follower of French New Modernist Philosophy on gun related site. "The truth is relative". The World never stop to surprise.


So..... You have a gun that you have had for 20 years, that came down to you from your parents, but after serving you so well it fails to eject about 10% of the time ( corresponding of amount of time per day calguns seems to be down in average ). And there is another one you have from a guy that you really can' stand, generally shady character ( not like I accept that owner of caguns is shady), but it works 99% of the time.

You really will have a discussion on the subject which gun is "better"?

I respond in kind and you accuse me of 'shifting' over to a philosophical discussion rather than reality? First, your numbers aren't correct. The amount of time per day Calguns is down on average is highly variable and seems to depend not only on the individual, but on the technology they are using, not to mention that, in many respects, it is a perception problem from the standpoint of how often one attempts to access it in a day. In case you hadn't noticed or paid attention, there are those who seem to get on and post even more often than I do and I know how persistent I am in terms of attempting to access the site. Second, I'm not the one ascribing labels such as 'French New Modernist Philosophy' as a negative. Bear in mind that I have more than a modicum of experience with that kind of discourse and don't care for it either. For the benefit of readers, from Google's AI...

French New Modern Philosophy encompasses the philosophical movements that emerged in France during the latter half of the 20th century, particularly after the decline of structuralism and post-structuralism. It represents a shift away from a reliance on language and text to a focus on materiality, embodiment, and the concrete experience of the world.

So, even if I were taking such a stance, what was that regarding sticking to reality? Materiality emphasizes the interconnectedness of matter and the environment, embodiment posits that our perceptions and understanding are not solely mental but are deeply intertwined with our physical experiences and interactions with the environment., and concrete experience is fairly self-explanatory. What have I been saying about context?

Now, go back to your numbers not being correct, but a projection of a personal agenda and you pushing the idea that I was the one changing this to a philosophical discussion when, in fact, I was responding to such a change; i.e., one YOU made. Then, you invite me to...

So, if you want to have a separate thread about the meaning of "better," go ahead—I might drop in with a snarky comment or two. But don’t try to hijack this thread to shut down the conversation the original poster actually wanted to have. That’s insulting.

You see, I'm not the one hijacking the thread. I'm the one interjecting a sense of reality to what many seem to feel is a 'bashing party,' where accusations (often via innuendo) and claims are exaggerated to justify demands and 'excuse' chivvying. If you'd spend time 'keeping track,' you'd find that many/most of us have acknowledged the problems; but, instead of simply grousing about them and issuing demands of 'fix it or shut it down,' we identify the actual problem from our perspective in the hope that it will help identify the cause, making it easier and more accessible to fix. We don't offer lip service, claiming it's simply a lack of skill/expertise or money that's at the root of why it hasn't been completely fixed...

This whole exchange reminds me why I quit social media 15 years ago. Absolutely useless.

This is my final post in this thread.

If the site’s owners come up with a reasonable plan to fix the issue—and need help, even financial—reach out. I’ll try to assist.

Over.

In fact, for those of us keeping up and not simply wanting to do a drive by, we've heard about the personal problems Kestryll has been going through (though not in the specificity some would like), we saw the posts Kestryll provided when he was trying to fix things, we saw his acknowledgement that it was beyond his technical abilities, we saw his acceptance of help from the one expert and that expert's team, we HOPE that their efforts are continuing, and many of us assume Kestryll isn't posting due to his personal problems and the fact that posting offers a no-win scenario in that it would simply engender more speculation, more demands, more criticism, etc. We also know that Kestryll's last activity is logged as yesterday; i.e., 6/7/25. Thus, we know, at least facially, that he hasn't 'abandoned' the site in the manner he's often accused of. (Well, we hope that's the case anyway. 😊)

Some of us have also had discussions regarding the likely nature of some of the problems lying in the degree of change to the software and bringing things up-to-date through several iterations; i.e., the software the site WAS using is outdated by a decade or more where it only worked with that iterations and several, newer versions have been released between the one we were utilizing and the one he was forced to move to by dint of the host going out-of-business and the new host demanding use of a more 'modern' version. While some of us may no longer be current in our knowledge of software, it doesn't change the fact that successfully and accurately bringing things through such changes isn't as 'simple' as many have been claiming and, it appears, not as readily managed as even some current 'experts' initially claim.

Which brings us right back to what I said before... If you prefer the other site, by all means, contribute over there. If you think this site isn't working and is doomed, by all means, don't bother to stick around. If you simply wish to express opinions, you might want to consider what you've been allowed to express on this site and set that against what is/isn't 'allowed' over there.

Why? Because what you're 'allowed' to post over there and the timbre on that site has already had an impact on the decision for many as to which site they prefer and, for others, where they are going to spend their time participating. That's not a philosophical muse. That's reality... What a concept.

[BPK]

As I've said and as you have acknowledged, the site DOES work. It just doesn't work as consistently/conveniently as you'd like or demand. You went down the track of 'better.' This is the FULL post you were responding to...

You fail to understand today's standards about website uptime. Uptime of 99.9% is considered minimum and that is what users should expect from a 'working website'. 99.9% allows for 8.76 hours of unplanned downtime. Planned downtime (maintenance, updates/upgrades, patching, etc) is not icluded in this figure.

No matter how much you'd like, you can't redefine widely accepted standard just to fit your narrative. When users say calguns.net is broken, it's because calguns.net is broken.