Scamers on Gun Broker

[Cockroach]

Nah. Maybe we should make it 100

Was waiting for this

[A-R]

Nah. Maybe we should make it 100

You have my support!

[Finkelstein]

Nah. Maybe we should make it 100

You have my support!

[Flintstone]

On Guntree now Gunafrica. There is consistently someone advertising TIPX Paintball pistol.
With location Upington for R1500. Some other items also. Same location.
This is a scamster.

Yes and that scamster is using my falsified .38 special licence as a means of identification.As stated in a previous discussion here on gunsite,i advise potential buyers to verify with corresponding ID and driverslicence,the authenticity of the seller before proceding with the purchase.

[Llen]

[QUOTE=BigT;1250158]So basically people want all the advantages of the community we’ve created here for free. And for no effort.



Hi T, sorry but I don't agree, ever been at a braai where one guy sits and listen and try and fit in but does't say much? Maybe he doesn't know anything or he is learning. Not all people are good with words like some of the contributors, some are very good and I enjoy reading their unbiased opinions, I am talking about that guy that might be more practical orientated (praktiese klas) and has extensive experience but might feel intimidated by the wealth of knowledge and good speech. Please this is not an attack but rather a call for some understanding. I have friends that can shoot a feather off a hoeder's poepol but will rather just read, sift out the shit and learn something. Thank you for your time reading this.

[Craig]

[QUOTE=Llen;1259075]

So basically people want all the advantages of the community we’ve created here for free. And for no effort.



Hi T, sorry but I don't agree, ever been at a braai where one guy sits and listen and try and fit in but does't say much? Maybe he doesn't know anything or he is learning. Not all people are good with words like some of the contributors, some are very good and I enjoy reading their unbiased opinions, I am talking about that guy that might be more practical orientated (praktiese klas) and has extensive experience but might feel intimidated by the wealth of knowledge and good speech. Please this is not an attack but rather a call for some understanding. I have friends that can shoot a feather off a hoeder's poepol but will rather just read, sift out the shit and learn something. Thank you for your time reading this.

I hear what you are saying and know people like this too. It would be great if they did get involved and we should do what we can as a GunSite community to make it feel like anyone can join the conversation and not feel like they might be belittled.

This is problem with the sales section too where the limit is concerned. 50 posts isn't really that much, but some guys who joined in 2009 don't have 50 posts, but visit frequently. Now there's an argument that these guys should be able to sell stuff and it's not so much that we don't trust these guys, it's just that we don't know them. By actively joining in the discussions you build a reputation, good or bad, and from this people vouch for you and so we build a safe place for people to trade.

The classifieds section is just an added bonus for regular GunSite users, it shouldn't be made out to more than that.

[Zeekus]

My 50-post-building 2 cents worth, my observations based on recent sessions of general lurking/browsing through various sections of the forum that are currently interesting to me as follows:
- Is the 50 post minimum advertised as part of the T's&C's when signing up? I don't remember reading about it when joining but honestly, who really reads T's&C's of something as innocent as joining a forum properly anyway?

- I was able to post a wanted ad as my first post

- My second, guilt-ridden post was an introduction in the appropriate section, made not tooo long after my first

- My introductory post magically disappeared a few days later. I saw some chatter about a "new format" and "roll-back" as well as some more diligent members posting repeat / re-introductions so assumed the site was rebuilt on a back-up that happened between my first and second posts.

- To Craig's point in the preceding post about building a tolerant, welcoming culture in the community, I have observed a "snappy" tone in some sections that I could be misinterpreting (tone from text is notoriously tough to read), i.e.: "It is X (or whatever),Read the Act." Any future threads/posts I make will explicitly ask member's to refrain from that sort of lazy response that, from my point of view at least, is intended to kill the discussion with the threat of superior knowledge without substance. I appreciate that I have no control over what other's post in their responses but hopefully the request will deter the snapping turtles. In the same breath, I do see many posts where people have not taken the time to either read that particular section's stickies, or even that specific thread's earlier posts. In that case, noobs and lazy bums beware, the snappers will get you!

- Forced participation in a group setting is currently a popular way of performance measurement, post-graduate business schools around the world LOVE it. What about a minimum total word count rather than post count? (obviously personal interest here) Or even a subjective quality vs. quantity assessment by the moderators?

[FrankH]

. What about a minimum total word count rather than post count? (obviously personal interest here) Or even a subjective quality vs. quantity assessment by the moderators?

No - it would just allow users to waffle on, saying nothing much, to push the word count .....

[A-R]

... I have observed a "snappy" tone in some sections that I could be misinterpreting (tone from text is notoriously tough to read), i.e.: "It is X (or whatever),Read the Act." Any future threads/posts I make will explicitly ask member's to refrain from that sort of lazy response that, from my point of view at least, is intended to kill the discussion with the threat of superior knowledge without substance. I appreciate that I have no control over what other's post in their responses but hopefully the request will deter the snapping turtles. In the same breath, I do see many posts where people have not taken the time to either read that particular section's stickies, or even that specific thread's earlier posts. In that case, noobs and lazy bums beware, the snappers will get you! ...?

On your "snappyness" point: I am known to elaborate more than what is absolutely necessary (I think I spelled this one right). However. If someone wants to argue about something that is clearly stated in the FCA, and while every legal gun owner is required to pass a test on knowledge of the act, then I get a little impatient. We (gunowners) are held to a higher standard. Not my choice, does not carry my blessing, but that is the reality of our situation. We are all required to know the law. Anyone of us who pleads ignorant is harming the whole gun community and every member of that community. So yes, READ THE ACT! That goes for everyone, not just someone who asks a ignorant question on a public forum.

Or else we would have to post and discuss each and every one of the 700 and 6000... sections of the FCA here every day. And there will still be someone asking a question that has been answered 2 post before...

My apologies if this sounds snappy. Was just trying to illustrate some of the situations that can arise here on this forum. I raise my hat to every member who displays more patience than I do.

[Zeekus]

@A-R: some members are indeed more patient in what must be very repetitive discussions. Here-in lies the value of a solid stickies section: A quick reference/pointer towards the appropriate thread goes a lot further for the same effort as a "read the act", to continue the example.

At the risk of waffeling , let me stir the pot a little more, as the proverbial devil's advocate. "Reading the act" is prudent advice for a wider audience than just gun owners. Anyone who employs someone else (i.e.: domestic worker) SHOULD read the Basic Conditions of Employment Act but I'm willing to bet that the majority don't, not even the summarized versions that are supposed to be displayed in places of employment. There is an abbreviation I learnt recently, "TLDR" - too long, didn't read. Its a pretty good approximation of both modern society's shortening attention span and the attitude towards hard work. Acts fall squarely into the TLDR category. With the wealth of legal firepower on this forum, if you will excuse my atrocious pun, could the community not create a similar guideline/summary of the act, written in simple layman's terms, that would address a lot of the simpler, repetitive queries?

Now I'm about to go totally off the reservation with this one: some industries have developed automated chat bots (software for those born pre-pc) that answer mundane, repetitive product queries from customers. I wonder if something similar could be applied in this situation?