|
Post by greghopper on Oct 12, 2006 10:28:31 GMT -5
So whats the Point Mr. Camby....Mbogo is very wrong ..... my point Greg ... is that he complains of Mbogo's posts on the OBR and thats all this fella has chatted about. It your opinion that Mbogo is wrong, NOT EVERYONE is of that opinion! 54% of the folks who returned the survey said they wanted a two buck period to compare results with, so I don't see where you all are comming from when you speak of victory! NOW....if the IDNR would do a survey with the buck harvest numbers,... pre and post OBR, how do you think the results would read? So If one comes here to talk about the OBR only He is not Welcome???good thing W.W. in charge not you!!!....And for the numbers 73% say kept the OBR....and 54% would be ok with a two buck period...73% sure looks Bigger than 54% !!!!!...and what is this Line your talking about 480???
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 12, 2006 10:29:06 GMT -5
I will say this one more time .... I did not attack anyone. I expressed an opinion. Nothing more and nothing less.
If mbogo takes issue with my opinion Im sure he is fully capable of talking to me about it without your help.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 12, 2006 10:39:08 GMT -5
A note from the administrator...
Fellers,
Let's cool the rhetoric.
EVERYONE can have an opinion, even moderators.
What we cant do is any personal attacks and that includes moderators and administrators too.
I am in the middle of something right now and when I get some time I will look over these posts and edit if necessary.
It does NOT matter how long a member has been here or what they post on. We have no seniority system and anyone can post on whatever thread/subject that they want to.
Thanks for your cooperation...
.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 12, 2006 10:50:10 GMT -5
my point Greg ... is that he complains of Mbogo's posts on the OBR and thats all this fella has chatted about. It your opinion that Mbogo is wrong, NOT EVERYONE is of that opinion! 54% of the folks who returned the survey said they wanted a two buck period to compare results with, so I don't see where you all are comming from when you speak of victory! NOW....if the IDNR would do a survey with the buck harvest numbers,... pre and post OBR, how do you think the results would read? So If one comes here to talk about the OBR only He is not Welcome???good thing W.W. in charge not you!!!....And for the numbers 73% say kept the OBR....and 54% would be ok with a two buck period...73% sure looks Bigger than 54% !!!!!...and what is this Line your talking about 480??? Who said that they were not welcome?? his complaint is that Mbogo has an **opinion** and complains that because Mbogo is a moderator he should not have one....THATS FUNNY AT BEST
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 12, 2006 10:52:25 GMT -5
I will say this one more time .... I did not attack anyone. WHO SAID YOU DID ?
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 12, 2006 11:02:50 GMT -5
cambygsp ... it appears as though you are confused about who I am retorting with on that point. It is not you.
And in the above referenced post it was not I that greghopper was talking about, it was another's post.
So .... no need to use the ALL CAPS SHOUTING at me.
And why is it funny that my opinion is a moderator should not have opinions on subjects? They are peace officers and rule enforcers. You cannot objectively enforce policy when you stand on one side of the fence or the other.
Again ... that is my opinion. If it is the understanding of the site owner and his staff that moderators and administrators are here for leisure as well as administration that is cool with me.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 12, 2006 11:05:32 GMT -5
71% want the OBR and 54% want two bucks. 71 is more than 54 but they are both the majority. That is why I have said before the questions were bad. You can not have the majority on both sides of an issue unless you are a ploitician trying to pass a law and show majority support no matter what. I do not support either view myself I just support the numbers and the science behind the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 12, 2006 11:10:12 GMT -5
Unfortunately one can make a survey say anything they want ..... and say nothing all at the same time.
To be more effective and accurate those two questions should have been one in the same .... would you support 2 bucks instead of one buck ..... then there wouldn't have been the confusion.
I never got the survey in the first place .....
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Oct 12, 2006 11:19:32 GMT -5
Heck,I'm over it now..It's hunting season...I'll let the DNR know from time to time I don't like the OBR..I've wasted too much time arguing about it..If you feel strong about something,let the right people know it..Good hunting
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Oct 12, 2006 14:55:27 GMT -5
Im a moderator and have been from day one. I have opinions on different subject matter and voice it most of the time. I don't have a problem with anyones opinion as long as they don't make it personal or attack another member. Sometimes this is a thin line.
Soon this OBR sh_t will be over and i for one will be glad. We all are outdoorsmen and have a common interest in our sport so lets quit the bickering and fighting and get back to sharing informative information instead of making this subject a soap opera every day. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 12, 2006 15:35:53 GMT -5
A big problem with anything written and not said is you are guessing at the manner in which it was delivered. What I mean is .... you dont get to hear the emotion or tone in a typed word. You might not get the tongue in cheek manner in which it was typed ... or you may not get the "joking" tone .....
Typed words are quick to offend people and often times offense is unwarranted.
I didnt mean to insinuate that because you are a moderator you should not have an opinion. I just meant that possibly 2 user profiles should exist .... one for administration and one for leisure. And .... like I said earlier ... if it is this sites policy to handle business and leisure together that is good with me. Didnt mean to ruffle any feathers.
|
|
|
Post by hunter7x on Oct 12, 2006 15:40:24 GMT -5
[quote
Soon this OBR sh_t will be over and i for one will be glad. We all are outdoorsmen and have a common interest in our sport so lets quit the bickering and fighting and get back to sharing informative information instead of making this subject a soap opera every day. h.h.[/quote]
Very well put.
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Oct 12, 2006 15:42:00 GMT -5
As many times Mbogo and I disagree, I have to say that even as a moderator, he should be able to post his feelings one way or another on a subject. He is first of all, a person who has opinions. I would think his being a moderator would fall far down on his life priority list. Now, just because he drinks the anti-OBR kool-aid doesn't make him bad or good. Just a little kooky ;D. Sorry, I couldn't resist!
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Oct 12, 2006 18:06:11 GMT -5
swilk,
No feathers ruffled here. h.h.
|
|
yankee
Junior Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by yankee on Oct 13, 2006 4:53:15 GMT -5
I did not criticize the man for having an opinion. I did not criticize the man for expressing his opinion. I criticized the manner in which he expressed his opinion. His posts demean those who aren't on the same page with him. If an individual can't express themselves without ridiculing others, they have no business being a moderator. That is my opinion.
People should be treated with respect and dignity. That is how each of us would like to be treated.
After reading the responses to my concerns, I don't feel this mesasage board is the right place for me. I apologize for the intrusion. Good luck to you all.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 13, 2006 6:06:35 GMT -5
It appears I need to set a couple of things straight here. First of all, I was not calling anyone on here a liar though it may have sounded that way. I was referring to someone who takes great pleasure in stirring the pot from afar. I am a moderator here and I do have opinions and will continue to express them when and where I see fit just like any other moderator on any other board anywhere else. Otherwise I would not be a moderator. Sometimes I may agree with you and sometimes I may not but if I am passionate about an issue I will probably have an opinion.
Secondly, I have debated with Hoyt enough times to know he is going to call it like he sees it(even though I have to wonder about his eyesight sometimes ;D) and I respect that even when I disagree with him. I always prefer to stick to the facts of the situation and the pertinent questions that arise from them but this always becomes an emotional debate. If you go back and read all of the OBR threads carefully you will see that I rarely if ever draw "first blood" and only after repeated barbs do I respond in kind. A person ony has so many cheeks to turn
Last but not least, Camby and Hunter480 your defense of me is truly appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 13, 2006 6:10:46 GMT -5
For those on the other side that say their opinion is not based solely on emotion.......................
This side of the OBR debate can be distilled down to three simple questions that have always been ignored or avoided by the other side. If anyone can give real, reasonable answers to the following questions I would be willing to re-evaluate my opinion of the emotion based opposition.
1. Most hunters(the majority of hunters being firearms only) could only kill one buck to begin with, so how can a rule change that only applies to the minority bring about the changes that are claimed by only acting on a small part of the hunting population?
2. The OBR is supposed to increase the number of mature bucks by decreasing the overall buck harvest and thereby allowing more bucks to grow older, but harvest data has shown an increase from pre-obr buck harvests every year under the obr except one. How is it possible to both kill more bucks and save more bucks at the same time? Keep in mind, if you are planning to argue that the deer herd has grown sufficiently to allow this that there are at least two does for every buck and while we have been setting buck harvest records nearly every year, last year was the first year we set or came close to an overall harvest record.
3. The number of HRBP entries are claimed as proof of the success of the OBR, but the single greatest increase in entries occurred in 2002 before the OBR could have possibly had a chance to act. If the OBR is truly responsible for this increase, then how could it produce a result before any of those bucks actually had time to grow older?
|
|
|
Post by whiteoak on Oct 14, 2006 8:41:36 GMT -5
Three excellent simple questions Mbogo. I'm looking forward to the answers that will be given. Any takers?
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Oct 14, 2006 22:45:50 GMT -5
For those on the other side that say their opinion is not based solely on emotion....................... This side of the OBR debate can be distilled down to three simple questions that have always been ignored or avoided by the other side. If anyone can give real, reasonable answers to the following questions I would be willing to re-evaluate my opinion of the emotion based opposition. 1. Most hunters(the majority of hunters being firearms only) could only kill one buck to begin with, so how can a rule change that only applies to the minority bring about the changes that are claimed by only acting on a small part of the hunting population? 2. The OBR is supposed to increase the number of mature bucks by decreasing the overall buck harvest and thereby allowing more bucks to grow older, but harvest data has shown an increase from pre-obr buck harvests every year under the obr except one. How is it possible to both kill more bucks and save more bucks at the same time? Keep in mind, if you are planning to argue that the deer herd has grown sufficiently to allow this that there are at least two does for every buck and while we have been setting buck harvest records nearly every year, last year was the first year we set or came close to an overall harvest record. 3. The number of HRBP entries are claimed as proof of the success of the OBR, but the single greatest increase in entries occurred in 2002 before the OBR could have possibly had a chance to act. If the OBR is truly responsible for this increase, then how could it produce a result before any of those bucks actually had time to grow older? And going back to the 2BR is going to do what? Nothing, thats why something different needs to be done! Lug
|
|
|
Post by whiteoak on Oct 15, 2006 0:41:56 GMT -5
I myself didn't have a problem with the structure of our deer herd prior, or during the OBR trial period. There is, and alway should be 150+ BC deer out there. Most hunters, myself including don't put in the time and effort to constantly kill them. I don't care what type of rule changes are made if you want to kill large antlered deer, you have to pay your dues and be very lucky to boot. If it ever gets to where there are record book bucks brhind every tree, killing one will not be so special. When I first started bowhunting 30 years ago and like most beginners I would shoot anything that gave me the opportunity. I killed my first bow killed deer at age 12 and was on top of the world. After tagging several deer after that somthing changed in me. I wanted bigger and better deer than what I have killed in the past. Shooting small deer didn't give me the "on top of the world feeling" anymore. Killing a BC buck now would give me that feeling once again. If killing a BC buck became common I would lose that feeling again. Everbody wants one, but face it boys, BC bucks are special and no matter what rules are changed, we are not all going to kill one, or at least I hope we don't. I would have to take up golf or somthing if we did.
|
|