PDA

View Full Version : Board Ordered Removal of a Forums Super Moderator



PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 01:06 PM
Today, we (Forums Administrators) were directly ORDERED to remove Jackam as a Forums Super Moderator.

We (Forums Administrators), who are responsible for the operations of the forums, including choosing moderators as we see fit, were NOT consulted in any way prior to this decision being made on our behalf. Why? Because this decision had NOTHING to do with Jack's performance as a MODERATOR. Jack was our most active and one of our best moderators and conducted himself in a professional manner in the performance of those duties.

Per the board's order (4/3 split vote), Jack has been relieved of his duties as a Forums Super Moderator.

-Admin

Scoop
06-20-2019, 01:27 PM
Because this decision had NOTHING to do with Jack's performance as a MODERATOR.I guess the BOD didn't take too kindly to his Ask the Candidates post (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?421846-Ask-the-Candidates&p=3132437&viewfull=1#post3132437), eh?

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 01:58 PM
I guess the BOD didn't take too kindly to his Ask the Candidates post (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?421846-Ask-the-Candidates&p=3132437&viewfull=1#post3132437), eh?

Correct, 100%.

Jack was NOT speaking as a Moderator in the above referenced post, rather he was using his voice as a MEMBER of the organization, which nobody is should be required to relinquish when they agree to volunteer to be a forums moderator. As far as his conduct as a MODERATOR, we have pages and pages of documented evidence (warnings/infractions issued) that he was an excellent moderator, and by far, our most active.

If we didn't have a documented procedure in the Bylaws for Membership revocation that involves much more than 4 people saying "remove him", I would fully expect to see that happen next.

Remember "the other gun organization" that didn't like people questioning their ethics…the one that booted them from the forums, banished them from the organization and threatened to sue them? That's the direction MGO is heading if we don't see some significant changes next month in who is running the organization.

G22
06-20-2019, 02:00 PM
I guess the BOD didn't take too kindly to his Ask the Candidates post (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?421846-Ask-the-Candidates&p=3132437&viewfull=1#post3132437), eh?

Exactly.

Some BOD decided that his personal criticism of them, made as a member, violated the procedure that outlines his duties as a moderator.


Michigan Gun Owners Policies and Procedures Manual
14.1 Administrator and Moderator Guidelines
MGO Administrators and Moderators are expected to be level headed, nonconfrontational and non-adversarial whenever possible. Administrators and Moderators should be "tolerant" of the diverse opinion base and social makeup of our users. They represent the organization and all conduct and communication should be professional in nature.

As members, this should serve as an alarming wake up call. Especially to anyone who remembers why this organization was created. We've just taken another huge step closer, to history repeating itself.

The meeting minutes will show how the sitting BOD members voted. Your vote this year may be the deciding factor between continuing down this road, or a new better direction.

Vote wisely.

Scoop
06-20-2019, 02:02 PM
Jack was NOT speaking as a Moderator in the above referenced post, rather he was using his voice as a MEMBER of the organization, which nobody is should be required to relinquish when they agree to volunteer to be a forums moderator. I agree 100%.

If that post was the reason he was removed as a moderator, then that was a total bogus decision by the BOD. Very unprofessional.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 02:03 PM
Correct, 100%.

Jack was NOT speaking as a Moderator in the above referenced post, rather he was using his voice as a MEMBER of the organization, which nobody is should be required to relinquish when they agree to volunteer to be a forums moderator. As far as his conduct as a MODERATOR, we have pages and pages of documented evidence (warnings/infractions issued) that he was an excellent moderator, and by far, our most active.

If we didn't have a documented procedure in the Bylaws for Membership revocation that involves much more than 4 people saying "remove him", I would fully expect to see that happen next.

Remember "the other gun organization" that didn't like people questioning their ethics…the one that booted them from the forums, banished them from the organization and threatened to sue them? That's the direction MGO is heading if we don't see some significant changes next month in who is running the organization.

It is NOT 100% correct, that is ONLY YOUR OPINION!

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 02:07 PM
It is NOT 100% correct, that is ONLY YOUR OPINION!

Which you care nothing about, as you stated loud and clear…


Why was this decision made without ANY input from the Forums Management Team (Admins)?

Because it is un-needed. Including the "Management Team" would only serve to prolong the inevitable (for or against) and waste time.

Scoop
06-20-2019, 02:07 PM
Michigan Gun Owners Policies and Procedures Manual
14.1 Administrator and Moderator Guidelines
MGO Administrators and Moderators are expected to be level headed, nonconfrontational and non-adversarial whenever possible. Administrators and Moderators should be "tolerant" of the diverse opinion base and social makeup of our users. They represent the organization and all conduct and communication should be professional in nature.

I find it rather interesting that the "Administrators and Moderators should be "tolerant" of the diverse opinion base ... of our users", but the BOD (apparently) doesn't have to be tolerant of same.

Scoop
06-20-2019, 02:11 PM
It is NOT 100% correct, that is ONLY YOUR OPINION!Out of curiosity, exactly which part(s) of PhotoTom's post (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?422014-Board-Ordered-Removal-of-a-Forums-Super-Moderator&p=3133429&viewfull=1#post3133429) was/were "... NOT 100% correct ..."?

dougwg
06-20-2019, 02:15 PM
I guess the BOD didn't take too kindly to his Ask the Candidates post (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?421846-Ask-the-Candidates&p=3132437&viewfull=1#post3132437), eh?

It was in reference to what you posted. Your statement is not accurate. PhotoTom responded that it was 100% correct to which I responded that it was not.

SteveS
06-20-2019, 02:19 PM
As members, this should serve as an alarming wake up call. Especially to anyone who remembers why this organization was created. We've just taken another huge step closer, to history repeating itself.

I am not one to say the sky is falling or to panic, but I will say that this happening very much reminds me of how things started when MCRGO imploded.

Scoop
06-20-2019, 02:23 PM
It was in reference to what you posted. Your statement is not accurate. PhotoTom responded that it was 100% correct to which I responded that it was not.So the BOD had no problem with with Jackam's Ask the Candidates post and it played no part in his removal as moderator?

G22
06-20-2019, 02:41 PM
I am not one to say the sky is falling or to panic, but I will say that this happening very much reminds me of how things started when MCRGO imploded.

I know you're not Steve. But you see the writing on the wall.

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 02:49 PM
I guess the BOD didn't take too kindly to his Ask the Candidates post (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?421846-Ask-the-Candidates&p=3132437&viewfull=1#post3132437), eh?

No, we did not take kindly to the way he represented MGO in multiple occasions, including the one you linked(although it has been edited from the original post). Those of us with titles do not simply get to take off our MGO hat and be a member. Rather, we are ALWAYS seen as the title we hold, regardless of what disclosers we may add.

Jack's outlandish comments and disregard for the AUP are what landed him here. He has made threats in PM as well as making wild accusations without any bearing evidence. This is not how a Moderator should act.

That is how we came to this conclusion.

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 02:53 PM
Which you care nothing about, as you stated loud and clear…

And now you are sharing exact quotes from a BoD/Admin only thread...

Why not show the membership the rest of the Admin threads since you are at it? You know, where some(not all) admins/moderators bash members using words like "**********" and "**** him".

How about sharing Jackam's PMs while you're at it? Since nothing on MGO is private apparently...


Membership, the above is why the BoD requested READ access to the entire forum. We were looking to be sure the AUP and other rules were being followed accordingly since the honor system seemed to have failed, evidenced by what I said above. Instead, Tom would like you all to believe that we(the BoD) are just nosey and want full control over the forum,which is not true. The BoD would simply like OVERSIGHT of an MGO asset, which we do not fully have currently and had even less of before we gained READ access to the Admin/Moderator sections. We do NOT have access to anything EC related, to be completely clear.

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 03:03 PM
And now you are sharing things from a BoD/Admin only thread...

Why not show the membership the rest of the Admin threads since you are at it? You know, where some(not all) admins/moderators bash members using words like "**********" and "**** him".

How about sharing Jackam's PMs while you're at it? Since nothing on MGO is private apparently...

We don't have access to other's PMs.

The "**********" thing that you are referencing was a long-running "joke" between moderators. We called each other **********s as part of that running joke. Believe it or not, when you are running an internet forum, there will be one or two frequently difficult participants now and again…and the mods sometimes just need to blow off some steam here and there.

Was it "appropriate"? Nope. We were called-out on it and the joke is long since over.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 03:15 PM
We don't have access to other's PMs.

The "**********" thing that you are referencing was a long-running "joke" between moderators. We called each other **********s as part of that running joke. Believe it or not, when you are running an internet forum, there will be one or two frequently difficult participants now and again…and the mods sometimes just need to blow off some steam here and there.

Was it "appropriate"? Nope. We were called-out on it and the joke is long since over.

Show me where in the Bylaws, P&P or CoC that if its a joke it's ok to call a member or members "**********s". And it was not just "each other" it was in reference to MGO Members!

TylerV76
06-20-2019, 03:30 PM
Show me where in the Bylaws, P&P or CoC that if its a joke it's ok to call a member or members "**********s". And it was not just "each other" it was in reference to MGO Members!

Since everyones airing dirty laundry...

This is going to be a legit (not trying to take a shot at you or insult you) question.

Is it in the bylaws that BOD members will be removed if they have an ND? I personally think that's asinine but Im curious if there is truth to that statement.

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 03:37 PM
Since everyones airing dirty laundry...

This is going to be a legit (not trying to take a shot at you or insult you) question.

Is it in the bylaws that BOD members will be removed if they have an ND? I personally think that's asinine but Im curious if there is truth to that statement.

Not exactly…


Section 3.03 Board of Directors Removal
(a) Any or all of the members of the Board of Directors may be removed from the Board, with or without cause, by a majority vote of all members of the Corporation who are present and voting in person; or by absentee ballot.

Membership revocation, in general:

Section 2.03 The organization may, in accordance with the policy and procedures in effect and published in the organization's official Policies and Procedures manual at least 30 days in advance of the removal/revocation process, revoke the membership of anyone convicted of a felony, of any crime involving dishonesty, theft, or the abuse/neglect of firearms, or who performs an action that is detrimental to the organization.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 03:38 PM
Section 2.03 The organization may, in accordance with the policy and procedures in effect and published in the organization's official Policies and Procedures manual at least 30 days in advance of the removal/revocation process, revoke the membership of anyone convicted of a felony, of any crime involving dishonesty, theft, or the abuse/neglect of firearms, or who performs an action that is detrimental to the organization

That is the relevant section that you are referring to.

Notice that it says anyone "convicted of a felony".

The member that keeps mischaracterizing this and bringing it up must have failed to read the whole section.

TylerV76
06-20-2019, 03:42 PM
Not exactly…



Membership revocation, in general:


That is the relevant section that you are referring to.

Notice that it says anyone "convicted of a felony".

The member that keeps mischaracterizing this and bringing it up must have failed to read the whole section.

Appreciate the definition. Wasnt stated that way when it was mentioned the other day and Ive been curious about it.

Coctailer
06-20-2019, 03:58 PM
So MGO and the forum are not separate and DO represent each other.

I thought we were told the opposite.

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 04:01 PM
We don't have access to other's PMs.

The "**********" thing that you are referencing was a long-running "joke" between moderators. We called each other **********s as part of that running joke. Believe it or not, when you are running an internet forum, there will be one or two frequently difficult participants now and again…and the mods sometimes just need to blow off some steam here and there.

Was it "appropriate"? Nope. We were called-out on it and the joke is long since over.

As Doug noted, it was beyond personal jokes between mods/admins. Inappropriate comments, like I outlined, have been made on MGO forums by mods/admins towards members of MGO behind closed doors. It's obvious that those involved thought the rules need not apply where membership can not see. One of these people are now running for an elected Board seat!

Again, this is what pretty much what prompted the request for the BoD to be able to have READ access to the entire forum....what Tom likes to call "the BoD being nosey". Pshh, ok Tom.

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 04:04 PM
So MGO and the forum are not separate and DO represent each other.

I thought we were told the opposite.

I wish it were as you just said(as in separated) but it seemingly gets harder and harder to draw that line. Sigh...

RifleGuy
06-20-2019, 04:06 PM
So MGO and the forum are not separate and DO represent each other.

I thought we were told the opposite.

My understanding of the matter:

The forums operate independent of the BoD and/or organization.
But, MGO is a 501(c)3 Corporation. The BoD is ultimately legally responsible for all actions of any aspect of the corporation. The forums are a sub group of MGO, so they do have parental authority.

My daughter is 23, lives in my house, but she doesn't ask permission to go places, see people, etc. She pays for her car, her insurance, her phone, her clothes, etc., even pays rent, so she is independent... but it's still my house so there are some rules; no males in her room, no drugs/alcohol, and a zero tolerance policy on rap music.

It's kinda like that.

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 04:08 PM
My understanding of the matter:

The forums operate independent of the BoD and/or organization.
But, MGO is a 501(c)3 Corporation. The BoD is ultimately legally responsible for all actions of any aspect of the corporation. The forums are a sub group of MGO, so they do have parental authority.

My daughter is 23, lives in my house, but she doesn't ask permission to go places, see people, etc. She pays for her car, her insurance, her phone, her clothes, etc., even pays rent, so she is independent... but it's still my house so there are some rules; no males in her room, no drugs/alcohol, and a zero tolerance policy on rap music.

It's kinda like that.

While I doubt you do this, you probably reserve the right to go through her room, if you saw fit to do so. Correct?

That's what the BoD wanted from READ only access to the entire forum. We wanted the right to see what goes on in our home! We have been denied that...

Imagine if your daughter could deny you access to a room in YOUR home....

RifleGuy
06-20-2019, 04:19 PM
As Doug noted, it was beyond personal jokes between mods/admins. Inappropriate comments, like I outlined, have been made on MGO forums by mods/admins towards members of MGO behind closed doors. It's obvious that those involved thought the rules need not apply where membership can not see. One of these people are now running for an elected Board seat!

Again, this is what pretty much what prompted the request for the BoD to be able to have READ access to the entire forum....what Tom likes to call "the BoD being nosey". Pshh, ok Tom.

We, the forum staff, engaged in 'locker room' talk. It was wrong; I'll not make excuses. We were out of line. We meant no harm, it was not done maliciously. There were a few personalities that had tweaked the noses of every one of the Admin's and Moderators. Our response was inappropriate, a poor reflection upon the Organization which has invested it's trust in us, and a failure to the Membership we are supposed to assist and serve.
On behalf of the forum staff, I apologize to the BoD, the entirety of the MGO membership, and all participants of the forums. We failed to maintain integrity, failed to execute our responsibilities in a professional manner. We ask forgiveness, we ask that we be allowed to put this behind us, and we ask that we be allowed to again earn the trust, and hopefully respect of the BoD, the Membership,and the forum participants.

We made a poor choice, we regret the damage it has done, and we would be grateful if we could move forward and not have our noses rubbed in it further.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Tim

RifleGuy
06-20-2019, 04:24 PM
While I doubt you do this, you probably reserve the right to go through her room, if you saw fit to do so. Correct?

That's what the BoD wanted from READ only access to the entire forum. We wanted the right to see what goes on in our home! We have been denied that...

Imagine if your daughter could deny you access to a room in YOUR home....

Yes Sir, that was the point I was trying, poorly, to make. If I thought the RifleKid was up to <insert pet offense here> in her room I'd boot the door in and clean house. At some level the BoD has to have that same oversight capability. But if I, or the BoD, are in that room every week making 'suggestions', we have assumed control and have ended independent operation.

Bikenut
06-20-2019, 04:26 PM
While I understand that this is a rather heated discussion mostly about things I don't have a full understanding of I will make this comment.....

Stop using profane language please! It is unseemly and very bad optics to have the top guys violate forum rules. I have no doubt as to what would happen if I (an ordinary forum user who mailed a check for membership a couple of days ago) were to use, or even quote, that word. And you all know which word I am referring to.

Airing complaints and disagreements can be productive if done in a polite and reasonable manner. But when the top people start violating their own forum rules it reflects poorly on the entire organization.

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 04:26 PM
As Doug noted, it was beyond personal jokes between mods/admins. Inappropriate comments, like I outlined, have been made on MGO forums by mods/admins towards members of MGO behind closed doors. It's obvious that those involved thought the rules need not apply where membership can not see. One of these people are now running for an elected Board seat!

You are referring to me. Are you sure you have your fact straight? I'm not.

What you are referencing was a comment made by a Moderator…and it wasn't Jack.

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 04:31 PM
While I understand that this is a rather heated discussion mostly about things I don't have a full understanding of I will make this comment.....

Stop using profane language please! It is unseemly and very bad optics to have the top guys violate forum rules. I have no doubt as to what would happen if I (an ordinary forum user who mailed a check for membership a couple of days ago) were to use, or even quote, that word. And you all know which word I am referring to.

Airing complaints and disagreements can be productive if done in a polite and reasonable manner. But when the top people start violating their own forum rules it reflects poorly on the entire organization.

Noted, sir.

The running "joke" was, between members of the forum staff, that word was not included in the auto-censor (cuss) list. We stumbled upon it, but nobody had used it on the forums, so it was our little joke between ourselves. As I said, that joke has long since been over with, but it is being drudged up now to distract from the fact that the "board" removed a moderator without any reason relating to his performance as a moderator.

I have added it to the auto-censor list now and it is retroactive.

-Admin

Ruger
06-20-2019, 04:33 PM
We, the forum staff, engaged in 'locker room' talk. It was wrong; I'll not make excuses. We were out of line. We meant no harm, it was not done maliciously. There were a few personalities that had tweaked the noses of every one of the Admin's and Moderators. Our response was inappropriate, a poor reflection upon the Organization which has invested it's trust in us, and a failure to the Membership we are supposed to assist and serve.
On behalf of the forum staff, I apologize to the BoD, the entirety of the MGO membership, and all participants of the forums. We failed to maintain integrity, failed to execute our responsibilities in a professional manner. We ask forgiveness, we ask that we be allowed to put this behind us, and we ask that we be allowed to again earn the trust, and hopefully respect of the BoD, the Membership,and the forum participants.

We made a poor choice, we regret the damage it has done, and we would be grateful if we could move forward and not have our noses rubbed in it further.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Tim

My trust use to be universal with all of you except one! Now in light of this new development and total lack of respect and professionalism I will trust no more.
Myself and many more will no longer trust any of your deceitful and flagrant use of our friendship and comradery.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 05:12 PM
We, the forum staff, engaged in 'locker room' talk. It was wrong; I'll not make excuses. We were out of line. We meant no harm, it was not done maliciously. There were a few personalities that had tweaked the noses of every one of the Admin's and Moderators. Our response was inappropriate, a poor reflection upon the Organization which has invested it's trust in us, and a failure to the Membership we are supposed to assist and serve.
On behalf of the forum staff, I apologize to the BoD, the entirety of the MGO membership, and all participants of the forums. We failed to maintain integrity, failed to execute our responsibilities in a professional manner. We ask forgiveness, we ask that we be allowed to put this behind us, and we ask that we be allowed to again earn the trust, and hopefully respect of the BoD, the Membership,and the forum participants.

We made a poor choice, we regret the damage it has done, and we would be grateful if we could move forward and not have our noses rubbed in it further.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Tim

I really don't think it was really rubbing noses in it...but I hear you. I believe it was given as an example only.

That is one hell of an apology and I find myself unable to not accept it. For the record, I understand locker room talk and I don't believe an apology was warranted.
But please believe me when I say that it is wholeheartedly appreciated.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 05:15 PM
While I understand that this is a rather heated discussion mostly about things I don't have a full understanding of I will make this comment.....

Stop using profane language please! It is unseemly and very bad optics to have the top guys violate forum rules. I have no doubt as to what would happen if I (an ordinary forum user who mailed a check for membership a couple of days ago) were to use, or even quote, that word. And you all know which word I am referring to.

Airing complaints and disagreements can be productive if done in a polite and reasonable manner. But when the top people start violating their own forum rules it reflects poorly on the entire organization.

I understand and apologize for the use of that word on the forums.

Draken
06-20-2019, 05:23 PM
This just reminds me SO much of what happened with that other organization.

On the forums, I for one never really cared for Jackam, but at the same time I never saw any reason to remove him from the mod status. If you look at his post in "Ask the Candidates" as a mod, yeah he went over the top and maybe should have gotten a couple points for it, but as a member, if he has a grievance, he has the right to put it out there. Now I'm not privy to any of the behind the scenes stuff so no way I can speak to that, but we as a .org need to fix this, and fix it quick....we have history to show us what happens otherwise. Egos need to be left at the door.

ECSUSER
06-20-2019, 07:01 PM
Bring me up to speed please - why can't the BOD have read access to the forum? We aren't just talking about PM's are we?

ETA Let me rephrase:

Is the BOD asking for PM's or are there sub forums that are unavailable?

G22
06-20-2019, 07:19 PM
Bring me up to speed please - why can't the BOD have read access to the forum? We aren't just talking about PM's are we?

ETA Let me rephrase:

Is the BOD asking for PM's or are there sub forums that are unavailable?

The forums, like the organization, were set up specifically for separation of powers. The BOD demanded access to the sub-forum where Admin and Mods discuss disciplinary actions. Traditionally this was a closed forum only accessible by Admin and Mods. They were granted access. They found locker room talk. It doesn't happen any more.

The BOD wanted access to the Election Committee sub-forum. They were denied access by the EC Chairman. The EC (if you look at the org chart) is an equal and separate branch of MGO that operates autonomously per the bylaws. Access to the EC forum is restricted to election committee members only. It should always remain that way to prevent possible election tampering.

No PM's are accessible by anyone except the recipient and the sender.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 07:36 PM
Correction...

The forums, like the organization, were tried to be set up specifically for separation of powers.

In reality, the ORG is a Michigan Corporation and as such the BoD is on the hook for the Corp.

The Forums are an asset of the Corp.

The Bod is RESPONSIBLE for stuff on the forums.

Example: In some secret forum, that only a handful of people can see, they are planning to overthrow the US government.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the BOD to not allow that to take place.

If you read the AUP you will see that we have a provision for that. Basically, it says you can't do that bad stuff on the forums.

But, you see, there is this little tiny sub-forum that only a few can see but NO ONE on the BoD can see it, yet we are responsible for it.

ECSUSER
06-20-2019, 07:47 PM
The forums, like the organization, were set up specifically for separation of powers. The BOD demanded access to the sub-forum where Admin and Mods discuss disciplinary actions. Traditionally this was a closed forum only accessible by Admin and Mods. They were granted access. They found locker room talk. It doesn't happen any more.

The BOD wanted access to the Election Committee sub-forum. They were denied access by the EC Chairman. The EC (if you look at the org chart) is an equal and separate branch of MGO that operates autonomously per the bylaws. Access to the EC forum is restricted to election committee members only. It should always remain that way to prevent possible election tampering.

No PM's are accessible by anyone except the recipient and the sender.

Thank you for that information.

G22
06-20-2019, 07:55 PM
Correction...

The forums, like the organization, were tried to be set up specifically for separation of powers.

In reality, the ORG is a Michigan Corporation and as such the BoD is on the hook for the Corp.

The Forums are an asset of the Corp.

The Bod is RESPONSIBLE for stuff on the forums.

Example: In some secret forum, that only a handful of people can see, they are planning to overthrow the US government.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the BOD to not allow that to take place.

If you read the AUP you will see that we have a provision for that. Basically, it says you can't do that bad stuff on the forums.

But, you see, there is this little tiny sub-forum that only a few can see but NO ONE on the BoD can see it, yet we are responsible for it.

The AUP is not a bylaw governing this organization.

The BOD is not responsible for anything the EC does. They conduct their business autonomously. Is the President responsible for the direct actions of the Supreme Court? Can he be sued if the Supreme Court has plans to take over the world?

Autonomous

1a : having the right or power of self-government
b : undertaken or carried on without outside control
2a : existing or capable of existing independently
b : responding, reacting, or developing independently of the whole

Shyster
06-20-2019, 08:00 PM
In the meantime, what has MGO done this past year to achieve it's mission? NOT A DAMNED THING while Michigan Open Carry has pushed several key pieces of legislation along.

Far too many people are acting juvenile. You know who you are.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 08:06 PM
The AUP is not a bylaw governing this organization.

The BOD is not responsible for anything the EC does. They conduct their business autonomously. Is the President responsible for the direct actions of the Supreme Court? Can he be sued if the Supreme Court has plans to take over the world?

Autonomous

1a : having the right or power of self-government
b : undertaken or carried on without outside control
2a : existing or capable of existing independently
b : responding, reacting, or developing independently of the whole

You still don't understand.
Please read these.

https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?422014-Board-Ordered-Removal-of-a-Forums-Super-Moderator&p=3133488&viewfull=1#post3133488

https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?422014-Board-Ordered-Removal-of-a-Forums-Super-Moderator&p=3133489&viewfull=1#post3133489

https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?422014-Board-Ordered-Removal-of-a-Forums-Super-Moderator&p=3133493&viewfull=1#post3133493

After reading those, if you still don't understand, there really isn't anything else, that I know of, that will help.

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 08:49 PM
We, the forum staff, engaged in 'locker room' talk. It was wrong; I'll not make excuses. We were out of line. We meant no harm, it was not done maliciously. There were a few personalities that had tweaked the noses of every one of the Admin's and Moderators. Our response was inappropriate, a poor reflection upon the Organization which has invested it's trust in us, and a failure to the Membership we are supposed to assist and serve.
On behalf of the forum staff, I apologize to the BoD, the entirety of the MGO membership, and all participants of the forums. We failed to maintain integrity, failed to execute our responsibilities in a professional manner. We ask forgiveness, we ask that we be allowed to put this behind us, and we ask that we be allowed to again earn the trust, and hopefully respect of the BoD, the Membership,and the forum participants.

We made a poor choice, we regret the damage it has done, and we would be grateful if we could move forward and not have our noses rubbed in it further.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Tim
Thank you for that sir. It's much appreciated and a rather stand up thing to come out and say.


Yes Sir, that was the point I was trying, poorly, to make. If I thought the RifleKid was up to <insert pet offense here> in her room I'd boot the door in and clean house. At some level the BoD has to have that same oversight capability. But if I, or the BoD, are in that room every week making 'suggestions', we have assumed control and have ended independent operation.

Well put and much agreed.

wizzi01
06-20-2019, 08:54 PM
In the meantime, what has MGO done this past year to achieve it's mission? NOT A DAMNED THING while Michigan Open Carry has pushed several key pieces of legislation along.

Far too many people are acting juvenile. You know who you are.

This right here is why I didn't renew. I will probably give my money to MOC.

If I renew will it be in time to vote?

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 09:02 PM
You are referring to me. Are you sure you have your fact straight? I'm not.

What you are referencing was a comment made by a Moderator…and it wasn't Jack.

You sure didn't have any objections to that sort of talk and did not see it fit to end it. You advertise yourself as the bigger man, but this is not how the bigger man should act.

Integrity is doing what is right, even when nobody is looking. Your claim of ignorance in the events I am speaking of shows a lack of integrity. This is not what MGO needs.

dougwg
06-20-2019, 09:07 PM
This right here is why I didn't renew. I will probably give my money to MOC.

If I renew will it be in time to vote?

I belong to both because I feel it's worth it.

wizzi01
06-20-2019, 09:10 PM
I belong to both because I feel it's worth it.

What makes mgo worth it at this time? I can catch the soap operas on basic tv for free

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 09:16 PM
If I renew will it be in time to vote?

There are no minimum time requirements for members to vote. Join and vote immediately, IF your membership is acknowledged/processed.

PhotoTom
06-20-2019, 09:19 PM
In the meantime, what has MGO done this past year to achieve it's mission? NOT A DAMNED THING while Michigan Open Carry has pushed several key pieces of legislation along.

Far too many people are acting juvenile. You know who you are.

THIS is a VERY POWERFUL statement. The man making it is the retained corporate counsel of Michigan Gun Owners, Inc and serves at the leisure of the board. As such, he has a direct FINANCIAL benefit to lose by speaking out against the BoD.

BUT, he did. And I applaud him for this.

CHANGE is needed!

Cocowheats
06-20-2019, 09:29 PM
THIS is a VERY POWERFUL statement. The man making it is the retained corporate counsel of Michigan Gun Owners, Inc and serves at the leisure of the board. As such, he has a direct FINANCIAL benefit to lose by speaking out against the BoD.

BUT, he did. And I applaud him for this.

CHANGE is needed!

Your hands have dabbled in his remarks. Don't act like they don't encompass yourself. You act as if you are immune to the drama, yet you have fueled plenty of it.

Drama wastes our time.

The drama needs to end. THAT is the change we need to begin moving forward again. I am tired of having to remain silent as to not fuel a fire. I am tired of having to rebuttal unfair and even untrue statements and then consequently fueling fires. Its lose lose...

dramey82
06-20-2019, 09:34 PM
Mikes rolling over in his grave! Too bad all the seats are not up for re election!

mitommy
06-20-2019, 09:34 PM
So, if I read this correctly, The BOD wants review access but gets stonewalled, but is reluctantly granted access. The Forum Administrators want to be free from BOD oversight. The EC wants to be free from oversight from the BOD oversight. “Adults” are name calling, just like schoolyard kids. Then when they get caught & action taken, they say it’s mutually agreeable fun? SomeBOD members engage In schoolyard bullying tactics too.

As I see it, the organization is MGO. It started as MGOUC (urn censored). For better or worse the UC part went away, because of childish behavior. It’s time this organization get back in focus as a grass roots, gun rights organization. Get rid of the childish turf wars and name calling. Trim the forums to those items that stay true to the mission. Let the BID run all aspects of the organization. If individual egos get in the way, then good riddance. MGO will either float or sink on it’s own merit.

But after all, what do I know. I was just one of the people that attended the founder meeting in May & June of 2002.

TylerV76
06-20-2019, 10:02 PM
This right here is why I didn't renew. I will probably give my money to MOC.

If I renew will it be in time to vote?

Ditto

You guys know you have lost membership but have failed to ask why. I know for a fact the admins of the forums know why because they have actually reached out to find out.

Like it or not, this forum is the heart of MGO. When you stop participating in it you have no idea what's going on. The BOD hasn't participated in god knows how long and has lost connection with what the members want. We want to see something. Something of substance that stands for why we're here. Something that makes us proud to contribute and give our hard earned money. It doesn't seem like anythings been done in a long time except hiding secrets and failures.

I don't know who's going to get elected to run things around here but whoever it is, pay attention to what people are saying and participate in the conversation. Separating the forums from the ORG is one of the stupidest things you could do. The forums are the ORG and where 100% of your members tell you what you need to hear.

We don't need gifts and bribes to volunteer or come to an event. We just need to know its not a waste of time.

In all fairness, I just left a bar on the beach in Puerto Rico and found out I love Mojito's. So I may not make sense but somewhere in there was some wisdom.

JohnJak
06-22-2019, 07:04 AM
Transcripts from Mod And Bod are available.

Cocowheats
06-22-2019, 06:32 PM
Transcripts from Mod And Bod are available.

Link?

Just wondering because it's kind of messed up if private Mod/BoD threads can be shared but NOBODY(EC aside) can see EC threads.


To be clear, I encourage all to read what is available, but if it's third party, take it all with a grain of salt.

AleksanderSuave
06-24-2019, 10:12 AM
He has made threats in PM as well as making wild accusations without any bearing evidence. This is not how a Moderator should act.

That is how we came to this conclusion.

Then you should remove Doug as well, as he has similarly made threats..and represents a genuine liability to our organization, since we dont have event insurance, and he had an ND AT an MGO EVENT

AleksanderSuave
06-24-2019, 10:15 AM
That is the relevant section that you are referring to.

Notice that it says anyone "convicted of a felony".

The member that keeps mischaracterizing this and bringing it up must have failed to read the whole section.

I don't think you actually know the bylaw you're quoting. Or you need to brush up on your understanding of the english language.


Section 2.03 The organization may, in accordance with the policy and procedures in effect and published in the organization's official Policies and Procedures manual at least 30 days in advance of the removal/revocation process, revoke the membership of anyone convicted of a felony, of any crime involving dishonesty, theft, or the abuse/neglect of firearms, or who performs an action that is detrimental to the organization

those items, separated by a comma, are multiple options. You dont need to have committed a felony, AND have committed theft, AND performed an action detrimental to the org. ANY Of the above is criteria for removal. It doesnt start and end with a felony, as much as you'd like for it to be that way.

JohnJak
06-24-2019, 10:17 AM
Then you should remove Doug as well, as he has similarly made threats..and represents a genuine liability to our organization, since we dont have event insurance, and he had an ND AT an MGO EVENT

Was there a ND or this based on fiction? I would like Doug to come forward and comment.

AleksanderSuave
06-24-2019, 10:19 AM
Was there a ND or this based on fiction? I would like Doug to come forward and comment.

https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?419487-Online-Voting&p=3121427&viewfull=1#post3121427


Both the threatening of members, and the ND at an event we didnt have insurance for happened.

wsr
06-24-2019, 01:46 PM
Seems like a bunch of passive aggressive whining to me

PhotoTom
06-24-2019, 02:57 PM
The four board members that made this motion and voted in favor of have all resigned. They worked as a team and they left as a team.

As I said in the first place, this had NOTHING to do with Jack's performance as a moderator. He was one of our best and most active moderators. We have a compete history of every moderator's actions taken, including their communications with the individuals receiving the warning/infraction. Jack has pages upon pages of actions taken, and there are nothing but example after example of how a mod should conduct themselves.

Once the dust settles and the new board is seated, this will be a topic to discuss…reversing this motion/vote and turn it back to the Forum Admins (Zigziggtyzoo and G22) to let them decide if they want to bring Jack back as a moderator.

wizzi01
06-24-2019, 03:06 PM
The four board members that made this motion and voted in favor of have all resigned. They worked as a team and they left as a team.

As I said in the first place, this had NOTHING to do with Jack's performance as a moderator. He was one of our best and most active moderators. We have a compete history of every moderator's actions taken, including their communications with the individuals receiving the warning/infraction. Jack has pages upon pages of actions taken, and there are nothing but example after example of how a mod should conduct themselves.

Once the dust settles and the new board is seated, this will be a topic to discuss…reversing this motion/vote and turn it back to the Forum Admins (Zigziggtyzoo and G22) to let them decide if they want to bring Jack back as a moderator.

Looks like I am going to become a member once again.

And, placed. Maybe I can get in the system before it's time to vote.

RifleGuy
06-24-2019, 04:03 PM
The four board members that made this motion and voted in favor of have all resigned. They worked as a team and they left as a team <snip>

Is there a post somewhere announcing this change? I have been busy and unable to follow the events of the last few days.

PhotoTom
06-24-2019, 04:06 PM
Is there a post somewhere announcing this change? I have been busy and unable to follow the events of the last few days.

No specific announcement. The remaining board is busy sorting things out so MGO will continue to be "legal" until the new/incoming board is seated.

By the way, did you know Trek resigned a few months ago?

Communications will improve in the future, but at this moment, I do agree that the remaining board is tied up with getting things taken care of…so I'm thinking an announcement will be made with ALL of the changes included soon...

Fuzzbutt
06-24-2019, 05:14 PM
Members can see this link in the Publication forum of our currently elected or appointed members.

Current-members-of-the-Board-of-Directors-and-Election-Committee (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?414724-Current-members-of-the-Board-of-Directors-and-Election-Committee&p=3097287&viewfull=1#post3097287)

Coctailer
06-24-2019, 05:23 PM
Members can see this link in the Publication forum of our currently elected or appointed members.

Current-members-of-the-Board-of-Directors-and-Election-Committee (https://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?414724-Current-members-of-the-Board-of-Directors-and-Election-Committee&p=3097287&viewfull=1#post3097287)

Paid members that are in the backlog cannot. Can you make it public for all that way all the paid members can see it?

RifleGuy
06-24-2019, 05:24 PM
Thank you, Gentlemen.

dramey82
06-24-2019, 05:24 PM
Bring Jack Back!

dwcopple
06-24-2019, 05:29 PM
:popcorn:

JohnJak
06-24-2019, 06:26 PM
Bring Jack Back!

Sorry not a fan.

He is a very nice guy(I do respect) outside of being a mod.

Ruger
06-24-2019, 06:41 PM
Bring Jack Back!


Sorry not a fan.

He is a very nice guy(I do respect) outside of being a mod.

Not a fan either. Bring him back and it's a slap in the face to the members that called for his removal and I'm not talking about the 4 board members.

dramey82
06-24-2019, 07:23 PM
Not a fan either. Bring him back and it's a slap in the face to the members that called for his removal and I'm not talking about the 4 board members.


Who? 3 or 4? and a couple of those if you've read their posts of recent are whinny ass cry babies! hell the only infractions I've received are by him and each time it was my fault, one of those whinners is currently running for a seat! this forum needs someone a little strict or should I say just enforces the rules.

Like him or not he is one of the most dedicated members, I've never met the guy but I can read and his heart is here! and if he was still a mod I'm sure he'd give me a warning for saying ass.

Not sure why you and John feel this way but just because he speaks his mind and tells you like it is I respect that, if some are afraid of him.... I don't see that as a bad thing.

TylerV76
06-24-2019, 07:42 PM
...just because he speaks his mind and tells you like it is I respect that...

As long as you agree or dont speak your mind in return.

Jack seems like a nice guy and very dedicated to MGO, as a member.

dramey82
06-24-2019, 07:48 PM
As long as you agree or dont speak your mind in return.

Jack seems like a nice guy and very dedicated to MGO, as a member.

One of the 3 or 4? Obviously you don't know me as I've always have spoken my mind here.

Ruger
06-24-2019, 08:20 PM
Who? 3 or 4? and a couple of those if you've read their posts of recent are whinny ass cry babies! hell the only infractions I've received are by him and each time it was my fault, one of those whinners is currently running for a seat! this forum needs someone a little strict or should I say just enforces the rules.

Like him or not he is one of the most dedicated members, I've never met the guy but I can read and his heart is here! and if he was still a mod I'm sure he'd give me a warning for saying ass.

Not sure why you and John feel this way but just because he speaks his mind and tells you like it is I respect that, if some are afraid of him.... I don't see that as a bad thing.

I've never received an infraction from him! I'm not against anyone speaking their mind and I assure you I'm not afraid of him or anyone here for that matter. Do you actually believe it took 3 or 4 members to have the previous BoD's to call for his removal? I'm going to let you in on a little secret..... I've never spoken to any of the previous BoD members about Jack...NEVER! As far as dedicated member, he can do that without moderator status...No?
That would leave us to believe that more then just 3 or 4 had an issue with him. I'm not at liberty to bring up my beef with him, if I did I'd be breaking the AUP rules. FTR/ I've only received on infraction the whole time I've been here and that was back in 2013 IIRC.

dramey82
06-24-2019, 08:28 PM
Do you actually believe it took 3 or 4 members to have the previous BoD's to call for his removal?

Yes and one annoying obnoxious ex VP.

Ruger
06-24-2019, 08:45 PM
Yes and one annoying obnoxious ex VP.

Disagree! :slap:

dramey82
06-24-2019, 09:10 PM
Disagree! :slap:

Ouch


:-)

PhotoTom
06-24-2019, 09:31 PM
Ouch


:-)

At least he didn't go with…

:roshambo:

:lollol:

TylerV76
06-24-2019, 10:56 PM
Yes and one annoying obnoxious ex VP.

Ive never received an infraction or even a warning. Ive also never talked to anyone about any mods until I posted what I did in this thread. Its an opinion Ive had for a couple years that never needed to be discussed until now.

From the looks of it, more than “3 or 4” people feel this way. The fact that you arent willing to accept that makes me question if the next BoD will be any different than the last.

G22
06-25-2019, 07:23 AM
Ive never received an infraction or even a warning. Ive also never talked to anyone about any mods until I posted what I did in this thread. Its an opinion Ive had for a couple years that never needed to be discussed until now.

From the looks of it, more than “3 or 4” people feel this way. The fact that you arent willing to accept that makes me question if the next BoD will be any different than the last.

Tyler,

He's not running for BOD.

Your lack of infractions/warnings speaks for itself. You have never violated the AUP or even come close as far as I've seen. Your tech. knowledge has helped a lot of people here, including myself. Thank you!

Nobody likes getting infractions/warnings. It certainly doesn't make the staff very popular. Some people like to convince themselves that they didn't violate the very rules they agreed to when they signed up. Some like to place the blame for their own actions on the Mods. Being a Moderator isn't a popularity contest. If it was none of them would be here including me!

His record as a Mod speaks for itself. It clearly shows that he was removed for personal reasons, not for his actions as a moderator.

So, where is the cutoff where a moderator should be booted because his personal opinions were unfavorable to a few people?

3-4? 10-15? 20-25? Of the thousands who visit MGO each month?

I'm telling everyone right now that the vast majority of those who get infractions/warnings say something like "oops my bad" or "sorry it wont happen again".

What we have is a very vocal minority who don't like Jack because of his personal opinions. They complained to a BOD who also disliked him for the same reasons. He was accused, tried, convicted, and hung for those personal opinions, without even the common courtesy of asking the Administrators.

Contrary to a minority belief, the Admin are very reasonable people. :) If Jack had acted in a way that abused his Mod power, we would have agreed with his removal and done it before any BOD intervention in the first place. He has no record of doing that. Has he made honest mistakes? Sure. So have all the Admin/Mods at one point. He owned them and corrected them.

It was a BS call plain and simple. A call made because he asked 'uncomfortable' questions of the leadership. A call made that goes against the founding principals of this organization.

That shouldn't be tolerated by you, me, or anyone who cares about this organization and it founding principals. That is what another organization did, and continues to do to anyone who dares question the leadership.

dramey82
06-25-2019, 07:26 AM
The fact that you arent willing to accept that makes me question if the next BoD will be any different than the last.
Sorry if you feel others can’t have a difference of opinion, as to the BOD if you really cared you’d have
your self in a position where can have a say, put people in place to your liking, you don’t so enjoy the
ride and just throw out comments.

JohnJak
06-25-2019, 07:44 AM
What makes a moderator a SUPER moderator?

78728

SteveS
06-25-2019, 07:46 AM
His record as a Mod speaks for itself. It clearly shows that he was removed for personal reasons, not for his actions as a moderator.

This is the impression I got. I have yet to see anything that suggests he broke a rule or abused his position in any way.

G22
06-25-2019, 07:58 AM
What makes a moderator a SUPER moderator?

78728

Good question!

MGO has several Moderators. Some of them only have Mod permissions in individual forums, like the classifieds, the front page, affiliate organizations etc...

Super Moderator is a designation that vBulletin applies to a Mod that oversees the entire forum.

Super Mods eat kryptonite for breakfast!

TylerV76
06-25-2019, 08:10 AM
Tyler,

He's not running for BOD.

My bad, confused him with someone else.



Your lack of infractions/warnings speaks for itself. You have never violated the AUP or even come close as far as I've seen. Your tech. knowledge has helped a lot of people here, including myself. Thank you!

Nobody likes getting infractions/warnings. It certainly doesn't make the staff very popular. Some people like to convince themselves that they didn't violate the very rules they agreed to when they signed up. Some like to place the blame for their own actions on the Mods. Being a Moderator isn't a popularity contest. If it was none of them would be here including me!

His record as a Mod speaks for itself. It clearly shows that he was removed for personal reasons, not for his actions as a moderator.

So, where is the cutoff where a moderator should be booted because his personal opinions were unfavorable to a few people?

3-4? 10-15? 20-25? Of the thousands who visit MGO each month?

I'm telling everyone right now that the vast majority of those who get infractions/warnings say something like "oops my bad" or "sorry it wont happen again".

What we have is a very vocal minority who don't like Jack because of his personal opinions. They complained to a BOD who also disliked him for the same reasons. He was accused, tried, convicted, and hung for those personal opinions, without even the common courtesy of asking the Administrators.

Contrary to a minority belief, the Admin are very reasonable people. :) If Jack had acted in a way that abused his Mod power, we would have agreed with his removal and done it before any BOD intervention in the first place. He has no record of doing that. Has he made honest mistakes? Sure. So have all the Admin/Mods at one point. He owned them and corrected them.

It was a BS call plain and simple. A call made because he asked 'uncomfortable' questions of the leadership. A call made that goes against the founding principals of this organization.

That shouldn't be tolerated by you, me, or anyone who cares about this organization and it founding principals. That is what another organization did, and continues to do to anyone who dares question the leadership.

I personally don't care one way or another if he's a mod. Im simply stating the fact that more than a few people didn't appreciate they hypocritical nature of some of his comments. Some of us felt that way without needing to have any moderator interactions. He seems like a good guy but he needs to be a bit more tolerant to opposing views.



Sorry if you feel others can’t have a difference of opinion, as to the BOD if you really cared you’d have
your self in a position where can have a say, put people in place to your liking, you don’t so enjoy the
ride and just throw out comments.

This is the exact attitude that stopped me from renewing my membership. You do know I contribute to other aspects of this place financially right? More than a membership would cost. I do so because I believe in the legal fund members.

The more this place keeps ignoring the non-paying members or talking down to them, the less paying members this play will have. Thats a fact.

G22
06-25-2019, 08:29 AM
Fair enough Tyler. If everyone agreed on everything this would be a very boring place :lol:

All non paid members should be seen as potential members. I believe that the incoming BOD is going to make that a priority right off the bat. Non paid members have no say in how the organization is ran, but many do contribute in other ways to help gun owners and the MGO community as a whole.

Hopefully the new BOD will change some minds of those who are sitting on the fence.

dwcopple
06-25-2019, 08:35 AM
The more this place keeps ignoring the non-paying members or talking down to them, the less paying members this play will have. Thats a fact.
correct. MGO "the forum" needs to remember it is separate from MGO "the organization or cause". I'd wager the majority of people here just want to meet, discuss, and interact with (probably sell and buy to and from) other MICHIGAN gun owners. By handicapping the classifieds unless you join the ORG as a paying member is a dumb idea. The classifieds SHOULD be run like any other gun forum (FREE) where they have a 24hr-3day bump rule. Making non-paying members wait 60 days to bump is absurd. My :twocents: that I've voiced on here already and taken flack for...which I'm sure I will again in a few moments too :???:

Hawgrider
06-25-2019, 08:53 AM
Nobody likes getting infractions/warnings.




Whoa there! Hang on a minute I love infractions. Please bring Jack back so that I can maintain my image as that is very important to me. Without Jack it only leaves Shyster as my only source for spankings.

JohnJak
06-25-2019, 09:03 AM
The term "Forum User" seems a bit offensive.

All non paid members should be seen as "Potential Members". Quote from G22.

G22
06-25-2019, 09:03 AM
Whoa there! Hang on a minute I love infractions. Please bring Jack back so that I can maintain my image as that is very important to me. Without Jack it only leaves Shyster as my only source for spankings.

Thanks for that!

As someone who could park their Silverado in your driveway without worrying about my tires, your non paid forum user status is greatly appreciated, but...I think you misread what I posted. I was talking directly TO you, as a nobody. :poke: :lol:

Joking aside, John has a point. Non-paid status used to say forum member. It was changed because some were getting confused between paid members and forum members.

Maybe this is something that needs to be reviewed again.

Scoop
06-25-2019, 09:08 AM
By handicapping the classifieds unless you join the ORG as a paying member is a dumb idea. Completely disagree. AFAIC, there has to be some TANGIBLE benefits to encourage people to become paying members. Why buy the cow if he can get the milk for free, no?

TylerV76
06-25-2019, 09:15 AM
correct. MGO "the forum" needs to remember it is separate from MGO "the organization or cause"...

This is where I think MGO makes one of its gravest mistakes. In reality, the forum is NOT separate from the ORG. The vast majority of memberships come from the forums, the BoD is ultimately responsible for the forums and any and all events are promoted through the forums. Like it or not, very few people donate money without using the forums and even fewer participate in the ORG without first participating in the forums. In fact, the forums are the leading factor to inform people what MGO is.

If I had to guess, I'd say the forums are by far the most active, profitable and participated in function of the ORG.

Hawgrider
06-25-2019, 09:38 AM
Thanks for that!

As someone who could park their Silverado in your driveway without worrying about my tires, your non paid forum user status is greatly appreciated, but...I think you misread what I posted. I was talking directly TO you, as a nobody. :poke: :lol:

Joking aside, John has a point. Non-paid status used to say forum member. It was changed because some were getting confused between paid members and forum members.

Maybe this is something that needs to be reviewed again.

If you are driving American your welcome anytime.:thup: Well since its you Id let you slide even if you showed up in a Suburu:grin:

Tallbear
06-25-2019, 09:39 AM
This is where I think MGO makes one of its gravest mistakes. In reality, the forum is NOT separate from the ORG. The vast majority of memberships come from the forums, the BoD is ultimately responsible for the forums and any and all events are promoted through the forums. Like it or not, very few people donate money without using the forums and even fewer participate in the ORG without first participating in the forums. In fact, the forums are the leading factor to inform people what MGO is.

If I had to guess, I'd say the forums are by far the most active, profitable and participated in function of the ORG.

Is this why you want to be a member?

CyborgWarrior
06-25-2019, 09:49 AM
This is where I think MGO makes one of its gravest mistakes. In reality, the forum is NOT separate from the ORG. The vast majority of memberships come from the forums, the BoD is ultimately responsible for the forums and any and all events are promoted through the forums. Like it or not, very few people donate money without using the forums and even fewer participate in the ORG without first participating in the forums. In fact, the forums are the leading factor to inform people what MGO is.

If I had to guess, I'd say the forums are by far the most active, profitable and participated in function of the ORG.

Trying to keep the two separate, yet together leads to the bi-polar dysfunctional appearance. I never understood that paradigm.
They are one in the same. The forums are the public relations and propaganda wing of MGO. Admit it. Run with it.

TylerV76
06-25-2019, 09:49 AM
Is this why you want to be a member?

On the contrary, I don't want to be a member currently and therefor Im not. I contribute to the aspects of MGO that I feel do as much as they can to contribute to gunowners.

When I was a member I did so for 2 reasons. Number 1 was forum privileges, plain and simple. A distant 2nd was to support the ORG. I was already supporting the Legal fund and that was based solely on my respect for the attorney's here. After having access to the members area and then watching the ORG become complacent I decided the forum perks weren't enough to support an ORG that lost its drive.

I don't understand why the ORG tries to separate from the forums so much. Its where EVERYTHING gets discussed. Right now there is a huge BoD issue and look where we are talking about it and how many non-paying members are interested in it. Accept it, the forums are your greatest asset. I know you want it to be the mission etc but its not, it may never be and that doesn't mean the mission is less important.

TylerV76
06-25-2019, 09:53 AM
Is this why you want to be a member?


Trying to keep the two separate, yet together leads to the bi-polar dysfunctional appearance. I never understood that paradigm.
They are one in the same. The forums are the public relations and propaganda wing of MGO. Admit it. Run with it.

Another "forum user" making the point. You guys gotta just accept it and make it play to your advantage. I'll be curious to see what transpires over the next few months.

dramey82
06-25-2019, 10:11 AM
This is the exact attitude that stopped me from renewing my membership. You do know I contribute to other aspects of this place financially right? More than a membership would cost. I do so because I believe in the legal fund members.

The more this place keeps ignoring the non-paying members or talking down to them, the less paying members this play will have. Thats a fact.

I meant no disrespect, I guess I was saying if you don’t like what happens here unfortunately it will cost a little to be able to make changes, I don’t care who’s paying member or not.
I say what I’m thinking sometimes sorry if it comes off as being harsh.

TylerV76
06-25-2019, 10:19 AM
I meant no disrespect, I guess I was saying if you don’t like what happens here unfortunately it will cost a little to be able to make changes, I don’t care who’s paying member or not.
I say what I’m thinking sometimes sorry if it comes off as being harsh.

No worries, I do the same. Putting my thoughts in text often gets me labeled as an a-hole, just ask my wife.

CyborgWarrior
06-25-2019, 10:24 AM
Another "forum user" making the point. You guys gotta just accept it and make it play to your advantage. I'll be curious to see what transpires over the next few months.

I had my reasons to stop being a forum member. It certainly wasn’t about the money. I regularly donate to 2A causes.
I’ve been close to restarting, then I see the tribalism and petty bickering, and I decide to sit back and wait.

SteveS
06-25-2019, 11:25 AM
I don't understand why the ORG tries to separate from the forums so much. Its where EVERYTHING gets discussed.

I think dwcopple is (mostly) correct. While a great deal gets discussed on the forum, the majority of paid members don't participate in the forum and just join to support the org. I have been here since the beginning and there has always been, to some degree, concerns about the image that forums convey to the public. A few years ago a bunch of people left over the perception that the forum was "anti cop." There were calls to restrict certain discussion. These were met with complaints of censorship. Having some level of separation would seem to allow a free discussion without concern that people would present some image that may hurt the org.

This could explain why most organizations don't have some kind of forum. Plenty have some social media interactions, but they seem to be heavily moderated.

TylerV76
06-25-2019, 11:39 AM
I think dwcopple is (mostly) correct. While a great deal gets discussed on the forum, the majority of paid members don't participate in the forum and just join to support the org. I have been here since the beginning and there has always been, to some degree, concerns about the image that forums convey to the public. A few years ago a bunch of people left over the perception that the forum was "anti cop." There were calls to restrict certain discussion. These were met with complaints of censorship. Having some level of separation would seem to allow a free discussion without concern that people would present some image that may hurt the org.

This could explain why most organizations don't have some kind of forum. Plenty have some social media interactions, but they seem to be heavily moderated.

But ultimately the ORG is responsible for the forums and the forums are the place where all ORG discussions are had so it creates a discombobulation.

Is there a way to get member stats showing how many are forum users (within the past 3 months) vs how many aren't? I would be shocked to find out the majority of paying members don't participate in the forums.

If the org is indeed worried about the image a forum creates then it only has 2 options in my opinion. A) Completely disconnect from the forums and let them be completely separate including the name. As It stands now, the ORG is responsible for anything that happens on here as its an asset of the ORG. B) Accept the fact that there are people who are not the best representation online and deal with them on an individual basis. You don't have to censor to achieve a common goal, you just have to accept that everyone has their own opinion and it may not be the popular one.

Quite frankly, the easiest way to rid the ORG's concern about its image is to make any non-firearm related sections opt-in only, like the fire pit. You should have to have X amount of posts to view them.

As it stands right now though, the BoD and ORG's image is completely tarnished because of the forums so their strategy isn't working.

Parkanzky
06-25-2019, 12:38 PM
As it stands right now though, the BoD and ORG's image is completely tarnished because of the forums so their strategy isn't working.

As an outsider, it appears to me that the board/organization are in turmoil and the forums are just bringing that to light. You could shut down the forum and prevent a lot of that from happening, but then a LOT fewer people are likely to find the organization and MGO may have a real challenge keeping up its membership numbers.

Scoop
06-25-2019, 12:42 PM
This could explain why most organizations don't have some kind of forum. Plenty have some social media interactions, but they seem to be heavily moderated.That's because "most organizations" simply want to put forth their agenda, and having a forum would promote free speech and differing opinions ... something many orgs can't handle.

Smokepole
06-25-2019, 12:47 PM
That's because "most organizations" simply want to put forth their agenda, and having a forum would promote free speech and differing opinions ... something many orgs can't handle.

Certainly one former premiere gun rights organization does.
;)

Scoop
06-25-2019, 12:50 PM
I would be shocked to find out the majority of paying members don't participate in the forums.

SELECT COUNT(userid) FROM vb_user WHERE lastvisit > UNIX_TIMESTAMP('2018-06-25 00:00:00');

That's a year. Or back to whatever date one might consider using as "participating" ... :)

dramey82
06-25-2019, 07:02 PM
If you are driving American your welcome anytime.:thup: Well since its you Id let you slide even if you showed up in a Suburu:grin:

Have you seen his Buick? :cool:

chosos
06-26-2019, 11:06 AM
I am still at a loss here as to how this went down the way it did. I sit on BOTH the P&P and the BLOC. Where exactly is the section where it details removal of site staff, or are we writing it as we go?

historian
06-26-2019, 03:52 PM
My two cents. I moved to MI. I am quite active on INGO, so I instinctively looked for Michigan Gun Owners. That is how I found this site. INGO doesn't have a lobbying arm, I was impressed that MIGO did (perhaps it is because there are supermajorities in IN and the only thing we argue over is if constitutional carry or free lifetime carry permits are best). That being said, I have considered becoming a member as I would like someone to fight for my rights against the loonies in Lansing. I am new to these parts, so maybe I don't know the history or personal slights, so I apologize for stepping on toes. However, it was my impression that the forum started first and the organization after. Reading this thread, it appears to be the opposite. That being said, I wouldn't know about (or care about) MIGO if it wasn't for the forums. Now, I'm still new and looking at things from a much different perspective. I don't know the interpersonal fights that I see happening here. I don't see the members only side of the site. However, I am hesitant to join as a Member if there isn't a cohesive front. Now on INGO we argue about if the NRA is really a pro-gun organization and there are many hurt feelings on both sides. We argue about OC and CC and there are hurt feelings. We argue about 1911s and Glocks and there are more hurt feelings than I care to admit. However, when it comes to having members show up to lobby at the statehouse or speak at information sessions or even take a newbie (as I was) and explain to them the ropes, the community is what it is all about.

I think MIGO needs a good community. If there is this much fighting about a mod, then maybe everyone should take a step back and think about why the joined (as members or on a forum).

I, again, apologize if I stepped on people's toes, but I feel that as someone who would like a community up here, maybe there should be some consensus so we can have a united front and maybe, just maybe, get lifetime carry permits.

Scoop
06-26-2019, 03:57 PM
Have you seen his Buick? :cool:

Please do not mention Buick's when I'm around, dramey82 ... :thdown:

RifleGuy
06-26-2019, 04:12 PM
Please do not mention Buick's when I'm around, dramey82 ... :thdown:

I take it that it was a Bui..., eh... that brand car, that tried to kill you, but wasn't tough enough for the task?

Scoop
06-26-2019, 04:33 PM
I take it that it was a Bui..., eh... that brand car, that tried to kill you, but wasn't tough enough for the task?LOL. Yea. *****g meth head driver, too.

(I was just messing with dramey82, BTW. Other than the missing limb, nothing from that incident bothers me one bit.)

SkyArms-Sean
06-26-2019, 05:10 PM
My two cents. I moved to MI. I am quite active on INGO, so I instinctively looked for Michigan Gun Owners. That is how I found this site. INGO doesn't have a lobbying arm, I was impressed that MIGO did (perhaps it is because there are supermajorities in IN and the only thing we argue over is if constitutional carry or free lifetime carry permits are best). That being said, I have considered becoming a member as I would like someone to fight for my rights against the loonies in Lansing. I am new to these parts, so maybe I don't know the history or personal slights, so I apologize for stepping on toes. However, it was my impression that the forum started first and the organization after. Reading this thread, it appears to be the opposite. That being said, I wouldn't know about (or care about) MIGO if it wasn't for the forums. Now, I'm still new and looking at things from a much different perspective. I don't know the interpersonal fights that I see happening here. I don't see the members only side of the site. However, I am hesitant to join as a Member if there isn't a cohesive front. Now on INGO we argue about if the NRA is really a pro-gun organization and there are many hurt feelings on both sides. We argue about OC and CC and there are hurt feelings. We argue about 1911s and Glocks and there are more hurt feelings than I care to admit. However, when it comes to having members show up to lobby at the statehouse or speak at information sessions or even take a newbie (as I was) and explain to them the ropes, the community is what it is all about.

I think MIGO needs a good community. If there is this much fighting about a mod, then maybe everyone should take a step back and think about why the joined (as members or on a forum).

I, again, apologize if I stepped on people's toes, but I feel that as someone who would like a community up here, maybe there should be some consensus so we can have a united front and maybe, just maybe, get lifetime carry permits.


I can't stress this quote enough.... Reflection is key. Sometimes we get swept up in the daily that we forget why we started something. This thread shouldn't even be a thread. But what do I know I am new to this community, but I am NOT new to communities, infact I run several of my own one of which his LLC'd.

But as someone new, issues like this will prevent me from becoming a paid member, I mean in all honesty I wouldn’t want to support an organization of disorganization and in-fighting.

AleksanderSuave
06-26-2019, 05:41 PM
Chosos brought up a lot of valid points...

we have no formal procedure in place for the BoD to vote out a mod (because at the same time...what would stop them from voting out the admins?)

Maybe the mods and admins should function separately like the EC?

dramey82
06-26-2019, 06:38 PM
Please do not mention Buick's when I'm around, dramey82 ... :thdown:

:door:

Bikenut
06-26-2019, 07:09 PM
My two cents. I moved to MI. I am quite active on INGO, so I instinctively looked for Michigan Gun Owners. That is how I found this site. INGO doesn't have a lobbying arm, I was impressed that MIGO did (perhaps it is because there are supermajorities in IN and the only thing we argue over is if constitutional carry or free lifetime carry permits are best). That being said, I have considered becoming a member as I would like someone to fight for my rights against the loonies in Lansing. I am new to these parts, so maybe I don't know the history or personal slights, so I apologize for stepping on toes. However, it was my impression that the forum started first and the organization after. Reading this thread, it appears to be the opposite. That being said, I wouldn't know about (or care about) MIGO if it wasn't for the forums. Now, I'm still new and looking at things from a much different perspective. I don't know the interpersonal fights that I see happening here. I don't see the members only side of the site. However, I am hesitant to join as a Member if there isn't a cohesive front. Now on INGO we argue about if the NRA is really a pro-gun organization and there are many hurt feelings on both sides. We argue about OC and CC and there are hurt feelings. We argue about 1911s and Glocks and there are more hurt feelings than I care to admit. However, when it comes to having members show up to lobby at the statehouse or speak at information sessions or even take a newbie (as I was) and explain to them the ropes, the community is what it is all about.

I think MIGO needs a good community. If there is this much fighting about a mod, then maybe everyone should take a step back and think about why the joined (as members or on a forum).

I, again, apologize if I stepped on people's toes, but I feel that as someone who would like a community up here, maybe there should be some consensus so we can have a united front and maybe, just maybe, get lifetime carry permits.Well said!

partdeux
06-26-2019, 09:05 PM
I, again, apologize if I stepped on people's toes, but I feel that as someone who would like a community up here, maybe there should be some consensus so we can have a united front and maybe, just maybe, get lifetime carry permits.
Welcome to MI and our crazy convoluted laws, including where the state police encourage people to commit felonies.

I've been a member for a little while, and used to participate in more activities, until I was shamed for not being on time for my shift, on a work day, and was 15 minutes early to the time I said I would be there.

The drama that's happening now has been a long time coming. My take, our dearly departed President, Mike Borders, was more a cohesive unit than I have since come to realize. His departure, left a huge void that was filled with power struggle, and a pretty big one at that.

I'm genuinely hopeful we will see some good come out of this. People are beginning to step up.

Draken
06-27-2019, 08:17 AM
Welcome to MI and our crazy convoluted laws, including where the state police encourage people to commit felonies.

I've been a member for a little while, and used to participate in more activities, until I was shamed for not being on time for my shift, on a work day, and was 15 minutes early to the time I said I would be there.

The drama that's happening now has been a long time coming. My take, our dearly departed President, Mike Borders, was more a cohesive unit than I have since come to realize. His departure, left a huge void that was filled with power struggle, and a pretty big one at that.

I'm genuinely hopeful we will see some good come out of this. People are beginning to step up.

I agree, I hope we can work forward to get the .org back on track.

SteveS
06-27-2019, 02:24 PM
If the org is indeed worried about the image a forum creates then it only has 2 options in my opinion. A) Completely disconnect from the forums and let them be completely separate including the name. As It stands now, the ORG is responsible for anything that happens on here as its an asset of the ORG. B) Accept the fact that there are people who are not the best representation online and deal with them on an individual basis. You don't have to censor to achieve a common goal, you just have to accept that everyone has their own opinion and it may not be the popular one.

Quite frankly, the easiest way to rid the ORG's concern about its image is to make any non-firearm related sections opt-in only, like the fire pit. You should have to have X amount of posts to view them.

As it stands right now though, the BoD and ORG's image is completely tarnished because of the forums so their strategy isn't working.

I think option A may be the easiest option. It is certainly the one that would allow the least amount of censorship and make any kind of content-based monitoring simple. We already deal with things on a case-by-case basis and it is been far from easy. How do you deal with people that are "not the best representation" without censoring what they say?

SkyArms-Sean
06-27-2019, 03:02 PM
I think option A may be the easiest option. It is certainly the one that would allow the least amount of censorship and make any kind of content-based monitoring simple. We already deal with things on a case-by-case basis and it is been far from easy. How do you deal with people that are "not the best representation" without censoring what they say?

Ive spent some time since joining here to review a lot of issues and comments with little to no context going back as far as 2014, so bear in mind I may not be 100% accurate on the past issues and strifes. This community forums shouldn't be a black sheep to the ORG, but a tool to keep the ORG and Community together between events and to help new and potential members.

The issue I see arising from this is some feel that the Forums and certain topics/people's opinion will/has tarnished the image of the ORG as a whole. I would have to disagree with that and with the idea of censorship. Obviously rules and Terms of Service apply to this forum and its community/ORG, however I feel the solution is more of a passive approach. The forums should have staff that are not separete from the ORG entity, as such the staff of the ORG and Forums should be cautious of their opinion, their title and role within the ORG will overshadow their individual opinion. This is common sense to me when you are in a place of responsibility, your opinions will often be taken as that of the position/title you hold and would be seen as a reflection of the entities stance. Is this fair? No. Is it how reality works? Yes.... ALL staff should bear in mind on having self control when vocalizing your personal opinion as it will most not likely be taken as an opinion of your position and not of individuality. This is how it works in almost every aspect of Business.

Censorship is NEVER a positive thing. Period. Ever. And now to my not so PC opinion; Those people who feel that random members opinions on any topic(controversial or not) are somehow a reflection of the ORG as a whole are sadly misguided and would no doubt have an IQ that is sub-100 and should not have a bearing on the ORG or the Staff. There will always be those with a dissenting opinion, however they should not have the power of influence over anyone or any policies.

TL;DR
Option A would be harmful, counter-productive and divisive

Option B with detailed outlined rules, policies and procedures on how to handle such infractions would be a working solution.

TylerV76
06-27-2019, 03:19 PM
...How do you deal with people that are "not the best representation" without censoring what they say?

Same way you deal with an employee that jeopardizes the companies reputation. There have to be clear guidelines that are expected to be followed in order to keep the ORG's mission and reputation in tact. Give people a private section to discuss controversial topics like politics etc. Those topics dont relate to the ORG so they shouldn't be visible to the public. Once they are visible then they become relative to the perception of the ORG. Just like some topics at work aren't appropriate so people are expected to have them outside of the companies common area.

The only sections that should be visible are gun related and law related topics as that's what the ORG's mission is about. Once you've removed the problematic sections from the public eye then you can get a handle on certain peoples actions without censoring them. Right now you guys have to judge every little post because anyone and everyone sees it. You essentially could loosen up a bit like you do in the pit.

SteveS
06-28-2019, 08:31 AM
Ive spent some time since joining here to review a lot of issues and comments with little to no context going back as far as 2014, so bear in mind I may not be 100% accurate on the past issues and strifes.

First of all, welcome.


Censorship is NEVER a positive thing. Period. Ever.

Generally, I would agree with you, but this is first and foremost, a place to educate the public on guns and gun rights. Anti-gun trolls and other people that come here solely to sow dissent and spew anti-gun nonsense will get the boot. This has always been the case.


And now to my not so PC opinion; Those people who feel that random members opinions on any topic(controversial or not) are somehow a reflection of the ORG as a whole are sadly misguided and would no doubt have an IQ that is sub-100 and should not have a bearing on the ORG or the Staff.

Even if we were to assume this were true, if you look at the IQ bell curve, this represents a huge number of people. In a perfect world, people would be able to separate the comments of group members from the group. We all know this doesn't happen. That ship has sailed.

We have a fairly robust AUP. Even with that, it can very difficult to figure out what is an actual "personal attack," or what is "hate speech."

There will always be those with a dissenting opinion, however they should not have the power of influence over anyone or any policies.

TL;DR
Option A would be harmful, counter-productive and divisive

Option B with detailed outlined rules, policies and procedures on how to handle such infractions would be a working solution.[/QUOTE]

SteveS
06-28-2019, 08:36 AM
Same way you deal with an employee that jeopardizes the companies reputation. There have to be clear guidelines that are expected to be followed in order to keep the ORG's mission and reputation in tact. Give people a private section to discuss controversial topics like politics etc. Those topics dont relate to the ORG so they shouldn't be visible to the public. Once they are visible then they become relative to the perception of the ORG. Just like some topics at work aren't appropriate so people are expected to have them outside of the companies common area.

The only sections that should be visible are gun related and law related topics as that's what the ORG's mission is about. Once you've removed the problematic sections from the public eye then you can get a handle on certain peoples actions without censoring them. Right now you guys have to judge every little post because anyone and everyone sees it. You essentially could loosen up a bit like you do in the pit.

I think this is a huge help, but I still see one glaring problem and that is that there are a number of people that leave MGO because of something related to the forum. This should never be happening. If you look at the mission statement, MGO does not exist to maintain a discussion group. I suppose you could say that it is part of educating the public, but a significant amount of the discussion relates to OT stuff.

gjgalligan
06-28-2019, 03:08 PM
As I recall it, The forum was first and the MGO Org grew from it.