Hopefully I don't get in trouble for this........................on another outdoor Alaska forum it has become likely that the main moderator, maybe a part owner, might be supporting a certain candidate for the one federal Senate seat from Alaska that is currently up for election. This candidate is probably not the best choice for consumptive wildlife users.
Without getting too much into politics.................would it bother you if someone very connected to, and in control of, an outdoor forum was supporting a politician that "might" be working against our wildlife use.

Yes, it would bother me.

Keith

Sounds like mind rot ....

The forum should naturally crash and burn


Unless the mind rot expands to its members

I think what would matter is if the mod is in fact also the owner.

In that case he is calling the shots.

If it is NOT the owner, OR the owner's instructions, then as long as both sides are presented I would say it's OK. But I would also hope that the members of that forum are informed enough about the candidates' positions to make a good choice.............not only in the voting booth but in what forums they frequent.

Not really. If they can separate there actual job on here from there politics who cares .

Martentrapper is not talking about THIS forum....just to be clear

I sent a PM to this moderator 3 days ago and haven't heard back so far. This moderator is a big time hunter, some time trapping. Has a supercub and flies his 2 boys around to primo hunting spots. He is also a teacher in a district outside of Anchorage. Likely an NEA member so maybe that explains his support of a democrat.

I have a strong dislike for people who help people who are against trapping, hunting, fishing and animal husbandry. I see them as enemies, because they are.

Keith

YES, most definitely

Would it bother me? YES. But as Ken said if he has no stake in the site other than being an unpaid mod...... he should be allowed to have his opinion even if I don't like it.

If he IS an owner of the site......I'd find a new site.

I'd not like that situation due to information coming and going both ways, gives the person a better insight for which ever side they want to be on in any given period. Isn't that like just using people for their own gain instead of helping either side ?

Some might say thats a good thing, but I say you can't ride a horse forwards or backwards all of the time, sooner or later it's just going to dump you !

Yes - moderator or not

BC got banned here due to a majority disagreeing with his views. But his views were entirely rational! I disagreed with that then as I still do. Paul oughta free the man.

Site is packed with sensitive little snowflakes who tie their identity to a politicians or a political stance and they assume a attack on their beliefs is an attack on their person. We've had some really good people leave or be kicked off the site (after they came under constant attack and responded) because people here can't accept someone may think differently than they do.

I thought he got banned not b/c of what he thought but b/c he couldn't stop bringing it up.

I certainly do not recall it that way.......

Perhaps Paul does.........

Get enough political trash already and enjoy being able to go to a site and not be bothered with more

I think he got into it with White some but I don't remember exactly. Im sure that didn't help. No one was out to get him.

It's your choice what you click on here,.it's your choice what you respond to here.