Sure name in the forum?

Vern said:
I use my first name.
However my concern is not the people who are on this sight but those who search the internet for ID theft.
You can do searches in google on a persons name and bring up posts in BRC.
I have a friend on this site that had that happen to him. If he cares to post he can tell the rest of the story.
Click to expand...

You betcha Vern......!
WATCH you Identity boy's... Rampant these days:(

I too sign with first name in posts.....

Lifelock member,
cale
 
I've often, and mostly, used my real name or something close enough that everyone knows who I am.

Nowadays, I don't do it. I moderate and admin on another forum and had a psycho dude get riled up and leave threatening voice mails on my home phone. Nothing came of it, but it scared my wife and kids.

FWIW, Greg J.
 
I'm with Seb and Francis,

I understand why some use a false handle and not all those who do are trouble makers but I don't think I have really seen anyone who uses their real name be a trouble maker (maybe one or two).

I used to have people come up to me all the time at matches and ask me if I was the Hovis that posted on BRC, most sit and chatted and a few just stared at me funny and walked away.

It is nice to see peoples names on here sometimes because if I seen their name with a competitor number at a match, I try to look them up and chat. Especially people that I may have had crossed words with, and all of them are friends now.

Kevin Hovis
 
Vibe said:
Not necessarily. Lynn Dragoman I think uses his real name.
Click to expand...

You need to be a little careful Vibe. Lynn & I don't like each other, but he (& I hope me) can be useful often enough.

To me, Lynn is like Jekyll & Hyde. When he is helpful, he's one of the best on BR Central, in terms of both information, and even physically helping people out. One clue to which Lynn's shown up is when he's reporting what he's actually tested, he's accurate and no more opinionated than the rest of us. A better observer, and capable of correlatiing several factors than many.

On teh other hand, when he's defending one of his heros, Calfee or Henry Childs come to mind, all objectivity goes out the window. (We're ignoring all the stuff on the fiasco sometimes called the NBRSA Nationals).

BTW, I'm not lumping Calfee & Henry in the same boat. They're worlds apart, the only thing I see in common is Lynn's adopted both & won't allow that either is ever wrong. Be interesting to see them disagree on something...

Aother BTW -- I follow what you say on BR Central. I don't have the background to challenge the theory -- but you need to understand most of us seek answers, not analysis that doesn't give any final answers. On the other hand, I do have the backgroud (Like Lynn) of literally thousands of rounds down range, and a reasonably good record on observation.

So, when Henry says things like "humidity doesn't affect grouping," yet I & others (Jackie Schmidt comes immediately to mind) find that we can successfully re-tune tune a load based on a meter reading of humidity, we don't care if "humidity" is causal or constant conjunction.

So, help us out here. Tuning & tuners seem to be one of your interests. Based on your knowledge, tell us what the variables are -- or those you're sure of, what we can control, and what needs more work. And this in terms of action, what to build and how to build it, not theory only.
 
Charles E said:
You need to be a little careful Vibe. Lynn & I don't like each other, but he (& I hope me) can be useful often enough.

To me, Lynn is like Jekyll & Hyde. When he is helpful, he's one of the best on BR Central, in terms of both information, and even physically helping people out. One clue to which Lynn's shown up is when he's reporting what he's actually tested, he's accurate and no more opinionated than the rest of us. A better observer, and capable of correlatiing several factors than many.
Click to expand...
This is true. My problem is he starts out posting as the good Dr and turn into Hyde in mid thread. His "Good Dr." side is the reason I don't just ignore his posts. Some of them are quite valuable.

Charles E said:
On the other hand, when he's defending one of his heros, Calfee or Henry Childs come to mind, all objectivity goes out the window. (We're ignoring all the stuff on the fiasco sometimes called the NBRSA Nationals).

BTW, I'm not lumping Calfee & Henry in the same boat. They're worlds apart, the only thing I see in common is Lynn's adopted both & won't allow that either is ever wrong. Be interesting to see them disagree on something...
Click to expand...
It would be that. I've never understood how Lynn could rationalize what BC has published in print to actually mean what I've been trying to say - the two scenarios are about as far apart and Calfee and Childs.

Charles E said:
Another BTW -- I follow what you say on BR Central. I don't have the background to challenge the theory -- but you need to understand most of us seek answers, not analysis that doesn't give any final answers. On the other hand, I do have the backgroud (Like Lynn) of literally thousands of rounds down range, and a reasonably good record on observation.

So, when Henry says things like "humidity doesn't affect grouping," yet I & others (Jackie Schmidt comes immediately to mind) find that we can successfully re-tune tune a load based on a meter reading of humidity, we don't care if "humidity" is causal or constant conjunction.
Click to expand...
I haven't followed Henry's accomplishments - but I can understand how humidity could affect accuracy on several levels. So off the cuff, I'd be sorely tempted to go with you and Jackie on that one.

Charles E said:
So, help us out here. Tuning & tuners seem to be one of your interests. Based on your knowledge, tell us what the variables are -- or those you're sure of, what we can control, and what needs more work. And this in terms of action, what to build and how to build it, not theory only.
Click to expand...
LOL. I wish I could. But you knew it wouldn't be that easy when you asked didn't you. The permutations are huge in number and the difference between the "best" of them gets pretty small. But as far as finding the "best" setting for a barrel tuner - I've provided one method for finding "the" sweet spot that should work (statistically speaking). That being a 2 or 3 variable Design of Experiments. Basically this statistical tool would let you test just the extremes of each variable and predict the optimum combination from that limited testing. Meaning it should predict the optimum state of tune (among those 3 variables) from as few as (8) - 5 or 10 shot groups.

But there are variables that no one seems to be looking at. Barrel stiffness - everyone looks at in some way. Stock stiffness -also looked at. The interaction between the two? I haven't seen anything to indicate that any work has been done on quantifying the interaction between the two. After all it's the force exerted on the barrel by the stock to return it to "normal" that is most important in setting up a controllable harmonic from which a stable tune can be achieved. The recoil throws it out of normal, but it's the return force that equates to the tension in a guitar string - and it's that tension which is important in tuning any stringed instrument. So wouldn't the stock/action/barrel interaction be just as important? But because someone says that you can just throw a weight a certain distance from the muzzle and magically stop everything in the right place - everyone quits looking for anything else. The shape of the weight plays a part, the density and distribution of that weight plays a part (7 ounces of aluminum will not tune the same as 7 ounces of tungsten), a tapers barrel will require one tuner, a reverse taper another, and a straight profile even another.
 
Last edited:
It's not rocket science to google some ones name and state on the internet,and theirs a good chance you can find there address.
I don't want criminals knowing I own firearms,and then theirs all those PITA animal fanatics.
If some weirdo finds your address,how knows what could happen.
 
OK, if you can tell me how.

I'm all for "real" names but give me a method that won't be a full time job. I'll explain using "Vibe" as an example as I don't think he'll mind.

Let's say Vibe had initially registered as "Jim Smith"...would that be considered a real name?

Let's say (and say it quickly) that all registrations had to go through a screening process. What would that process involve? How would I respond to an email that Vibe wrote from a hotmail account..."Hi Wilbur, my name is Jim Smith and I'm a new competitor from Montana." Anybody can get a hotmail account in minutes - jimsmith43256@hotmail.com. Further, If I simply mandated that folks use their real names, some valuable members would just stop posting.

A few days ago I took the first step to implement a sort of credibility rating and Charles said it was stupid. I didn't like it either...back to the drawing board.
 
I don't mind at all Wilbur. It's a pretty good example.

Some boards won't accept registrations from those "quick" mail accounts. But that doesn't work real well either. I've had the same Yahoo, Hotmail, and Gmail accounts for decades (OK at least one decade) - but in that same amount of time I've had 6 different internet service providers depending upon where work took me to live. I would have had to reregister on each board I go to - and would have had to change posting names (usually) each time. Not a real good way to lend credibility. At least since I use the same posting name (validated by the same avatar, on those that allow avatars). I'm usually not shy about telling what my given name is - but I just don't use it as a posting signature.
 
And BTW - stay off Facebook using your real name unless there's a reason. My niece and a couple of co-workers got fired because of some stuff they wrote on Facebook. I woulda fired them too but that's not the point.
 
Wilbur said:
And BTW - stay off Facebook using your real name unless there's a reason. My niece and a couple of co-workers got fired because of some stuff they wrote on Facebook. I woulda fired them too but that's not the point.
Click to expand...
Besides - If you are a gun enthusiast, Christopher Braeske (AKA GunKid, AKA one of the biggest trolls to ever cruise the web) might try to "friend" you - which might get you kicked off of any number of gun forums.
 
Wilbur said:
I'm all for "real" names but give me a method that won't be a full time job. I'll explain using "Vibe" as an example as I don't think he'll mind.

Let's say Vibe had initially registered as "Jim Smith"...would that be considered a real name?

Let's say (and say it quickly) that all registrations had to go through a screening process. What would that process involve? How would I respond to an email that Vibe wrote from a hotmail account..."Hi Wilbur, my name is Jim Smith and I'm a new competitor from Montana." Anybody can get a hotmail account in minutes - jimsmith43256@hotmail.com. Further, If I simply mandated that folks use their real names, some valuable members would just stop posting.

A few days ago I took the first step to implement a sort of credibility rating and Charles said it was stupid. I didn't like it either...back to the drawing board.
Click to expand...
Lime Green. I use HFV because that's what I am, not who I am. Wilbur and a lot of other posters know my real name. Yep, it's Abberjayjabbehaw.
 
bisley I like people nowing I own guns, that keeps all but the nuts honest. So who cares what happens to them. I had some guys working on my garage, so I let them know I own weapons of various kinds. One of them forgot something one night, so he called the contractor to have him call me to let me know he was coming. SMART FELLOW! I also have alarms set in different places. Also life lock.
Charles start one on TUNNERS, I have some thoughts on them. This ones is about names, thats what you allways tell me. Or did I read somthing wrong again?

Joe Salt
 
It,s important to remember it,s not 1950 any more .
We are on a world wide form and we have no way of knowing what info we put out will be used for .

This is not the local club house as much as we think it may be .
KEYBEAR
 
Which is around 1/4 or more of the total registered membership of the posted 21,461.
Now if there was a way to tell which ones were duplicates - that might be interesting. But there's not one really, as that would be confused by members who share a computer and registered separately and various other perfectly legitimate reasons.
 
This is TO ME a somewhat lame topic. Of all the things to get your pantys in a bunch over, the use of a nick name or handle on a Talk Forum surely is not one.

I always sign my first name to all of my posts, but the use of my handle is up to me and I don't really give a flip what anyone thinks. That handle in my case is based on a lotta years and has meaning to those who know me. I have no plan what so ever to stop using it. I don't worry about ID theft, or Facebook or any of that other stuff, just not in my AO.

I also am not afraid to use my given name even though I had no input into it when it was given. Any wanting to know my name ( although I also don't understand that being high on anyones to do list) walk up to me at a match look me in the eye and shake my hand. That ought to be easy enough......

Roland
 
Joe Salt said:
bisley I like people nowing I own guns, that keeps all but the nuts honest. So who cares what happens to them. I had some guys working on my garage, so I let them know I own weapons of various kinds. One of them forgot something one night, so he called the contractor to have him call me to let me know he was coming. SMART FELLOW! I also have alarms set in different places. Also life lock.
Charles start one on TUNNERS, I have some thoughts on them. This ones is about names, thats what you allways tell me. Or did I read somthing wrong again?

Joe Salt
Click to expand...

I live in England we can not have firearms for self defense,these been a couple of case gun owners shooting burglars and going to jail.
I need a green card and get out of here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top