The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Lancs Lad wrote:

KidsClays&Cartridges wrote:Its the tone of some answers on this thread that really make the inexperienced like me think twice before asking questions. How about we think about the tone of response before hitting submit. You can be right, but you can also be an ass when you're being right.

KCC;

There's nothing 'ass' about being correct!

LL

Let me give you an example to illustrate my point:

"2+2=4" I am right with this statement
"2+2=4 you stupid tw@t" I am also right with this statement, but I'm being an ass

KidsClays&Cartridges wrote: Let me give you an example to illustrate my point:

"2+2=4" I am right with this statement
"2+2=4 you stupid tw@t" I am also right with this statement, but I'm being an ass

You are 'correct' with the first statement, with the second you are both 'correct' and 'right'.

KidsClays&Cartridges wrote:

Lancs Lad wrote:

KidsClays&Cartridges wrote:Its the tone of some answers on this thread that really make the inexperienced like me think twice before asking questions. How about we think about the tone of response before hitting submit. You can be right, but you can also be an ass when you're being right.

KCC;

There's nothing 'ass' about being correct!

LL

Let me give you an example to illustrate my point:

"2+2=4" I am right with this statement
"2+2=4 you stupid tw@t" I am also right with this statement, but I'm being an ass

Unfortunately, you are missing the point!

With firearms and reloading there is an ever-present risk. We can mitigate this risk by using good procedures and standard terminology such that we all know exactly what we are talking about. A gradual departure from standard terminology will cause confusion / uncertainty and eventually lead to incidents in any activity. As an ex construction safety manager with 25 years global experience I can attest to this.
I fully appreciate that our moderator can be somewhat anal regarding this issue BUT ... he is absolutely correct! It's not as if there haven't been enough threads on this forum relating to component names etc. I mean ... how hard can it be to call a spade a spade?

LL

Lancs Lad wrote:

KidsClays&Cartridges wrote:

Lancs Lad wrote: KCC;

There's nothing 'ass' about being correct!

LL

Let me give you an example to illustrate my point:

"2+2=4" I am right with this statement
"2+2=4 you stupid tw@t" I am also right with this statement, but I'm being an ass

Unfortunately, you are missing the point!

With firearms and reloading there is an ever-present risk. We can mitigate this risk by using good procedures and standard terminology such that we all know exactly what we are talking about. A gradual departure from standard terminology will cause confusion / uncertainty and eventually lead to incidents in any activity. As an ex construction safety manager with 25 years global experience I can attest to this.
I fully appreciate that our moderator can be somewhat anal regarding this issue BUT ... he is absolutely correct! It's not as if there haven't been enough threads on this forum relating to component names etc. I mean ... how hard can it be to call a spade a spade?

LL

Thing is he is dead right to point it out. 100%. But as KCC says there is a way to do it. I’m clearly new. Clearly haven’t done this before. Got the common sense to ask the experts first, so why not respond with a more friendly and less sarcastic approach. It was obvious I didn’t know the difference, so why the sarcasm and pointless questions? Why not just say, ‘the head is this part mate, please read up on this’.


Sent from my boing using "An application"

North Star wrote:Ruger_Steve.....welcome to FBUK!

Don't be offended by any comments you receive regarding your questions. Some people can be a bit nit-picky regarding terminology, but on the whole you will find all the members to be friendly and helpful. Now I'm just out to try and get some head.....

Thanks for your PM however it won’t let me reply to you as I don’t have permissions for that and not sure who I can ask as an admin to grant me the permission.


Sent from my boing using "An application"

I think you will be able to reply after you have posted a set amount of posts. Its all explained in the house rules post at the top of the forum.

Quote: As a new member you will need 15 posts to your name before you can use the PM system and the for sale/wanted sections. We expect these to be contributing posts not just repeats to clock up the required post count. Be warned, if you do they will be removed. Such activity is not in the spirit of Full-Bore UK and reflects badly on the poster.

ruger_steve wrote: Thing is he is dead right to point it out. 100%. But as KCC says there is a way to do it. I’m clearly new. Clearly haven’t done this before. Got the common sense to ask the experts first, so why not respond with a more friendly and less sarcastic approach. It was obvious I didn’t know the difference, so why the sarcasm and pointless questions? Why not just say, ‘the head is this part mate, please read up on this’.


Sent from my boing using "An application"

Enough of this whingeing.

I was not being sarcastic I was trying to get you to think about your use of terminology and perhaps come up with the answer yourself, if anyone has sarcasm issues it is you. putting things like "bullet/head/potato" in your otherwise good posts devalues your position and is undoubtedly sarcastic.

When it was explained to you by me "The head is the bottom of the case, the bullet is the bullet. Which part of the bullet is the bullet head?

If you are serious about reloading and wish to be a responsible and safe handloader then it is incumbent upon you to learn the correct nomenclature to avoid confusion, mistakes and potentially dangerous situations."

Your response to this was to ask me if I was serious and to say that it was not an issue as you had seen/heard other people using and had never read it anywhere "Are you serious? Everything I have read has referred to the projectile as the head or bullet head including the RFD’s selling then. I don’t think anyone (barring you) would not know that I was referring to the little bit that comes out of the tube part of the gun and whizzes through the air. I understand the need to be precise with this but come on, that is splitting hits a little isn’t it?

If I called a shop and asked to buy some bullet heads, what do you think they’d send me?

As I say, nothing I have read has referred to the ‘head’ as the cartridge or bottom so you must forgive me for not communicated that way."

So little wonder that I think that your attitude to reloading is dubious as you cannot have been basing your reloading research on any reputable sources and have not read sufficiently widely on the subject. I tried to point this out to you in robust terms to try and get through to you the responsibility required to reload.

You chose to take the hump at this and have been whingeing on about it for the rest of the thread with your sarcasms and slaver.

You need to grow up, let go and move on.

There is no further discussion on this you have your view and I have mine, it is unlikely that you will ever see any merit in my view that reloading needs to be approached in a responsible and adult manner.

This thread is now locked.