So after a bit of tweaking I finished my AR-15 CQC (Close Quarter Combat). The main issue with the old configuration was the Monstrum 3X had really poor eye-boxing and the color was off.
Changes from the earlier configuration:
* replaced the Monstrum 3x magnifier with a Sig Sauer Juliet3 flip-to-side magnifier
* Added hybrid 3-point sling
* Moved red dot and juliet3 closer to the eye giving it priority over the 45 degree backup irons in terms of placement
* Removed fingershelf from 45 degree fore grip.
#Gun #Guns #2A #Rifle #Rifles #AR15 #ar
QT: https://qoto.org/@freemo/110747625974423228
๐ณ๐ฑ
@freemo@qoto.org
@freemo I realise that images of, and discussion about weaponry is probably normalised in your experience - but to many, myself included, it is not something that belongs in a STEM-oriented instance.
As moderator, can I suggest that you should be seeing a good example and marking these posts as "sensitive"? Pretty please?
@freemo not suggesting any rules - I had just expected that you would mark images of guns in particular as sensitive. I'm not sure why you're resistant to the idea.
I'd overlooked the fact that I can filter - I've not used that before.. I'll give it a go.
@raymondlesley I am not resistsnt to the idea. I am tryi g to figure out the logic here.. what sorts of things do you feel shoukd be marked sensative by someone wishing to set a good example?
@freemo as I said: images of guns
@raymondlesley I dont think your understanding the question... what guidlines shoukd one use to decide if somethibg shoukd be marked sensative. You suggest images of guns be one of the things I mark sensative. I am willing to consider that.. the question is why and how woukd that logic apply to other things? Whats the logical criteria we are applying here.
@freemo oh, I see now. I'm not thinking in terms of defining a criteria beyond "images containing guns". I guess we could be more specific and say "firearms". I assume you already have similar expectations around members posting images containing nudity, "gore" and/or injury detail?
Btw: I can't see how to filter. Tusky's got an option - but it just errors. I can't find the option on qoto.org
@raymondlesley We have no such rules on gore or injury, CQ is only required for NSFW content (nudity) and movie spoilers. Both of which are due to practical reasons, not tendency to offend.
But unlike spoilers and nudity I cant think of a practical reason we should hide all images of firearms. Its not damaging for it to show up on your screen in some settings (as with the other stuff). It seems (correct me if im wrong) the main reasoning is "I dont like to see it". Im not sure thats a good criteria. Its also important to remember why most people who support gun freedoms post this stuff, to normalize it. So putting it behind a CW would defeat much of the reason we share this in the first place.
@freemo it's precisely the normalisation that I object to. I find the content offensive. I cannot imagine any setting where having images of firearms in my timeline is less damaging than learning what happened on yesterday's TV.
How do I filter it out, please?
@raymondlesley You can simply filter out hte hashtag guns if you wish:
finding something offensive in and of itself isnt a good enough reason IMO. would you find it acceptable if you were asked to add a content warning to anything someone found offensive, even if you disagreed? Probably not, and it isnt a workable expectation. I am happy to be polite on an individual basis, but we are talking about my feed and whatI choose to share with my friends and followers here.
@raymondlesley Are you suggesting the instance shouldnt allow non-stem topics being posting in the plain? Im confused, what new rule are you proposing?