Being manipulated...

[Ron Ankeny]

Yeah, I know it is poor form to flame away at someone on the Internet and Brian has a no tolerance policy for being less than civil with one another. But I just need to vent.

I think several of us recognized right away that DRM was here for no purpose other than self promotion. I knew he was picking a fight on purpose and I knew his goal was to take a whole bunch of heat then add Brian's forum to his list of "old school dogma". It pisses me off that he is manipulating the entire shooting community via the Internet.

In his first point shooting post on his own forum Middlebrooks states, "... Nothing has generated more controversy than the subject of "POINT SHOOTING"..." His intent is to generate that controversy as a method of drawing attention to his system. That is obvious. He does that by pissing people off through innuendo then he plays the poor innocent picked on prophet. Here's what he said about his venture to Brian Enos.com:

"Geesh, I just got my ass chewed out for being too "tactical" on the Brian Enos forums!!  

It never ceases to amaze me how when I bring up POINT SHOOTING or anything different than the old school dogma people get really pissed!  

It wasn't me, mind you. I was on my best behavior. I had my hat in my hand and was VERY nice!  

It's either pure jealousy or FIST-FIRE does really threaten them, I haven't figured it out which one it is yet..."

This guy will do or say anything to further himself. He knows damn good and well that it isn't jealousy and he also knows none of us are threatened by his system. What really sickens me is how a guy like him can march into a shooting haven like this and confront some of the best shooters in the world. Ah to hell with it...I am going to bed.

[ErikW]

That was a flagrant piece of trolling. We should know better not to take the bait.

Interesting response. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But now there's no doubt.

Let this be a lesson for the moderators. I'm sure they are hesitant to close threads and they don't want to appear like they are crushing dissent. But if it walks, talks, and smells like flagrant troll bait, it's troll bait. When this happens in the future, I think we should Message moderators encouraging them to close the troll-baiting threads.

I fear for this place. I have seen how ugly places like GlockTalk and AR15.com and SubGuns.com can be. Don't let it happen here.

[gm iprod]

I was always under the impression that we were about competition, and improving our performance within the arenas that we compete. Regardless of IPSC, USPSA, NRA or IDPA etc. Some others appear to forgetten that it's a game, a hard game, but nonetheless a game.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Carlos]

Excellent comments to date; I concur. THe civility of this forum is what diferentiates it from some of the more hostile forums out there; I hope BE.com can be preserved as someplace civil for the exchange of useful information on competition.  Perhaps moderator action will keep the barbarians at the gate.

[THS]

Carlos,

I doubt it.  The other FistFire thread has already deteriorated into name calling and challenges.  

Too Bad.  I post(ed) here looking for answers and thoughts WITHOUT accusation and insults.  I can get that at a number of other sites.  Now it appears things are sliding in that direction here.

Makes me wonder about the character of some of the participants.  

I've never met Mr Middlebrooks, though I read through his website months ago.  Like 90 percent of what I see, read, and hear about marksmanship, there is a part I fully support, and some I doubt.  That is a function of my experiences and observations, no more-no less.

My disappointment is that we've slipped to name calling and challenges made only because they will mever be met.  

Sadly,

Tom

(Edited by THS at 9:29 am on Dec. 6, 2002)

[EricW]

My and everyone else's problem is with the unproved assertions and the fact that *we* have been made responsible to prove them.  Let's look at a more drastic example to see what's going on:

Assertion:Pink elephants trot around Venus.

A well-reasoned scientist would argue this is obviously impossible since the climate of Venus is inhospitable to life.  But, the unreasonable asserter would argue that the scientist has not conclusively PROVEN there are no elephants on Venus.  Therefore, his assertion still stands.  Even though it is ridiculous, the asserter calls his assertion Truth in absence of a proven denial by a third party.  

This is why logic ALWAYS places the burden of proof on the one who makes the assertion.  Otherwise, anyone could make any claim and state that it was true until proven false.  Clearly this is a ridiculous state of affairs that would only revert us back to medievalism.  

Secondly, and more importantly, it is logically impossible to prove that something doesn't work or doesn't exist.  How does the scientist conclusively prove there are no pink elephants on Venus?  He can't.  The asserter always has a cop-out.

"Well, they ran behind that hill while you were looking."

"What if they were on the opposite side of the planet when the satellite flew over?"

“Maybe they were in cave during the survey…”

It never ends.  We can never prove that something doesn’t exist or doesn't work.  That is why have to place the burden of proof on the asserter.  

Now, think about what D.R. Middlebrooks is telling everyone.  

“Fist Fire works.  Don’t like it?  Prove me wrong.”  

See the logical fallacies now?

My responses and those of others have certainly been crass, but certainly not without merit or justification.  

E

(Edited by EricW at 8:11 am on Dec. 7, 2002)

[John Thompson]

DM must be running out of fourms to get shut out of to go BE.com and try to debate combat tactics in a  sport shooting forum.

"Fistfire" reminds me of a movie I once saw at a frat party

(Edited by John Thompson at 5:41 pm on Dec. 7, 2002)

[38supPat]

I am the ruler of the world, prove me wrong...hehe. I guess since you can't that makes me the big guy...You all must now bow before me!

[John Dunn]

Ron,

Excellent post.  

This forum is the best because most of the regulars are seekers.  They aren't interested in rigid doctrine, but rather what works.  Even at a Gunsite class this year the instructors taught the Weaver stance, but not dogmatically so.  They encouraged students comfortable with Isosceles not to bother fixing something that wasn't broken.  We also had an instructor using a Glock!

When I realized that our instructors were teaching A way and not THE way, I immediately had more trust and confidence in what they were teaching.  In a way it is sad that DRM is so self-promoting and dogmatic, as it taints whatever truth may be contained in his system.

Everytime DRM posted in response to Brian I kept getting a mental picture of a lesser evangelist (I pictured Elmer Gantry) shouting at Billy Graham, "Let me teach you how to really save souls!"

Keep posting.

[Singlestack]

I really didn't want to close the last FF thread and I'm glad that you guys seem to agree with the decision. I wanted DRM to talk technique. He probably would have sold a few books here if he had approached this group differently.

I don't want to close the other FF thread but it sure ain't going anywhere.

[38supPat]

Close it

[Jon Merricks]

Close it and delete it, before OKsmoe or what ever starts in.

[Jon Merricks]

Oh sjit I spoke to soon.  rotflmao

[howardw]

The funny thing is that thread was the best discussion of "Point Shooting" I've seen. The raising of the topic usually makes me cringe and run for cover, but now things are clearer.

What I learned:

1) Aiming is a continuum and making hits can be brought about by various indicators, from feel to hard sight focus. It's all about "seeing what you need to see." And that seeing need not be visual. That understanding right there help relieve the cramp.

2) Brian’s point about "point shooting" usually conjuring up images of shooting from the hip. That’s why the term has lost most of its utility.

Anyway, only on BE.com can such a "controversial" topic be handled so well in such a succinct time. Hell, on Glocktalk that thread would have gone on for 50 pages and wouldn't have gotten locked until someone started making racial slurs.

Howard

[Flexmoney]

Assertion:Pink elephants trot around Venus.

[gm iprod]

I want in the space program if thats Venus, and does she have any sisters.

[EricW]

Only Flex could come up that one!!!!  I stand corrected!!

 

[benos]

I was hopin' the spirit of this forum, which is due to - and the hugest thank you to -  ALL involved, would do what it did.

be

[DogmaDog]

D-izz-amn!  

Flex MONEY!  Yeah, dog!

Ahem.  I'm actually kinda sorry to see that thread go.  It was kinda entertaining, and I was hoping it might steer toward a "reverse engineering" of DRM's "method".  

I figured that we could deduce just about every aspect of it in spite of DRM's non-disclosure of any substantive information.

And I'd be more than willing to try out some drills to get a feel for what it is he was trying to promote.  Just hold the gun at chest level and hose a target at 4 yards, repeat at longer ranges?  Why does it work?  How does it work?  Where does it lead?  I would have liked to have something to try out.

As it is, I'm far more likely to seek training elsewhere.

C'est la vie,

DogmaDog

[Rich Bagoly]

I'm really glad that  EricW didn't say Uranus.

                               

(Edited by Rich Bagoly at 8:29 pm on Dec. 20, 2002)