Topgun 30-06
Active member
This post just went up on the MM General Forum a few minutes ago:
SFW/BGF and Utah DWR Employees
- Thread starter Topgun 30-06
- Start date
MTbowhunter84
Member
From what i have seen so far sounds right on par for the course.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
Now we know why Peay bought the Outfitters business.
dan.kirkpatrick
Well-known member
utah is really corupt on there game management,but there doesnt seem to be much us public hunters can do about it,,,the big dollars always out number public comment.
OriginalOscar
Active member
Now let's see if I get a response. ALL Utah sportsmen need to get active on pushing this issue with their local legislators.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
I hope somebody does some investigation and gets to the bottom ot it because it appears the thread has already been pulled from MM and I'm beginning to think that the reason is that the site owner is not interested in outing lawbreakers, just like when the threads discussing his buddy, Mike Brownlee, the multiple game law violator were pulled. (Birds of a feather flock together, as the old saying goes!) Funny, but from my understanding I believe he was a previous member of the SFW Board of Directors at one time. That I do not know, but the more I see and hear of what's going on out in Utah the more interesting it gets. Hmm! Folks should know that the individual that made these allegations. Brad Turner, a resident of Utah, has been convicted of multiple game law violations and it was already brought up by SFW supporters that all he is doing is trying to get back at people in the organization. I guess I really wonder, but what difference does that make if the allegations are true because more than one crook has been nailed by another throughout the history of our country.
Last edited:
2rocky
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2010
- Messages
- 5,133
I'm guessing that the possibility of libel suits and the ensuing flame war may play a bigger role in Forum threads being pulled than whose ox is being gored.
We hold the press accountable for baseless accusations. It is too easy for the gossip fest online to build up the perception of guilt or innocence in all the outrage being expressed.
It is a fine line between first amendment rights and opinion presented incorrectly as fact.
Now I don't have a dog in the fight at MM, here or on any other forum but I do tire of the conjecture of peoples motivations that moderate, regardless of the issue.
.
Bambistew
Well-known member
Or maybe he's not willing to let unsubstantiated, possibly libel post be placed on his website? Those are some pretty big allegations, against both parties. I can’t imagine that any self-respecting “professional” would take such a bribe, let alone it being legal to do so.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
I doubt that the site owner would have to worry since he wasn't the one to post the allegation and maybe deleting it is more of a coverup than the reason you mentioned for it to be deleted. Yes, they are big allegations against all involved and I find it hard for you not to believe that something like that could happen in this day and age when a lot of "self-respecting" professionals sell their soul for a lot less than what that hunt would have cost! If you haven't been keeping up with all the goings on involving SFW higher ups and the Utah DWR, you might not realize there may be a lot more than what was stated going on here!
Last edited:
Bambistew
Well-known member
You haven't had to deal with many lawyers have you? He doesn't have to write it, he owns the site and from what I understand is responcible for its content. He can take it down if he wants too. If you want to actually do something about it call the local rag, they seem to be looking to pick a fight with SFW. Now that I think some more about it, if it was me, I think I'd delete the first post in this thread...
This is the first time I've heard of SFW, who are they again?
This is the first time I've heard of SFW, who are they again?
Last edited:
Mudranger1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,892
maybe we are all just not like you....the naysayers with a negative look at most things...is it possible sure anything is...just saying
Topgun 30-06
Active member
You haven't had to deal with many lawyers have you? He doesn't have to write it, he owns the site and from what I understand is responcible for its content. He can take it down if he wants too. If you want to actually do something about it call the local rag, they seem to be looking to pick a fight with SFW. Now that I think some more about it, if it was me, I think I'd delete the first post in this thread...
This is the first time I've heard of SFW, who are they again?
***Actually you're wrong again as I retired in 2002 after 30+ years as a LE Investigator for the State of Michigan and have dealt with more lawyers than I even care to think about. Further, I've already started the ball rolling trying to find out if there is any truth to the allegations. If they prove to be true, it could be the downfall of SFW/BGF, which would break a whole lot of hearts---NOT!!!
Last edited:
Bambistew
Well-known member
Wrong on which part?
What if they prove to be false acusations?
You stated you didn't write it, but its posted under your user name, with no link and the original post is now gone... The only possible libelous post is now under your name. I'm not a lawyer, but have been around enough of them to know better.
Again if it was me... I'd do some digging before posting a rumor.
Also, the "poster" on a forum board is not the only one who could be held accountable.
What if they prove to be false acusations?
You stated you didn't write it, but its posted under your user name, with no link and the original post is now gone... The only possible libelous post is now under your name. I'm not a lawyer, but have been around enough of them to know better.
Again if it was me... I'd do some digging before posting a rumor.
Also, the "poster" on a forum board is not the only one who could be held accountable.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
You're wrong on your initial comment on my never dealing with lawyers. You're not me and you're making some statements that I don't believe you've adequately researched, so don't worry about it because I'm sure not!!
Last edited:
NOTE RELATED TO THE LIBEL ISSUES MENTIONED BY SOME:
I have exemption from liability of content posted by others Under Section 230. Yet, that exemption does not relieve me from the personal responsibility of moderating content that might be libelous to some involved. Without fact to support what the person posted over on that other website, and the fact that some could be damaged by the suppositions posted, I am changing some of the content of this thread, even though I am legally exempted from any requirement to do so.
Some might not like that I have changed some of what was posted, but as the site owner, I am not interested in rather damaging claims that are not even remotely supported by any facts, links, data, or other corroborating evidence.
Opinions are one thing and we pretty much understand when something is an opinion. When it is an accusation it needs some reference and support for facts.
Even if one group involved is an organization with whom I have had differences, this forum will not be a place where damaging claims are made without some supporting evidence.
And as the former owner would say about instances such as this, "I am the owner, so at this place, that is the law."
I have exemption from liability of content posted by others Under Section 230. Yet, that exemption does not relieve me from the personal responsibility of moderating content that might be libelous to some involved. Without fact to support what the person posted over on that other website, and the fact that some could be damaged by the suppositions posted, I am changing some of the content of this thread, even though I am legally exempted from any requirement to do so.
Some might not like that I have changed some of what was posted, but as the site owner, I am not interested in rather damaging claims that are not even remotely supported by any facts, links, data, or other corroborating evidence.
Opinions are one thing and we pretty much understand when something is an opinion. When it is an accusation it needs some reference and support for facts.
Even if one group involved is an organization with whom I have had differences, this forum will not be a place where damaging claims are made without some supporting evidence.
And as the former owner would say about instances such as this, "I am the owner, so at this place, that is the law."
Topgun 30-06
Active member
"Even if one group involved is an organization with whom I have had differences, this forum will not be a place where damaging claims are made without some supporting evidence."
***Understood and apology offered for putting the OP up when it was just an allegation. In my defense, this is what happens when a person like myself gets overzealous trying to right what appears to be wrongs that can have serious negative ramifications throughout many states. If what was posted is true, I would hope that someone who read the post on either site takes the ball and does an investigation to find out the true facts regarding that hunt.
***Understood and apology offered for putting the OP up when it was just an allegation. In my defense, this is what happens when a person like myself gets overzealous trying to right what appears to be wrongs that can have serious negative ramifications throughout many states. If what was posted is true, I would hope that someone who read the post on either site takes the ball and does an investigation to find out the true facts regarding that hunt.
