I managed to get it activated. Takes a day or 2, so it seems. A work mate was surfing garbage on google the other day, and typed in my name for giggles. He came across your blog in this forum. Interesting comments to say the least. Shoot me in the hand, hmm? If you're doing that with a Sturm-Ruger #1 I reckon I'd be safe. I was, in truth, thinking the other afternoon of just how I would blast you over this. Get myself onto that Hunter's forum and reply back with vengeance. Afterall, you did it to me, so I'm quite confident you should therefore have no dramas me doing it to you. But I managed to calm down after a coffee and Marlboro. It didnt upset me at all, really. It bacame immediately apparant that you dont like my writing. I've actually had some 30 to 40 odd articles printed in the SSAA Shooter, Hunter or Handgun magazines since 2004. I'm also being published by NZ Guns and Hunting, Outdoor Canada and a South African magazine called Magnum. You and the other chaps you were talking to mentioned a few of them, but theres plenty more besides. Anyway, its obvious that you dont care for my style, or what I write, what you've read of mine anyway. Perhaps you are a Ruger man. Theres a number of reasons I dont like that brand. As for the comment re 7x57mm vs 7mm-08, I wasnt trying to stir up an argument there. Since the dawn of the present century there have been enough 'new' cartridges introduced to cover any possible hunting situation. The wheel has been reinvented many times, and its not entirely over with. New cartridges are basically answers to problems solved generations ago. I did get the date of introduction right. Yes, the 7mm-08 was a wild cat, but from the 1950's, not 60's. It appeared soon after the advent of the parent case in 1952. Remington simply legitimised it in 1980, so therefore, thats the official date of introduction. The same goes for the host of other wildcats that were legitimised. .260 Remington, .416 Remington, .22-250 Remington, .257 Roberts and heaps of others. My editors have assured me that in the upcoming Hunter #31 out in October they are printing an article I wrote called 'cartridge trends in transition, whats in it for hunters?' It covers most of this ground. In fact in the current issue of Hunter, #29 I have a piece on bullet performance vs velocity. And no, I'm not all about the short action cartridges. I own both a .300 Holland and Holland magnum and a .416 Remington magnum, which are huge and require a long model 70 action to house them. Still, I'd be interested in your side of the coin, Kombi. I cant say I've been accused of talking down to readers before. I get tons of letters from all over full of questions, but no hate mail as yet, well until now anyway.

Hmm.... It's customary to welcome new members to THL Damien, and so I do so here.
 
If you read through my posts, you'll find I am no 'friend' of gunwriters (ptooey), and by your own account, it would be appropriate to hang that moniker on you. HOWEVER, I am open-minded on most subjects, and as long as you remain civil I suspect there may be 'positive' outcomes from future 'discussions'.
 
THL has a precedent of granting special privileges to "celebrites". I sincerely hope that precendent was a one-time mistake.
 
We're a fair bunch for the most part here, and my welcome was sincere. I look forward to reading your future posts. That is assuming you came here to join the membership of THL and not just to provoke a fight with kombi.
 
Paul

Thank you. As much as I may disagree with Kombi's comments, I'll defend to the death his RIGHT to make them. I'm not here to ruffle any feathers, more to gleam a little feedback on my work in a way. Being new, I dont know what happened with this 'one time mistake' to which you refer

QuoteBeing new, I dont know what happened with this 'one time mistake' to which you refer

That comment was more for the administration than for you. I wouldn't expect you to know what happened there.
 
We had a prominent North American gunwriter (ptooey) take umbrage to the fact that I caught him in some blatant, and bald-faced lies, and decide to "join" THL to confront me. Unfortunately FOR ME, I was on vacation, and the THL admin let him SERIOUSLY and in a manner COMLETELY CONTRARY to the forum's policies, have his way with me while I was unable to respond. WhenI got back to my computer, they blocked me from responding, WITHIN FORUM POLICES, and did so without ANY conversation with me AND without censoring the celebrity. Chapped my cheeks pretty seriously.
 
For the most part, it's 'water under the bridge', as long as the same thing doesn't happen again now that we have another celebrity among us.
 
Paul

I understand. Good to see it hasnt soured you. PATOOEY!

The " celebrity" is still continuing his career of spreading B.S. in large loads in his present job of "Field Editor" with the American Rifleman.
I have protested several of his articles with NRA in the past and NRA even went to the EXTREME resort of stopping sending me weekly requests for donations.
I dropped "Handloader" when he started writing there, too.
Oh well, always make a fair tale into a great one and keep on making that money!

I have a copy or 2 of the American rifleman. I'll have to look this fellow up, do doubt I've not heard of him here in Australia

Well, it seems time for me to chime in since I seemed to pen the "garbage" your friend surfed the other day, Damien.
I think first I should make a bit of an apology.
I am a man given to strong opinions and at times I express them with more force than necessary, so much so that I did a back search of the posts you speak of and, not so surprisingly, found myself grinning a little sheepishly at the way I expressed my opinions.
So I apologise for the force I made my points and some of the comments which were really quite personal.
BUT.......my opinions on these still stand.
I don't know if you've had a bad time with Ruger No1s, Damien - perhaps you have - but every Ruger I've ever used has been a decent rifle.
In fact I just purchased a No1 Tropical in 450/400 N.E. 3".
I also abhor reoccurring trend of companies to re-invent the wheel and by smoke and mirrors convince the buying public that the brand spanking new product is superior to the cartridge it was cloned on.
The 7x57 and 6.5x55, both of which are almost perfect in terms of all round cartridges for Eastern Australia, have suffered most from that sort of misinformation.
There's also the fact that reviews on new products seem to be all catalog gloss and no reality.
How come car magazines can be blunt but we have to cop the rosy coloured glasses from gun reviews?
I can name at least one review that seemed fine but in reality was best read more like a real estate description.
Do I think new cartridges or rifles have nothing to offer? No, not at all.
The 204 Ruger won me over because of its performance.
And I might add I was won over by it's performance in my friend's H&R Handirifle single shot, not from a Ruger rifle.
That said, I haven't bought one because I own an original Sportco Martini Hornet and consider the 204 to be doubling up.
The 204 has more range but I like classic cartridges (you may've worked that out) and the 22 Hornet is plenty of power for me.
Anyhow, please except my apologies for the extremes of my comments.
I would be interested to see more of your articles if you feel I've wronged you.

I hear you, kombi. I'm a vocal man myself, to my own detriment at times. I agree wholeheartedly with you, in fact. I'm quite fond of the 6.5x55mm. The reason I'm such a fan of the 7mm-08 is mainly bacause i wanted a Winchester model 70 at the time in that calibre. I wasnt much of a reloader then and wanted performance. I reload like **** now. Yes, it is a bit shorter than the old 7x57, but the Mauser will generally take a bit more powder to get the same ballistics. Game cant tell the difference when the 2 are reloaded and each is as good as the other, thats for sure. Its just that where I am (northern New England, toowoomba) its easier to get 7mm-08 ammo and brass is a bit cheaper. Thats it and thats all. My gripes with Ruger are many, but basically, I DONT like investment casting of parts and i have seen 3 ruger rimfires blow up on ranges. I can show you some pics to prove it. The number 1 is actually a good rifle, but dont thank William Ruger for it, thank Gibbs and Farquharson. Like you, I like the older calibres. I use a .22 Hornet as well, also a Martiti, but also a Brno ZKW465. I use a .25-20 Remington model 25 hammerless slide action, .32-20 Winchester model 53, 1899 Savage hammerless lever action in .22 Savage hi-Power and .250-3000 as well as a Savage model 1920 rifle in .250 as well. I own a Winchester model 70 in .300 Holland and Holland magnum too, so yes, older calibres work just fine for me. I've even used rifles chambered for the 450-400. Geoff McDonald of Woodleigh provided me with the projectiles. I get a lot of stuff from him, he is a very generous and accomodating man. The SSAA is publishing a review of mine on his Protected Point projectiles in the #31 issue of Hunter in october. I agree with your sentiments re gun articles. Brendan Atkinson was the one who got me into writing. I would read his stuff and think 'I could write better than this!'. So I did, and got immediately accepted. I just got sick of reading articles and no having any of my questions answered. Unlike a lot of writers, if I dont like something, I try not to sugar coat it

Forgot to mention, since the aploogy was as public as the belittling, its accepted. I actually enjoyed the feedback. A problem cant be fixed if I dont know it exists. Feel free to reply back and take me to task over anything else. I'll clear up what I can. Or, if you want a load for the 450-400, let me know. I've shot buffalo with one of those and its performance is emphatic. No idea what you'd aim it at in your neck of the woods though!

Quote from: Damien Edwards;96669Brendan Atkinson was the one who got me into writing. I would read his stuff and think 'I could write better than this!'.

:laugh: You are not the only one who has thought that! The Australian Shooter is not my favourite magazine.:frown

Anyway, welcome to THL Damien. There are alot of people here with loads of experiance and knowledge. I hope you join in and get something out of it.

Everyone is treated equal here at THL.

In fact, mods, admin, and members have the same rank as far as posting. Including celebrities. (I hope that answers your guestion, Paul.)

Courtesy & respect have got equal billing, no matter who you are.

We actually welcome constructive, healthy debate. As long as the respect stays intact there should be no problems. From what I see here, it's not even an issue.

Barry

Well, I'm glad to see that this hasn't gotten out of control.
 
This thread goes to show what happens when derogatory remarks are allowed to stand, even when the person they are against isn't a member here.  Public figures of any kind are generally subject to criticism, yet being human are not immune to being offended.
 
If/when they see the remarks and join the forum to address the issue, it creates a problem that becomes hard to deal with for administration.  Because of the "public figure", criticism is allowed to stand, and as members here they address the issue.
 
And in most cases, the issue becomes a series of attacks on one another, which isn't good for the forum or anyone involved.  
 
But, at that point, where does administration draw the line to maintain peace on the forums?  A person was attacked, and defended theirself.  Then if the offender continues to stand his/her ground, the dispute escalates, and THL administration unfortunately has to deal with it.  They're accused of "favoritism" by either side when they finally have to end the dispute to protect the forum, and obviously some members do not forgive and forget such things.  Hints are made years later as a "warning" to administration, as if it's going to stop administration from interfering with any eventualities that must be dealt with.
 
All that aside, I'm happy to see that the membership here has once again shown that we're above and beyond the norm for internet forums.  As Staff initially intended and believed, there are better ways of expressing one's self than name calling and personal attacks.  Rather than one side or the other having to prove themselves right, we can agree to disagree when it becomes necessary.
 
And believe me, such things make my visits here far more enjoyable.  My thanks to all involved.
 
Daryl

I'm pleased you accepted my apology, Damien, for it was sincere and although our opinions may differ on some things I try not to hold grudges or to make things personal.
Your clarification of a few aspects here is interesting.
Perhaps your criticism of Rugers should be qualified a little more in future.
It would have changed my view of your comments if I had been aware of your issues with their use of investment casting.
I trust your word when you say you've seen those rifles fail.
As for Ruger No1s, the inspiration of Gibbs and Farquharson is undeniable and Bill Ruger would definitely agree with that.
But I see his role as more like Henry Ford.
He took an expensive and exclusive item and made it accessable to every man.
The modifications were made either for manufacturing or efficiency reasons and that isn't a bad thing.
No1s aren't cheap and by all accounts there have been duds but by your own admission they are a good rifle and deserve their due.
I would be interested to hear your other gripes with Ruger.
You collection of rifles seems quite similar to my own tastes.
I don't own a magnum but the only 300 that holds any vague interest is that old classic the 300H&H and given the right opportunity I'd happily own a 32-20 as well.
I'm afraid I have to agree with 22hornet about Brendan Atkinson.
There are few if any rifles he writes about that seem to come in for much criticism if any.
I'm a big fan of the BBC show TopGear and Clarkson, Hammond and May seldom hold back when they review a new car.
It's clear most of their focus is on super cars, muscle cars and performance cars and how well these vehicles feature on their own scale of excellence but you always know exactly where they're coming from.
I'm yet to read a review that's has a similar slant in a gun mag.
The only definitive reviews I've heard are "This rifle was so good I went out bought one myself."
Makes you disinclined to read the mag in the first place.
So, here's a challenge for you from a reader to a writer.
How about doing a review on every new single shot you can get your hands on?
Pick a popular cal - preferably something medium sized like 308 but 223 would do just as well - and review the lot from an objective viewpoint.
I don't just mean the Ruger No1;  I mean Rossis, H&Rs, Baikals and if you can get them stuff like Blasers and Dakotas too.
The thing that frustrates me the most is that often cheap rifles don't get reviewed often at all yet more expensive models get constantly reviewed and if they shoot average we get the "with a bed and a setup it will be amazing" rubbish.
For $2000 to $3000 it should shoot very nicely right out of the box with premium ammo IMO.
So be straight and call it like it is, despite the price.
If the above is too difficult to organise then try doing a more expansive story on single shots.
It would probably take a few installments but talk about as many of the common single shots available to the modern shooter.
I mean those 2nd hand ones as well as new ones.
There would be a long list including the Baikal, Rossi, H&R, CBC, Blaser, Martinis, Ruger No1 and No3, Stevens Favourites, Rem rolling blocks, Sharps rifles, the Dakota and the Browning falling block, etc.
That's a lot of rifles but a few paragraphs on strengths and weaknesses of these rifles and their availability would be fascinating.
Some test targets would also be good if they could be procured.
Since you've shown a strength of opinion in many things why not do the same with that sort of story and call a spade a spade?
Anyhow, I thank you for your response and I think I may take you up on your 450/400 NE 3" load advice.
Eventually I intend to chase some buffalo myself and it will probably be using Geoff McDonald's bullets.
I'd also like to try it on a nice big sambar stag and I'm going to mess about a little with 41 cal pistol bullets too.
Meanwhile the cost of brass is the biggest consideration. :undecided:

Tell me to shut up and mind my own business if you all like, but I suspect I can imagine a reason or two why this may not be possible.
Would a suitable middle ground be a write up on what YOU,  Mr Edwards,  consider to be the top ten or maybe twenty single shots?
 
Like I say, feel free to tell me to go away.....