• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

What happened to the "Best Leica for the job" thread? (1 Viewer)

Thotmosis

Member
Netherlands
Hi all, i was participating in a very interesting conversation with NZbinodude and others about Leica binoculars but suddenly this conversation disappeared? What's going on here?


Censorship is most often a bad thing.

Cheers,
T.
 
Last edited:

PYRTLE

Old Berkshire Boy
I had posted within this thread, but perhaps something on the debate was not in keeping with forum rules. Could it have been that the OP mentioned that he or she was intending to use the instrument when out " hunting " ( if I recall correctly )? Maybe drop one of the site administrators a Direct Message / Conversation.
 

Thotmosis

Member
Netherlands
I had posted within this thread, but perhaps something on the debate was not in keeping with forum rules. Could it have been that the OP mentioned that he or she was intending to use the instrument when out " hunting " ( if I recall correctly )? Maybe drop one of the site administrators a Direct Message / Conversation.
Thank you for your swift reply. Yes he mentioned that he was a hunter but is that a crime or against the BF rules? I have contacted a moderator. Let's see what will be the reply.
 

Mark9473

Well-known member
Belgium
I know it's all extra work, but removing the few offending paragraphs would have left us with a very interesting thread.
 

Thotmosis

Member
Netherlands
Serious question: Leica, Zeiss and many other binocular manufacturers make special products for hunters (like rangefinders and rifle telescopes) still birders use their products for watching birds (as I do), isn't it a bit hypocrite to criticize a guy who uses his binocular (also) for hunting. Many hunters also use their binoculars for birding. Also I see a big Zeiss logo (sponsor?) on the top of this page. Im not offended by this. Anyway I honestly think that erasing a whole tread is a bit too extreme and therefore im very sorry but I will leave this forum. It's not my cup of tea, I have seen too much censorship in my life. Have a good time all.

Cheers,
T.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zdr

pm42

Well-known member
Erasing an entire thread is extreme and I'm disappointed. He asked questions about binoculars, answers where interesting and if memory serves, talked about hunting only when asked about it. He never said a word about it before.
I do not hunt but as he said, this is kind of hypocrite to point at him unless everybody here is vegan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zdr

Swissboy

Sempach, Switzerland
Supporter
Switzerland
Erasing an entire thread is extreme and I'm disappointed. He asked questions about binoculars, answers where interesting and if memory serves, talked about hunting only when asked about it. He never said a word about it before.
I do not hunt but as he said, this is kind of hypocrite to point at him unless everybody here is vegan.

The problem here is that this is a forum set up by some who also specified the rules. And the owners can, of course enforce them if they wish. It might be that those rules were not sufficiently clearly stated to everybody. I certainly never felt things were so strongly anti-hunting, though I knew it was not welcome. But that knowledge, to me, came via some remarks made by participants in various threads. So I agree, it would have been more appropriate to maybe just throw out some offending posts, rather than the whole thread. But as I did not follow this thread, I don't know whether this had maybe even been done and did not lead to the desired effect?

It's a bit funny that I had at some early point in my internet activities been potentially confronted with the opposite situation. This was long before I discovered BF: But it was when I realised there were forums that provided exchange possibilities among participants about specific topics. In my case, it was optics, just as here. So I ended up on a forum of hunters. But just as here, there was a sub-forum discussing the various brands of binoculars and scopes. So I was definitely interested, and at some point I wanted to participate in order to get more specific info. As is often done here as well, people did not use their real names. So the question arose for me, what kind of name to choose. As a non-hunter, I did not want to openly reveal that I was not one of the typical participants. So I did not want to out myself as a birder. Thus I tried to find some kind of "neutral" name. Now that was a US forum, and as a European, I still had a bit of a childhood memory of connecting "America" with cowboys. (Of course, "Luky Luke" and other comics reinforced that connection every now and then.) Also I felt, I could very well say that I am from Switzerland. That is how I came upon the name of "Swissboy". And it's been in use since then, in virtually all the forums I had to sign up for, as well as for other occasions. At times with slight alterations like adding a digit to it or so.
 

jring

Well-known member
Hi,

sorry that your discussion was interrupted - but rules are rules. I try to answer to such conversations and drop a little reminder about the rules and the advice to keep it a bit more generic in some half-sentence... but I don't read every thread obviously.

Maybe start over and just talk about observing animals and avoid discussions about certain extra long eye-relief monocular optics...

Joachim
 

b-lilja

Well-known member
This is birdforum, as in we like and preserve and dont shoot wild birds. It is not a generic binoculars forum, though on this sub forum it is easy to forget that.
 

mbb

Well-known member
(Not wanting to get banned myself, I won’t make any statement about hunting or, obviously, ask for any advice about it as I am not even a hunter and as this is Birdforum. I would just like to ask for some clarification and make an open suggestion, in order to make it easier to get back on birding optics topic and avoid such situations in the future.)

Maybe deleting the dubious posts within the thread (or the whole content of the thread if real need be) with a referral to the (specific, infringed) rules would have been clearer and also more helpful for everyone (this being my small suggestion), both to know what/why (also for future threads) and also because there was really some interesting discussion there about optics for use on long hikes. I have never hunted and am not making any plans to do so, but the questions were also not formulated as such, in fact they were almost identical to questions I am asking myself for birding during more general longer hikes in nature (e.g. mountain hikes).

The irony here is that it is still not really clear to me what the actual rule infringement was: the original poster being a hunter, or him having said so (apparently being open and honest about it, not trying to keep it silent?), or having clarified in one or two sentences the type of hunter he is (without aiming for a discussion about it, propaganda or whatsoever), or asking advice for optics which might be used during or for hunting (which might thus be for different aims), or...? Would it be possible to just clarify that? Ideally, if available, with a simple link to these rules (I did only find this link: https://www.birdforum.net/help/terms/ ) or just saying what the general policy is about it. I don’t necessarily want to have a discussion about that here. I just think that sharing the relevant forum rule/guideline/policy here would allow all forum members to know what must be known, also for the future threads and posts, and for us all to go back on topic on the birding optics ;-)

Maybe to clarify for those who hadn’t read the thread: the thread really was not about hunting, but after several answers and advices, the original poster mentioned that (in his case, for which he started the thread and asked for advice) the optics would be used during hunting hikes. (At least that was a honest mention, but it would have been better for all to know the context/use at start, or whatever the rules exactly are about this. This is why I asked the question above: he might not have been able to know he posted something against the rules.) Obviously, there were two or three limited reactions related to that, but 99% was still about binoculars and scopes, and not specifically related to hunting at all (unless I have missed some very last posts). It was rather related to considerations when on long hikes and some occasional low light or long distance use (weight vs brightness vs magnification etc.), with some interesting advices on combinations of binoculars and scopes for longer hikes.
As a comparison: I have seen several posts in the binocular forum making some statements about the fact that the Zeiss HT binoculars seem to have been designed with hunters in mind for reason A or B. I don’t know if that really was the case or not, but the difference with putting such info here is not that clear to me: such info is actually at least as specifically informative for hunters, but just not addressed to them as it is written in a (public...) birding forum. Unless the issue was that the original poster said that he would use the optics during hunting hikes?(Which is something that has been said by others in several other posts, though often rather implicitly and not that explicitly.)

As an example of relevant content, wanting to push this back on birding optics topic as soon as possible when it is clear what not to say here ;) : Someone dropped the idea in that thread of combining 7x42 binoculars for low light and viewing comfort with a 2x booster when in occasional need for more magnification when carrying a scope would be too heavy. I don’t remember who that was, but I am still curious about the experience of people having tried that out (for nature observation of course, mainly birds). It sounds like an interesting idea to me for when I cannot or don’t need to carry my scope (e.g. harder mountain hikes, or when I’ll mainly be in dense woods) but would like to have some higher magnification for that occasional more distant bird I cannot ID at 7-8x. Maybe the start of an interesting new thread... :)
 
Last edited:

NZbinodude

Well-known member
I only mentioned that the binocular was to be used for hunting in addition to birding. I didn't delve into the details of my hunting trips, or the animals I'd be targeting. I simply said the "H-word" so people would better understand my intentions.

Then another member came along and said something rude/petty (along the lines of "I was going to help you, but now I don't give a f***"). That spurred another member to pass comment on the practice of hunting, to which I gave a diplomatic reply (which again didn't involve any nitty gritty details). That member was fine with what I wrote, and we all moved on.

Later, another member provided a link to an article which was part of a hunting oriented website - but the article only discussed the merits of high magnification optics v.s low power optics. There were no graphic images on the page etc.
,
I acknowledge that there are rules on this forum which must be followed, and I'll take care to not mention the word 'hunting' ever again.

With that said - it's sad that some 'adults' cannot seem to grasp that they share this planet with people who hold different values to them, or have grown up in different circumstances to what they have. Diversity is both a blessing and a curse.

Truth bomb By virtue of living on this planet, we are ALL contributing to the loss of life. Whether you're a vegetarian or a meat eater; devout animal lover; blood thirsty killer; or anywhere in-between. You can either accept it or sink your head into the sand.

Everything's not so black and white. Many hunters I've met over the years were passionate wildlife photographers, birders, conservationists, practicing ecologists, farmers, vets...the list goes on.

Taking the life of an animal in order to EAT it, is NOT an indicator of a person's affinity (or lack thereof) towards life on this planet. If anything, it fosters a grounded, real-life perspective on where food comes from and where we (humans) sit on the food chain in relation to all else.

I live in New Zealand. We've got a long tradition of hunting, and most of our country is covered in rugged wilderness which is absolutely crawling with deer, tahr, chamois, hares, pigs - you name it. If we don't control them, their numbers will sky rocket.

There are three options:

  • Poison them and leave the carcasses to rot (cruel and a terrible waste of meat).
  • Shoot them from helicopters (which often results in wounded animals) and, again, leave the carcasses to rot.
  • OR, encourage people young and old to get out in the hills - where they'll get plenty of exercise and fresh air; forge friendships; be exposed to all manner of wild creatures (including birds) and ancient forests; and learn how to ethically harvest wild animals and make use of the meat.
^ All sorts of life skills are learnt in the process - from outdoor navigation, to survival skills, cooking skills, and interpersonal skills. As far as young people are concerned - it sure beats being stuck at home watching TV, browsing social media, or getting up to no good out on the streets.

Depression and juvenile delinquency has sky-rocketed in New Zealand over the past few decades - especially among males. Involvement in activities such as fishing and hunting have decreased as more and more people flock to cities. Is their a link?

I do NOT look down on people who choose not to hunt, or who don't support the practice. I come from a non-hunting family. I totally get it.

But I'd still share a beer with someone who wasn't enamored with the idea of hunting, as long as they didn't let their values interfere with the way they saw me as a person. It's okay to disagree with one another, is it not? Does disagreeing with somebody make them your enemy? I certainly don't think so.
 

Patudo

Well-known member
I've noted this before; but I really do think the original poster would get better advice on a hunting specific forum - not because of any animosity towards hunters here (at least not from the great majority of BFers, including myself) but because of knowledge or the lack thereof. How many of us routinely use our binoculars for the purpose of spotting chamois, tahr or similar sized animals at 3km, and do so in the course of going up and down alpine terrain for hours, carrying not only binoculars but all the other essential kit a hunter needs, including firearm? The physical challenge may well be the prime influence on one's choice of optics. Now some of the folks here do hunt, and may have experience of similar terrain, and hopefully they'll have offered their opinion to the OP. But those forums that discuss exactly what the OP intends to do would likely offer the best advice - just like if I wanted to learn about optics for astronomy I'd go off to Cloudynights. Likewise, if the OP was after something for seawatching from his country's amazing coastline, or to use in a more enclosed environment looking for other NZ endemics, this would be the best place to ask. It really is a case of horses for courses, so to speak...

PS. totally tongue in cheek here, but if your area is overrun with tahr and chamois... introducing an apex predator like say... Panthera uncia might be a fourth option - if they end up causing too much trouble, simply...
 

Kevin Conville

yardbirder
A lot of bloviating here with excuse and justification and continued arguments about hunting. Seriously? This is a binocular thread on Bird Forum. I defer to the moderators and I respect their opinions. We've had hunters around here before throwing their weight around and it is offensive. Maybe the timing was bad for NZbinodude and he reaped the outcome of what had preceded him. People are allowed at this site for the pleasure of the site owner and the moderators. Don't like it? There are other places to have this discussion and there won't be birders there to interfere.

I wouldn't be surprised if this thread is deleted or (at least) moved to Ruffled Feathers.

Oh, and NZbinodude- In your post #15 where you attempt to quote what I wrote previously (second paragraph) there was no "F" in my writing. I'm afraid you are projecting. If you are righteous, there's no need to embellish.
 
Last edited:

dries1

Member
I could just replace the word hinting with binoculars in the foist sentence and birders for hinters in the second sentence, and we have somewhat described the binocular forum.

Andy W.
 

NZbinodude

Well-known member
A lot of bloviating here with excuse and justification and continued arguments about hunting. Seriously? This is a binocular thread on Bird Forum. I defer to the moderators and I respect their opinions. We've had hunters around here before throwing their weight around and it is offensive. Maybe the timing was bad for NZbinodude and he reaped the outcome of what had preceded him. People are allowed at this site for the pleasure of the site owner and the moderators. Don't like it? There are other places to have this discussion and there won't be birders there to interfere.

I wouldn't be surprised if this thread is deleted or (at least) moved to Ruffled Feathers.

Oh, and NZbinodude- In your post #15 where you attempt to quote what I wrote previously (second paragraph) there was no "F" in my writing. I'm afraid you are projecting. If you are righteous, there's no need to embellish.

I don't understand where you're coming from. This entire discussion (which 'should be had someplace else') came about due to a remark YOU made on MY thread. I wasn't throwing my weight around, nor were any of the other members offended by anything I wrote. Not at one point did I make any graphic references to hunting or try to impose my views on anyone else.

I understand it was a binocular thread, in the binocular section of the forum. This isn't the birding section, is it? Binoculars can be used for all manner of things. I didn't realize the rules were this stringent.

Whatever your chosen word was, it was bleep censored, and it didn't leave a friendly impression. But, yes, you're right - I shouldn't assume things. Sorry.

As for bloviating and justifications - hunting doesn't require any justifying. It's an activity like any other. If you like it - great. If you don't - great. A per my post above, I made it clear that hunting benefits many people (physically and mentally) and it doesn't imply anything about their morals. Period.

I'm projecting?!

You said: "We've had hunters around here before throwing their weight around and it is offensive".

Who is throwing their weight around now? You made no meaningful contributions to the thread in question. You butted in, and tried to create division.

Or: "Don't like it? There are other places to have this discussion and there won't be birders there to interfere."

'Birders' (plural). No 'birderS' were interfering. But ONE birdeR was.



Most outdoor types are cut from the same fabric. Instead of looking for ways to polarize each other, why don't we focus on things that unify us?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top