OnX hypocrisy

[Billinsd]

Guess, I'm totally confused by you then. Can't tell if you are saying they are hypocrites or not. Then you go on to say you are not on anyone's side, but have made many posts in the thread all over the place. Are you trying to take the position of a lawyer or moderator -- crying out "objection" when you think someone has made a post contrary to how you think the discussion aught to be going?

It’s “seems” like they are a “little” hypocritical to me, but it doesn’t bother me much at all. I’m also extremely cynical. I’m moderating that both sides use good arguments, with good grammar and logic. Yes, mostly your last sentence. We are all family, the family of hunters. Like Republicans we often fight each other over trivial issues and are often very foolish. The real enemy is very disciplined, well funded, and extremely articulate and convincing. I wish we were better organized and disciplined like the other side.

 

[Billinsd]

Fowl play and McGee - I can’t quite wrap my head around the logic you’re using.

It sounds like - as a crude analogy- that if there is a politician that runs a campaign claiming to be against corruption and that he/she will work to end corruption - when they get elected then as long as they only utilize the “normal” amount of corruption - however bad it is - then they weren’t hypocritical when they told everyone they were fighting to eliminate corruption ???

It’s like Congress. I’m a hard right Conservative, mostly. However, I thought speaker McCarthy was ok as speaker. Was he an establishment Republican? I think so. Do I like establishment Republicans? In general, NO! I think it was terribly wrong to vote out McCarthy and has made the Republicans look very foolish. Are the Republicans that voted out McCarthy that stated they were doing what they promised their constituents foolish? I think so. Are they bad people? I don’t think so. I’m a Ted Cruz, Rand Paul guy. Are all the fabulously wealthy hunters who profited in the hunting industry bad? I don’t think so in general. Are they angels? Of course not. “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton wrote Bishop Creighton. Money is power in our great country.

 

[PMcGee]

Fowl play and McGee - I can’t quite wrap my head around the logic you’re using.

It sounds like - as a crude analogy- that if there is a politician that runs a campaign claiming to be against corruption and that he/she will work to end corruption - when they get elected then as long as they only utilize the “normal” amount of corruption - however bad it is - then they weren’t hypocritical when they told everyone they were fighting to eliminate corruption ???

I don’t have any beef with what people do with their money. But that doesn’t mean it’s not hypocritical to run an organization that -quite clearly and very loudly - claims to be the advocate of unlocking public lands and reducing the ability of private landowners to effectively annex their land make money off the outfitting because only they can legally access it….turns around and does exactly that.

If you mean his actions are separate from those of OnX -then that is a reasonable argument which should then call into question exactly how committed the company is to those goals if the CEO is (quite obviously) not sympathetic to it in his personal life. Different path- same outcome.

If those don’t qualify as hypocrisy then one of us doesn’t have a grasp of the definition.

If you can post it, that might help.

+++++++++
For the record - I am NOT Matt Rinella nor am I associated with the HuntQuietly podcast in any way.

I simply arrived at the same epiphany that he/they did…..and…..well. Nevermind

My logic is what he’s doing isn’t taking away access to public land. If he bought land that allowed public access and then stopped public access I’d see your point. But that’s not what he did according to the op. He’s leasing the hunting rights. There’s a big difference. Onx’s is for trying to gain access to landlocked property. He didn’t stop access to landlocked property or gain access to landlocked property’s. He didn’t take an opportunity from someone because there never was one. If you show me where they say they’re against outfitters leasing property next to landlocked property I’d change my position. But I can’t find it. And yes i did look but I’m not going to spend hours on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Fowl Play]

Similar to above. I just did not see where hunter access changed. But someone can show me in more detail if I am wrong -- the data presented is not very clear and does not actually support that public hunters lost access.

Inaccessible public land is not all the same. Much of it is lost forever just due to the ways properly lines are drawn and an owner's unwillingness to sell. You can't make a private individual give up their right to property -- you can try to negotiate land trades, etc. but leasing private land is never going to go away. Especially for an outfitting operation which relies on that private land for their business.

 

[HuntQuietly]

Similar to above. I just did not see where hunter access changed

My logic is what he’s doing isn’t taking away access to public land. If he bought land that allowed public access and then stopped public access I’d see your point

Well, I guess if OnX’s stated goals were to “keep all landlocked access the same and not make any additional locked public land available to the public” then your arguments would hold water. But that’s not the tagline.

Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

Beware the manufacturer/non-profit/game commission money laundering machine. Its strong and we have been duped by virtue signaling companies and organizations who claim to have our best interests when at best they don’t help and at worst they are meaningfully doing harm to our hunting opportunities and the lands we love. In search of money- not habitat and game populations.

Well, some of us love. If statistics are right the majority of you fools drive around and shoot shit out the window of your truck.

But since I can’t tell who’s who- i just have to lay it out there and hope some of you have enough intellectual curiosity to do the research and see the truth.

++++

I’m not Matt Rinella and all that sh$&

 

[HuntQuietly]

Admins. Before you kick me out for speaking the truth- would you change my username to “not the real hunt quietly” or something like that to protect Matt’s -seemingly impeccable- reputation.

 

[WRO]

Well, I guess if OnX’s stated goals were to “keep all landlocked access the same and not make any additional locked public land available to the public” then your arguments would hold water. But that’s not the tagline.

Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

Beware the manufacturer/non-profit/game commission money laundering machine. Its strong and we have been duped by virtue signaling companies and organizations who claim to have our best interests when at best they don’t help and at worst they are meaningfully doing harm to our hunting opportunities and the lands we love. In search of money- not habitat and game populations.

Well, some of us love. If statistics are right the majority of you fools drive around and shoot shit out the window of your truck.

But since I can’t tell who’s who- i just have to lay it out there and hope some of you have enough intellectual curiosity to do the research and see the truth.

++++

I’m not Matt Rinella and all that sh$&

You’re making a mountain out of a mole hill, the parcels you’ve highlighted are small and broken up in nature. Good on him for getting permits to hunt it, most outfitters don’t even do that for parcels that small.

No one lost any opportunities because of this except for the last outfitter.

If you want to hunt it, get a helicopter to drop you off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PMcGee]

Well, I guess if OnX’s stated goals were to “keep all landlocked access the same and not make any additional locked public land available to the public” then your arguments would hold water. But that’s not the tagline.

Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

Beware the manufacturer/non-profit/game commission money laundering machine. Its strong and we have been duped by virtue signaling companies and organizations who claim to have our best interests when at best they don’t help and at worst they are meaningfully doing harm to our hunting opportunities and the lands we love. In search of money- not habitat and game populations.

Well, some of us love. If statistics are right the majority of you fools drive around and shoot shit out the window of your truck.

But since I can’t tell who’s who- i just have to lay it out there and hope some of you have enough intellectual curiosity to do the research and see the truth.

++++

I’m not Matt Rinella and all that sh$&

lol you’re something else. Bottom line is what he’s doing is not taking anything from anyone. There was nothing there to begin with. Enjoy your hunt. I’m loading up the truck with my 30 pack to go do some road hunting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[PMcGee]

Admins. Before you kick me out for speaking the truth- would you change my username to “not the real hunt quietly” or something like that to protect Matt’s -seemingly impeccable- reputation.

Well you’re trying real hard to be him. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[HuntQuietly]

Well you’re trying real hard to be him. Lol

Not hardly. Matt still thinks there hope and seeks to educate to turn the tide. A noble cause indeed worth respect and admiration

I don’t have such hope- hunting in America is already ruined, it’s just taking a bit longer to reach everywhere and I’m trying squeeze the last bit out of it before the nitro circus, window shooting, outfitter leased, instagram posting, facebook poaching, by-any-means necessary as long as I can take a photo of a dead critter and post it on social media -crowd fully takes over.

Don’t forget the sandbag for your rear view mirror….

 

[MattB]

To me the problem is the hypocrisy. This guy's company launches a campaign to tell you about how they are working to identify and open access while simultaneously profiting from some of it's closure.

But did they? A couple of people have asserted that but no has definitively demonstrated whether that is the case.

 

[MattB]

Diversity, Inclusion and Equity. I've had to take about 100 classes about it at work.

The acronym is DEI, sounds like you need another class.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[fngTony]

Admins. Before you kick me out for speaking the truth- would you change my username to “not the real hunt quietly” or something like that to protect Matt’s -seemingly impeccable- reputation.

Users have to initiate a name change. I’ve already made one reminder for everyone to be respectful however this (the entire thread) is an important topic which often leads to heated discussion that we let some behavior slide. Drop the condescending attitude. Last warning for everyone.

 

[Leverwalker]

Listened for the first time to the infamous Meateater podcast with Steve Rinella and his brother Matt getting into it in a pretty cringeworthy way, imo. I'll say it flatly. I hate seeing hunters in the field. Anywhere. I want my hunting grounds all to myself.

And I'd have to be the biggest hypocritical prick to think somehow I have any kind of greater right whatsoever to a square inch of public land, than anyone else. Population is exploding and land isn't. Pretty basic, though it seems our numbers are dwindling, not growing apace with population growth.

 

[MattB]

he is charging people to access the public through his leased land so yes, he is preventing access. Or rather providing access to clients only.

I dont see how prior access matters in this situation. He isn't just a no name guide outfit. He is a self proclaimed advocate for public access, that is using private lands to access landlocked parcels for monetary gain, and restricting access to the public.

It matters because, unless there was previously public access which he has blocked through leasing private land, there is no hypocrisy in this instance. You yourself posted “and restricting access to the public” but you haven’t demonstrated that is actually the case. If there was previously no public access, nothing has changed.

 

[WRO]

Not hardly. Matt still thinks there hope and seeks to educate to turn the tide. A noble cause indeed worth respect and admiration

I don’t have such hope- hunting in America is already ruined, it’s just taking a bit longer to reach everywhere and I’m trying squeeze the last bit out of it before the nitro circus, window shooting, outfitter leased, instagram posting, facebook poaching, by-any-means necessary as long as I can take a photo of a dead critter and post it on social media -crowd fully takes over.

Don’t forget the sandbag for your rear view mirror….

Huh, I’ve done two great hunts this year, one private leased and one diy otc. 0 complaints on either except the weather. Stop wasting your energy on perceived injustices and go have fun. Who gives a flying **** what others do.

And for my part I’m sorry I got sucked into this nonsense, I’ve got more hunts to plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wapitibob]

Stop wasting your energy on perceived injustices and go have fun. Who gives a flying **** what others do.

clearly, those the follow matt rinella care what everybody else does

 

[WKR]

Huh, I’ve done two great hunts this year, one private leased and one diy otc. 0 complaints on either except the weather. Stop wasting your energy on perceived injustices and go have fun. Who gives a flying **** what others do.

And for my part I’m sorry I got sucked into this nonsense, I’ve got more hunts to plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

clearly, those the follow matt rinella care what everybody else does

When a tag that used to be over the counter moves to draw... I care

When a 0 point unit becomes a 5 point minimum... I care

When regulations change for the worse and opportunities are taken away because of an influencer posting stupid videos... I care

When a good hunting spot gets burned because of social media... I care

When I think about what the future of hunting access and opportunities will be like for the kids and generations to come... I care

If you want to sit on the sidelines and watch thats your prerogative.

 

[WKR]

It matters because, unless there was previously public access which he has blocked through leasing private land, there is no hypocrisy in this instance. You yourself posted “and restricting access to the public” but you haven’t demonstrated that is actually the case. If there was previously no public access, nothing has changed.

See post #66

In this situation it is the person doing the action that makes it hypocritical.

 

[MattB]

See post #66

In this situation it is the person doing the action that makes it hypocritical.

I read that, but it doesn’t answer the question. If there was no public access previously, he has done nothing to restrict public access as you have asserted. And if he hasn’t restricted public access, I see no hypocrisy. This is one of those “words have meanings” situations.