UKAF and/or UKAPU

[Asomodai]

Best you can do is do surveys of the rules of every field and publish a white paper on the findings, then you can think about how to draw similarities and think about pros and cons of unifying which rules at what costs and what impact

Then you can try to come up with one version of a regularised version of airsoft, publish it, and hope the fields will adopt it

the UKARA list of registered fields is a good starting point

You can set up a dedicated forum (somewhere outside facebook)

and then use it as a base of operation, do a program and recruit volunteers to complete chunks of surveys for you

and then have people write the stuff and publish it

But surely that is not part of the UKAPU's mission, they have got enough on their plate

You need a consortium for airsoft regularisation research (come up with a better name), for the sole mission of coming up with one version of a semi-improved airsoft ruleset, or some sort of standard framework for fields to adopt

Later on you can convince some fields for testing and also publish the experiment results and go from there

To do all of the above would take more people and funding that UKAPU currently generates. It's a chicken and egg scenario. UKAPU supports it's members first and have the resources to do so. But are currently not large enough or have the clout to represent the site owners or the commercial interests. 

However attempts have been made in the past to work with organisations like ATB, UKARA and UKPSF who have represented site owners and the commercial arm of Airsoft. 

ATB collapsed due to power struggles/inactivity (And has been reborn as the UKAF under the tutelage of one of the people involved at the time).

UKARA still exists but will only cooperate to further their commercial aims. At one point Frank at FS wanted sole control of ALL of the importation of Airsoft RIFs (Making Fire Support and friends the only game in town) so that the average person and small retailers not a part of UKARA could not import. 

https://airsoftodyssey.blogspot.com/2013/11/vcra-reboot-proposals.html?m=1

UKPSF represents a number of sites that run both Paintball and Airsoft. Whom UKAPU do have communications with. But (This is my own personal guess) UKPSF as the larger organisation tend to only communicate when legal issues threaten both sports. 

There have been many more organisations that have collapsed, mostly due to inactivity and power grabs by individuals. 

As to who should be the governing body of Airsoft? Players? Commercial entities? Sites owners? UKPSF got it right, whereas Airsoft is too fragmented.

Ideally it would be all three, but they tend to be in conflict with each other. (Unless there is a threat on Airsoft as a whole, see VCRA etc)

I tend to side with UKAPU because they at least seem to have a legal head on them and they have AGMs where members voices and suggestions are heard. UKAPU are not perfect and have had a chronic shortage of volunteers to fill committee positions which results in some mistakes, but they do have players interests at heart. 

 

[Pseudotectonic]

Just brainstorming but are there other airsoft bodies in other countries that are somewhat similar to a regulation body in that country? How are they shaped in relation to the triangle of retailers, site owners, and players?

Because let's say in the far future airsoft develops an international federation of its own, which is required for olympics (https://olympics.com/ioc/international-federations), it might be helpful to learn from other countries and their associations and it's never too early to start I suppose

Back to the UK, I think UKARA at least has a clear purpose and is functional.

It seems UKAPU is at least poised to sit in the players corner.

At the moment the site owners corner is vacant, because ATB/UKAF does not inspire a whole lot of confidence let alone looking competent enough.

I guess in order to research and develop some version of a federation airsoft we will at least need the player's corner and site owner's corner to co-lead the process (probably as a consortium), while having UKARA on the side as support because the growth of the sport also means growth of their profit. Because it needs to be a project that benefits everyone.

And if UKAF is non-functioning, it is all down to UKAPU to step up. But they don't seem to have the resources.

But I don't think the final result should be a governing body (at least not in the beginning), to even to start, we really just need the rules and definitions of the sport written on a piece of paper. It is largely just a white paper.

And the only thing to do afterwards is to wait for fields to adopt and players to adopt and for the hobby to catch up, and hopefully the benefits will be clear enough to become a de-facto adopted format of airsoft, then we can talk about regulating and governing.

--

I think we need AI to do the work

 

[Asomodai]

What also doesn't help are people who make unsubstantiated and untrue claims about UKAPU. Especially when they have performed little to no research on the subject. Whom when presented with counter evidence chooses to change the subject rather than admit they could be possibly be wrong ?

Just brainstorming but are there other airsoft bodies in other countries that are somewhat similar to a regulation body in that country? How are they shaped in relation to the triangle of retailers, site owners, and players?

Because let's say in the far future airsoft develops an international federation of its own, which is required for olympics (https://olympics.com/ioc/international-federations), it might be helpful to learn from other countries and their associations and it's never too early to start I suppose

Back to the UK, I think UKARA at least has a clear purpose and is functional.

It seems UKAPU is at least poised to sit in the players corner.

At the moment the site owners corner is vacant, because ATB/UKAF does not inspire a whole lot of confidence let alone looking competent enough.

I guess in order to research and develop some version of a federation airsoft we will at least need the player's corner and site owner's corner to co-lead the process (probably as a consortium), while having UKARA on the side as support because the growth of the sport also means growth of their profit. Because it needs to be a project that benefits everyone.

And if UKAF is non-functioning, it is all down to UKAPU to step up. But they don't seem to have the resources.

But I don't think the final result should be a governing body (at least not in the beginning), to even to start, we really just need the rules and definitions of the sport written on a piece of paper. It is largely just a white paper.

And the only thing to do afterwards is to wait for fields to adopt and players to adopt and for the hobby to catch up, and hopefully the benefits will be clear enough to become a de-facto adopted format of airsoft, then we can talk about regulating and governing.

--

I think we need AI to do the work

Not sure about Airsoft regulatory bodies overseas myself.

None of what you say above are new ideas. Just that there has been too much mudslinging between the player base to form an effective Union, UKARA vs Non UKARA complaint retailers (The latter of which are growing), and too many site owners who want to do things their own way. 

Our best chance to be unified was during the VCRA, but there was too much infighting. I imagine the next time something threatens airsoft as a whole will be the next best opportunity to unify. 

 

[Pseudotectonic]

Any facebook group can sell patches and claim to be sending emails and monitoring google, but it takes UKAPU to be claiming they "preserve UK airsoft" by sending some claim forms for you and defend airsoft (what even does that mean) with patch sales.

It will take a group of volunteers to begin to think about a new airsoft ruleset, but UKAPU is not it.

 

[Asomodai]

Any facebook group can sell patches and claim to be sending emails and monitoring google, but it takes UKAPU to be claiming they "preserve UK airsoft" by sending some claim forms for you and defend airsoft (what even does that mean) with patch sales.

It will take a group of volunteers to begin to think about a new airsoft ruleset, but UKAPU is not it.

You really have a massive beef with UKAPU for some reason. You get the legal help for free with the Bronze Membership. The other things when dealing with the home office etc have helped Airsofter's even if you aren't a member. 

The only difference between a paid member and a non paid member is a patch or two. 

I gave a list of things they have done to preserve and defend Airsoft yet you completely ignore them and keep banging on with your rhetoric. Even if you don't think it doesn't amount to "defending" Airsoft, there is a fund within UKAPU to do just that if legal issues arise (As with VCRA 2016)

Your argument is without merit as you can't even acknowledge the things they have done which is plain to see.