UKARA Alternative

[fivezerothree]

Could you point out what I've got 'twisted?'

 

UKARA came up with a requirement to join their database (3 games in over 2 months), which is not a legal requirement for anything, and your organisation is just copying the same game and timeframe limits.

I dont see the point you're making.

 

As I have mentioned previously, yes, as it is a good recommendation.

 

Are you saying we should ride closer to the 'law'? The problem is, is that it's far from perfect and very grey – we wouldn't want to bring unhealthy attention towards us like that. Either way spit out what you mean and then I can begin to understand what you are trying to say. Other than that; I'm devoting a lot of my spare time to airsoft related projects at the moment and as such I respectfully don't have time for playing 'have a go solictor'!

[Longshot]

I dont see the point you're making.

As I have mentioned previously, yes, as it is a good recommendation.

Are you saying we should ride closer to the 'law'? The problem is, is that it's far from perfect and very grey – we wouldn't want to bring unhealthy attention towards us like that. Either way spit out what you mean and then I can begin to understand what you are trying to say. Other than that; I'm devoting a lot of my spare time to airsoft related projects at the moment and as such I respectfully don't have time for playing 'have a go solictor'!

Are you purposely being obtuse? I'm asking why you're just taking the same 'recommendation' that UKARA made up for themselves and making it a necessity in what you're labelling a new and better scheme. Have you given any thought as to whether that is indeed the best policy?

[fivezerothree]

Oh that one's easy; cost.

 

I really want this project to succeed and be a viable alternative to UKARA, but at the moment if I were a site owner I'd be failing to see the real tangible benefit to my business. £100 isn't much money I agree, but some sites are so cheap they use bin bags for team arm bands (sadly not a joke).

UKARA as a scheme has pitched everything at exactly the right level for sites; stamp a form and let a retailer worry about the admin. Most places I have played at file their waivers by attendance day and never do anything with them, many others just have a book which players sign to record their attendance.

 

I expect in order for the home office to get on board and accept it as a defence you'll need a LARGE amount of players, retailers and sites signed up and actively participating. For that level of market penetration to happen I honestly believe you need to offer significant benefits above and beyond it being cheaper for retailers and more flexible for players. A lot of sites make money on memberships too, this will be taking that money away from them and you're asking to charge £100 for the privelidge.

I think most of your points are coming from misunderstanding.The tangible benefit is digitising common processes – it allows for a mostly automatic beginning to end process, saves time and thus money. Sites will also be able to do a lot with this data should they choose to, such as in depth data analysis and interpretation – the foundation of modern business.

 

UKARA doesn't have everything right, it's an awful system and the UKARA founding members will openly admit that. The fact that some poor sod has to check a piece of paper, stamp it, sign it and post it is frankly a process from the early 90s.

 

Yeah some sites have gotten very cosy with required memberships, but if UKARA equates to 80% of these defences in the UK or rather holds the majority and forces membership? Comeeee onnnnn, it's not required, that is lazy business of which shouldn't be mixed with sort of proof system. Luckily most sites offer a good incentive to become a member. But this is a player defence and it simply measures your attendances. No other fuss required. Being a member of a particular site means very little given how many sites there are compared to airsofters in the UK. However it's a point I think should put to a vote as soon as more has been done.

 

Regarding the Home Office, ACPO and all that business – don't worry about it. All covered.

[fivezerothree]

Are you purposely being obtuse? I'm asking why you're just taking the same 'recommendation' that UKARA made up for themselves and making it a necessity in what you're labelling a new and better scheme. Have you given any thought as to whether that is indeed the best policy?

 

No, [redacted], I'm not being obtuse but I am being tested by someone who can't take a bloody straight answer! lol

 

Yes – we think it is the best recommendation.

 

 

We're not having name calling. We will discuss this politely or not at all - Ian_Gere

[Longshot]

Right, so you're saying that the UKARA policy that playing 3 games over more than 2 months is what everyone should have to do before being allowed to buy a RIF, AND that this is something everyone at Luther has seriously discussed and agreed upon. I get that now.

 

That being the case here are some examples I want you to consider:

 

1, a person plays one game in January, one game in June and one game in December. They CAN buy RIFs with Luther (as long as they remember to sign up before they even play their first game).

 

2, a person plays one game a week for six weeks. They CAN'T buy RIFs with Luther.

 

3, a person turns up for a weekender game as their first airsoft experience and pays £100 up front for the whole weekend. They CAN'T buy RIFs with Luther (though one of the founding members of UKARA WILL sell them a RIF when they turn up).

 

Do you honestly not think there are any issues with sticking someone else's already problematic restrictions in your new and improved scheme?

[jcheeseright]

Like I said. I'm sold on this, I've drank the kool aid, it's lazy site owners who've got an easy life at the moment that you need to incentivise: getting people to sign a book and a bit of paper, occasionally stamp a form and claim their £10 for the last stamp... Sure it's slow and they don't get any hard and fast data on who's coming to their games, but really anywhere that's so blasé about their admin that they use a hardback ledger to do their records isn't gonna be all that interested in analytics!

Lazy business practices are what grass roots airsoft runs on at the moment, if it weren't the case then sites wouldn't be charging £10 or more for a 'membership' that doesn't do anything except allow you to buy a RIF. The bigger sites (ground zero, first and only, blue streak, etc) I expect will be on this like white on rice as their admin overhead is probably quite large and they're by and large really professional business-oriented outfits who will see where their £100 is going and where the savings are. It's the bloke who runs his site out of a white van and some private woodland with a handful of awful rental guns who is too cheap to buy team bands, that's who will need convincing!

[typefish]

I'd just like to add that the site I go to does not charge for UKARA stamps.

 

Membership at the site I go to is about discounts, not UKARA.

[fivezerothree]

Like I said. I'm sold on this, I've drank the kool aid, it's lazy site owners who've got an easy life at the moment that you need to incentivise: getting people to sign a book and a bit of paper, occasionally stamp a form and claim their £10 for the last stamp... Sure it's slow and they don't get any hard and fast data on who's coming to their games, but really anywhere that's so blasé about their admin that they use a hardback ledger to do their records isn't gonna be all that interested in analytics!

Lazy business practices are what grass roots airsoft runs on at the moment, if it weren't the case then sites wouldn't be charging £10 or more for a 'membership' that doesn't do anything except allow you to buy a RIF. The bigger sites (ground zero, first and only, blue streak, etc) I expect will be on this like white on rice as their admin overhead is probably quite large and they're by and large really professional business-oriented outfits who will see where their £100 is going and where the savings are. It's the bloke who runs his site out of a white van and some private woodland with a handful of awful rental guns who is too cheap to buy team bands, that's who will need convincing!

Right, yeah you make a perfect point. Remember the fact that it's an alternate to UKARA doesn't even have to be better, just an alternate in it's rawest form. People will welcome a quicker system even without the extra tech! We've had plenty of smaller sites contact us too.

 

I realise you're sold and I also realise that you see that it is also a sybian circle in that all parties need to be happy and involved for it to work, I get that and it will be.

 

I have spent years in sales and can open people's worlds up in terms of possibilities with a 'product' (for lack of a better term) such as this. We plan on demonstrating this system to as many parties as possible, it may very well be a education for some. Whether you think people will or will not bite is somewhat moot because you aren't that particular party, but I do completely understand your concerns as this is something we are tackling stage by stage, logically.

 

Anyway, we may very well fail, but it's unlikely given our (non financial) resources, experience, motivation and err... 'persistance' lol – worth keeping up to date with us on facebook.

 

I will be building our website soon too so hopefully we can have proposals and a voting system included so potential members can tweak the system themselves before making the jump.

[Longshot]

Right, I think I've finally worked out what my problem with this is, so I'll ask about it because I'm off to bed soon: why are Luther looking to tell people who can and can't buy RIFs?

 

I like the idea of Luther. I like the idea of having all players and their games registered and kept on a free to access database; I like the potential for business improvement for sites and easy confirmation of how often people play. But I don't want it to end up replacing UKARA as the tagline next to sales: 'must have Luther to buy this RIF.'

 

Surely the real power of Luther, if it is indeed for the players, is to simply provide an easy to access database that people can use for THEMSELVES to determine whether they have a defence to sell to someone else, not to start telling people who can and can't buy or sell based on a pretty arbitrary number and timeframe that has just been imported wholesale from a system that Luther is describing as terribly flawed.

 

Why have the 3 games in over 2 months at all? What's it got to do with Luther?

[Mike636]

Any one can buy a RIF as long as your are over 18.

[fivezerothree]

Right, I think I've finally worked out what my problem with this is, so I'll ask about it because I'm off to bed soon: why are Luther looking to tell people who can and can't buy RIFs?

 

I like the idea of Luther. I like the idea of having all players and their games registered and kept on a free to access database; I like the potential for business improvement for sites and easy confirmation of how often people play. But I don't want it to end up replacing UKARA as the tagline next to sales: 'must have Luther to buy this RIF.'

 

Surely the real power of Luther, if it is indeed for the players, is to simply provide an easy to access database that people can use for THEMSELVES to determine whether they have a defence to sell to someone else, not to start telling people who can and can't buy or sell based on a pretty arbitrary number and timeframe that has just been imported wholesale from a system that Luther is describing as terribly flawed.

 

Why have the 3 games in over 2 months at all? What's it got to do with Luther?

I think you are being purposely obtuse now! lol I read your reply twice and I'm sitting here screwing my face thinking " I shouldn't have to reply or defend this" as your opinion is wild.

 

Think about what you are actually scratching at here. We have to have means as to quantify and qualify a valid defence otherwise it's really grey and it doesn't work. I don't care about your idealist attitude because that doesn't apply in the real world lol. While there is technically no system of being given the thumbs up from the Home Office or the ACPO we are working purely from what we know involved parties are currently happy* with. The facts: if you are asking this question, your knowledge of our current legal system, mass public portrayal of the sport isn't great – which isn't an issue or something to be looked down upon in anyway or form.

 

You cannot however begin to question things and approach some romantic ideal of how it could be 'easier' – because that's what you are getting at isn't it? This is a basic method to ensure that morons cannot go to the one skirmish and buy a years worth of RIFs to start his own RIF shop robber squad.

 

You still not suggested anything other than suggesting "we are copying so therefore it is bad".

 

 

 

1, a person plays one game in January, one game in June and one game in December. They CAN buy RIFs with Luther (as long as they remember to sign up before they even play their first game).

Sites will be able to add data from the past from whatever previous methods they used to record attendance which means adopters to the scheme get their Luther ID a la defence instantly.

 

 

 

 

2, a person plays one game a week for six weeks. They CAN'T buy RIFs with Luther.

 

Correct, as impatience serves as a deterrent, warding away those not worthy.

 

 

 

 

3, a person turns up for a weekender game as their first airsoft experience and pays £100 up front for the whole weekend. They CAN'T buy RIFs with Luther (though one of the founding members of UKARA WILL sell them a RIF when they turn up).

 

Do you honestly not think there are any issues with sticking someone else's already problematic restrictions in your new and improved scheme?

 

The 'restriction' as you put it isn't problematic. Stupid humans, are problematic. These 'restrictions' provide an even, acceptable keel to operate on, if they operate outside of this policy and the shit hits the fan; we are not responsible. It's as simple as that?

 

You are quite exceptional at beating around the bush though. Tell me what you consider as ideal!

[Ian_Gere]

Right, this is primarily aimed at you, 530, but just in case anybody else feels minded to chance their arm - this forum is nice and chilled. It stays that way because the moderation team hold the reigns very lightly, but that doesn't mean laissez faire. The next person in this thread to level a personal insult at another member is getting a posting ban for a number of days commensurate with the gravity of the offence.

 

This now is my personal contribution; nothing to do with the above which is purely da way we roll, seen...?

Right, yeah you make a perfect point. Remember the fact that it's an alternate to UKARA doesn't even have to be better, just an alternate in it's rawest form.

It does have to be better, or why bother? People are inherently lazy and, in uncertain financial times, regrettably, conservative: they just don't make an effort unless it's demonstrably daft not to.

 

Edit:

 

 

Sites will be able to add data from the past from whatever previous methods they used to record attendance which means adopters to the scheme get their Luther ID a la defence instantly.

Yes, but that means they have to keep separate records of their own and you're wanting to sell Luther as a replacement to that. Longshot is right (OMGonads, twice in one day!), if a site does go with Luther as proposed, players will have to join as soon as they want to play in order for their attendance to be registered.

 

BTW, if you read back you'll see that I am in favour and i will put my money where my mouth is, but as has been said, there are issues to iron out. Personally I don't see it as pointless idealism to attempt to find a way forward which does not contravene the VCRA but also does not support or lend it credibility. In fact I think it is the most important thing which any replacement to UKARA should do.

[fivezerothree]

What personal insult? There wasn't one.

[Deva]

Let's keep this on topic..

 

What Ian said doesn't mean to say we don't want people to discuss this, though. If this is consumer led scheme, then those setting it up do need to listen to us, else it doesn't actually represent consumers accurately and is just a scheme that some people thought was good. Stroke and compliment those giving you feedback, this will work in your favour, you will get more feedback, popularity and notoriety for accepting people's ideas. Even if it is not something you personally agree with, if it is something you can later raise and lots of other people are for it, it's something you'll have to accept.

I don't think Longshot is being wild. Adopting 3 in 2 is your *easiest* option. But easiest does not always equal best.

I'm not providing an alternate watertight solution, no single person can do that. But as Longshot said:

Surely the real power of Luther, if it is indeed for the players, is to simply provide an easy to access database that people can use for THEMSELVES to determine whether they have a defence to sell to someone else

[fivezerothree]

Let's keep this on topic..

 

What Ian said doesn't mean to say we don't want people to discuss this, though. If this is consumer led scheme, then those setting it up do need to listen to us, else it doesn't actually represent consumers accurately and is just a scheme that some people thought was good. Stroke and compliment those giving you feedback, this will work in your favour, you will get more feedback, popularity and notoriety for accepting people's ideas. Even if it is not something you personally agree with, if it is something you can later raise and lots of other people are for it, it's something you'll have to accept.

 

I don't think Longshot is being wild. Adopting 3 in 2 is your *easiest* option. But easiest does not always equal best.

 

I'm not providing an alternate watertight solution, no single person can do that. But as Longshot said:

 

Eugh, It took you to quote that for me to actually understand it – that's actually quite an astute point Longshot.

 

I really need to get the website done so I can list suggestions like this.

[Ian_Gere]

What personal insult? There wasn't one.

You called Longshot a cretin. I redacted it from your above post. We don't need any etymology about how the word actually means christian and besides there are many people who would consider that an insult. It clearly was meant as a personal insult and that is against the forum rules. Pretty much any forum rules.

[Deva]

That would be good - it sounds like you have everyone you need in your team, but if you want a private discussion forum, resources or any technical help then let me know.

[fivezerothree]

You called Longshot a cretin. I redacted it from your above post. We don't need any etymology about how the word actually means christian and besides there are many people who would consider that an insult. It clearly was meant as a personal insult and that is against the forum rules. Pretty much any forum rules.

I would apologise but that would also be an admission of making a mistake.

[fivezerothree]

Haaaa I jokkee.

 

That would be good - it sounds like you have everyone you need in your team, but if you want a private discussion forum, resources or any technical help then let me know.

 

Private forum you say? That may very well be of great use to us?

[Deva]

PM or email me, whatever is your preference.

[Longshot]

You are quite exceptional at beating around the bush though. Tell me what you consider as ideal!

I'm a fan of 'beating around the bush' because I love the Socratic method. Then again, it works well with some people in some situations but not with others as sometimes we're so committed to what we think that we don't wish to be open to any perceived criticism, even when it's not criticism but actually the 'advice from the community' that was asked for at the start of the thread.

 

Here's what I consider ideal: don't have anything to do with the law or 'laying it down.'

 

UKARA doesn't decide the law (despite what most airsofters seem to think!), they decide what they want as a defence for THEMSELVES to use, should the need arise. That's because they're retailers and need to cover themselves by creating a defence for themselves when making sales.

 

Luther isn't a retailer organisation, so why are you trying to dictate what will constitute a legal defence? Why should you dictate who is "worthy," to use your own term? Can you not just be the purest form of data collection and simply record, collate and make accessible the information regarding who is playing airsoft, where and when, and allow the people who access the data to use it as they wish?

 

What I dont want is to be dictated to about who I can sell a RIF to or patronised; I actually understand the laws involved very well and just want the information to make a sound assessment. If someone has played 3 games in 3 months I'll be able to check and see that on Luther and may choose to sell them a RIF. If someone has played 7 games in 7 weeks I'll be able to check and see that on Luther and may choose to sell them a RIF. I want to make the choice about who to sell to since I'm the one who needs to establish a defence, and ideally, I just want a system like Luther to give the the capacity to do that easily.

[fivezerothree]

I'm a fan of 'beating around the bush' because I love the Socratic method. Then again, it works well with some people in some situations but not with others as sometimes we're so committed to what we think that we don't wish to be open to any perceived criticism, even when it's not criticism but actually the 'advice from the community' that was asked for at the start of the thread.

 

Here's what I consider ideal: don't have anything to do with the law or 'laying it down.'

 

UKARA doesn't decide the law (despite what most airsofters seem to think!), they decide what they want as a defence for THEMSELVES to use, should the need arise. That's because they're retailers and need to cover themselves by creating a defence for themselves when making sales.

 

Luther isn't a retailer organisation, so why are you trying to dictate what will constitute a legal defence? Why should you dictate who is "worthy," to use your own term? Can you not just be the purest form of data collection and simply record, collate and make accessible the information regarding who is playing airsoft, where and when, and allow the people who access the data to use it as they wish?

 

What I dont want is to be dictated to about who I can sell a RIF to or patronised; I actually understand the laws involved very well and just want the information to make a sound assessment. If someone has played 3 games in 3 months I'll be able to check and see that on Luther and may choose to sell them a RIF. If someone has played 7 games in 7 weeks I'll be able to check and see that on Luther and may choose to sell them a RIF. I want to make the choice about who to sell to since I'm the one who needs to establish a defence, and ideally, I just want a system like Luther to give the the capacity to do that easily.

How well versed are you with the law and how it affects retailers? Retailers will not like what you suggest.

 

Just to get it perfectly accurate; a buyer needs a defence for a seller to be able to legally sell that item. These recommendations provide a decent foundation that people can rely on – no gray areas. The reason we have these recommendations is that people's opinions differ as you are quite clearly demonstrating but that doesn't mean that every opinion giver is well versed with the law. If you leave things open to interpretation you then have to suffer the consequences of stupid Humans. We can't expect everyone to know the VCRA and it's attached exclusions. It would also make things less accessible for people.

 

The facts; the home office likes the recommendation and thinks it's a safe bet. – I will not discuss any further with you regarding riding closer to the line of law as I think your opinions are extreme.

 

But to be perfectly clear, you are not providing 'advice'. You are providing an opinion without much prior knowledge and/or understanding. That or your being some mixture of stubborn and an idealist.

 

I do need to make my stance very clear on this. I see you want things improving and making better but this is something out of reach. While it will assessed and put to a vote – I nor the team will discuss it with anyone other than legal experts at this point. There are so many reasons for this and so very few against, I simply don't have the time to discuss this with you personally.

 

Suggestions elsewhere, will however be extremely welcome. Such as the name; we are considering a name change. Although Luther has stuck and some think we should stick with it others think we should be more 'official' like.. what say you?

[Airsoft-Ed]

So, you want to leave it up to whoever's checking against the player to use the information that's there and make up their own minds whether or not to sell to them?

Where do you draw the line?

As it stands now, people on Facebook will regularly sell guns to people with no defence at all.

[M_P]

I agree to be honest, leaving it up to the sellers interpretation is all well and good till some mong sells an RIF to someone who once skirmished in 2004.

Luther suggests a simple system whereby they can recommend whether to sell to someone or not, there's nothing stopping people ignoring it but it's there to help at the end of the day in an easy and simple way. Either you're a regular player or not, a system like this will help determine that with a simple yes or no.

[Airsoft-Ed]

Of all the problems surrounding UKARA, I've never heard anyone complain about the way in which they determine you eligible for purchases.

I think it takes long enough for people who are serious to commit to, but it's not too short than anyone can do it just to be a cock once they get a RIF.

Of course there's still going to be two tones, the second hand sales market and the presence of idiots making the whole thing largely pointless, but all we're effectively trying to do is streamline, modernise and simplify the existing system, whilst removing the power from the monopolistic UKARA committee and throwing financial incentives at people, such as raffles and free games/sites/weekenders.