I don’t mind the resharing of some of these articles, assuming they’re pertinent AND assuming the poster contributes unique and non-self-serving content to the forum, which this OP does here, at least in some ways. Reposting/sharing content in a venue like this leaves them more vulnerable to scrutiny than if they’d only posted within the confines of their own domain, so if they’re willing to take their lumps for posting poor quality content, AND contributing other content instead of being 100% self-serving, well, I guess strap on your helmet and party on...

What I find frustrating about this article in particular is the apparent disconnect from the content espoused by several specific statements made which are generally untrue or inapplicable and the vagary claims made by dropping buzzwords which are largely nonsensical (“AAC/Remington is a SAAMI Company” sure sounds great, but is wholly meaningless, as it is not true to say AAC/Remington has (or rather had) an obligation to SAAMI, and certainly not any ownership, as in they were an owned entity or participating member. SAAMI compliance is a voluntary act, Remington and AAC were free to chamber anything they so desired in any cartridge they could devise). The “breakdown” of two bullet weights is largely non-sensical as well... THESE were the reasons I asked whether the site has a content editor - I would have needed a handful of red pens if this article would have crossed my desk, because this wouldn’t be content I’d want going out of my door in its current state.