Leaderboard

I was going to make this comment on another thread, but the more I wrote, the more it seemed to apply to a lot of threads here, so I gave it it's own life. ~ OD So, another thread with the usual back and forth comments trying to toss a zinger at the last poster or two. Has anyone ever come to the conclusion that working in conjunction with each other, you know, believer and skeptic, that what we all want will come out in the end? The believers and the skeptics both only want the truth. Instead of taking shots at each other to try and bolster your own position, working through what is offered as evidence may produce more results. Why do you think it is that so many of us refuse to release anything they find to any but a select few? It isn't because what we find we think is untrue or not actually evidence at all. It is because they don't want to be caught up in the never ending debate that is sure to follow. If the findings were offered and then looked at subjectively by ALL involved, believers and skeptics alike, some progress would be made. Forcing the findings to be kept within a small circle severely limits it's exposure to scrutiny, but does put a much wanted buffer between the person who has the evidence and the yahoos who just use it to spur an argument for no other reason than recreation. Sure, some findings offered by people silly enough to believe it will be looked a with all due sincerity start off well, but then the conversation slips back into a back and forth of personalities and oneupsmanship, and never comes back down to the issue at hand, just veiled insults tossed back and forth, until the thread is basically non-recoverable. The evidence offered SHOULD be torn apart bit by bit. That is the only way we will find out if it is inconclusive. The person who offers the evidence should NOT be torn apart in the same fashion. Sadly, this is what happens too many times. Therefore, the reluctance exists. Then when someone puts out evidence that may be flawed by one factor or another, and they offer something additional later, they are labeled a hoaxer. Sure, some are hoaxers, and should have their "evidence" no longer reviewed, but to start to attack them on the forums gives their hoax legitimacy to them, and they will continue doing the same just to get the members all wound up and arguing. To them it is recreation. If we don't look at it and feed their personality, they will move on. By the same token, we should not have what I now call the Paula Deen reaction, automatically dismissing a persons evidence for something that may have been a mistake long ago. Look at what they have, scrutinize it and offer your opinion in a concise and logical manner without attacking the poster. If they get rude and try to argue, just move along. It is really hard to argue with yourself. If they keep offering what appears to be hoaxes time and time again, just don't give it any traction, just pass it by. The hoaxer will soon move on due to not getting what they so badly need, attention. For both sides of the coin to engage in a petty back and forth of insults and ridicule does neither side any good. Believers start to look like loons, and skeptics start to look like trolls. Maybe there is a bit of that on both sides, but when threads fall into this realm, they make everyone involved look silly. I'm not saying we shouldn't exchange viewpoints, but we should keep it civil if we want our point to be taken seriously. There are any number of people who post, that when I see their name in the reply, I just go to the next and don't even give their post a view because I know from their many past posts what is going to be there, and they don't add to the conversation. So, in the end of this long winded opinion piece it comes down to this for me. Now mind you, this is just my opinion, and you can take it for just that, one guys opinion. If you can't get your idea or opinion across to the rest of the forum without being rude, insulting or out right hostile, maybe you're not getting your message across in the most effective manner to begin with. If you want to be taken seriously and with respect, offer the same. If we want to get to the bottom of the controversy surrounding the existence of the creature, we need to work together. Sure one side will be disappointed in the end, but we will all be better for our efforts and for knowing the truth. Some will still refuse to accept the truth, no matter how it all falls out, but then that happens on all issues, and that is human nature. Offered respectfully, thanks for your time ~ OD

You have every right to be here Larry, but if you could care less about the evidence, why even bother? Just curious. I come here as someone who has not had an experience, looking for evidence to keep my hope alive that BF does exist. It kind of upsets me when someone who claims they KNOW BF exists are not willing to help me KNOW. I understand that it's nearly impossible to share here without the drama from the skeptics and even proponents at times. But dang, it's frustrating to me and I bet others like me who look for any evidence to keep our hopes alive. As Old Dog pointed out in another thread, this community needs to come together to help each other. If we don't, we will never accomplish anything except the bickering that is what 90 percent of the threads end up consisting of.

That's the romance in you SW..

I have a dissenting view. Remember, the guidelines are to promote discussion, not to promote proving. If you are able to step back from your own positions and watch in abstract how "business is conducted", it becomes pretty obvious that the rules are not there to facilitate resolution of the bigfoot question. I don't fault the mods, they just enforce the rules. They're among our most kind and welcoming individuals ... just don't become the job they have to do. (Says a guy with a warning point. ) I don't know where the Steering Committee falls so far as defining the rules and guidelines so I do not necessarily fault them. But someone, somewhere, has **designed** failure to resolve the bigfoot question into the very underlying structure and operation of the forum. Why? And .. accident or intent? Ironic that observation has to come from MIB, huh? I have no issues with witnesses, "mere" believers, knowers, or honest skeptics. My issues are with the scoffers masquerading as skeptics who are here adding nothing of value but asking disingenuous questions to derail debate, harassing people into silence, and so on. They are quite good at staying just inside the boundaries of acceptable conduct while still achieving their purposes. There's nothing that can be done about it unless the rules change. As it stands this is a debate forum, not a bigfoot issue resolution forum. It does not help the new witness who is dazed and confused with their world view turned upside down, it just throws them to the wolves. Even I, who have been "at this" for over 35 years and generally a pretty thick skin, have personal stories I will not share here because of the environment. I welcome honest questions, not the thinly veiled derision and ridicule I've seen others subjected to. The forum accomplishes its mandate ... discussion. If you are frustrated by the lack of progress, look at the rules and guidelines again with a sharper eye. If you're not getting what you're here for, perhaps what you're here for is not what the forum is here for. I would not recommend BFF to a new witness. The "help" water is too shallow and the "debate" water too deep for someone at that point in their journey. That's my observation. Hopefully I don't get tossed out on my rear for sharing it. MIB

See, a skeptic doesn't even believe it when I say that they don't believe in the existence of Sasquatches for good reason..