Is the Bigfoot Forum losing interest?

[norseman]

2 hours ago, Trogluddite said:

All we need to do is capture a bunch of mosquitos that have bitten bigfoot, extract the DNA from the blood they drew, then reverse engineer bigfoot by using DNA from some other species to fill in the blanks in the genome sequence, then grow a few and show them off in some sort of Bigfoot theme park!!! Genius!!

This ends badly….with lots of screaming and running.

[jiz]

I'm interested!!!!!

[Backdoc]

6 hours ago, jiz said:

I'm interested!!!!!

 

 

Welcome.   You will find a lot of great information here.  

[jiz]

I spent all day going over years of BFF threads and it's apparent that the powers that be here banned a whole bunch of people who didn't quite go along with the controlled narrative. When the question arises "is the BFF losing interest" it looks like a genocide occurred here and members were axed and eliminated vs. attrition from "losing interest". 

 

Cut off your nose to spite your face then wonder "what's wrong"? 

[Huntster]

11 minutes ago, jiz said:

........the powers that be here banned a whole bunch of people who didn't quite go along with the controlled narrative.........

 

This must mean that you have a firm grip on what that "controlled narrative" is. Please outline what that is.

[Incorrigible1]

1 hour ago, jiz said:

I spent all day going over years of BFF threads and it's apparent that the powers that be here banned a whole bunch of people who didn't quite go along with the controlled narrative. When the question arises "is the BFF losing interest" it looks like a genocide occurred here and members were axed and eliminated vs. attrition from "losing interest". 

 

Cut off your nose to spite your face then wonder "what's wrong"? 

 

Geez, Jiz. Your observations, so far, IMHO, wildly incorrect. Is that an axe you're grinding?

[jiz]

the OP of this thread is "is the bf forum losing interest?"

 

I would say "no, it lost members who were axed"

 

without an active membership, there isn't much of a forum, not enough people around to "lose interest"  Many, MANY contributing members have been banned yet everyone is lamenting some "lost interest" or blaming fakebook, reddit etc.

 

Management here ran this joint into the dirt. You bum rushed the audience with power trip bannings. What's left here is just a shell of once was. Congrats

[Incorrigible1]

19 minutes ago, jiz said:

the OP of this thread is "is the bf forum losing interest?"

 

I would say "no, it lost members who were axed"

 

without an active membership, there isn't much of a forum, not enough people around to "lose interest"  Many, MANY contributing members have been banned yet everyone is lamenting some "lost interest" or blaming fakebook, reddit etc.

 

Management here ran this joint into the dirt. You bum rushed the audience with power trip bannings. What's left here is just a shell of once was. Congrats

 

What was your previous handle, Jizzy?

[Huntster]

18 minutes ago, jiz said:

the OP of this thread is "is the bf forum losing interest?"

 

I would say "no, it lost members who were axed"........

 

You wrote:

 

Quote

........the powers that be here banned a whole bunch of people who didn't quite go along with the controlled narrative.........

 

What did you mean by "controlled narrative"? Does this mean that some topics are not allowed?

[jiz]

YOU MANIACS, YOU BLEW IT ALL TO HELL

I'm sure if a prospective contributor would first do a historical review of BFF before joining, they'd find the same proof of mass banishment's with the aftermath being a select few that are left here to grouse and argue over the same old issues. No, they wouldn't bother registering just to be in the company of a clique. reminds me of Charlton Heston in the last scene of Planet of the Apes

https://youtu.be/gf4WhCe9Ey4?si=blM3r7C26m7M9Zyu

Edited 18 hours ago by jiz

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, jiz said:

..........they'd find the same proof of mass banishment's with the aftermath being a select few that are left here to grouse and argue over the same old issues.........

 

Well, I'd agree that there are a handful (certainly NOT a selected few) of regulars who grouse and argue over the same old issues, but it certainly isn't due to "mass banishments". It's pretty obvious that you've been a previously banished member, and it's pretty clear why that might have been, but most folks disappear through sheer boredom or disgust, not banishment.

[norseman]

Yanno? I have to approve everyone in the welcome thread. And I see the username Jiz? Hmmmmm….. That’s probably a troll.

 

I hate being right. 

[Trogluddite]

14 hours ago, jiz said:

I spent all day going over years of BFF threads .... 

 

"All day is about time enough to go over about 1/20th or less of what's on the Forums.  And it seems like half your posts are complaining about people getting banned from the Forums. 

[Backdoc]

17 hours ago, jiz said:

I spent all day going over years of BFF threads and it's apparent that the powers that be here banned a whole bunch of people who didn't quite go along with the controlled narrative. 

 

 

 

I've never felt there has ever been any agenda on the BFF.  

 

If by agenda, you mean most on the BFF believe in Bigfoot that might be true.  That doesn't make it an agenda more so than a reasonable demographic breakdown.  I would expect most people who go to a Country Western bar tend to like country music.  Makes sense. 

 

 

I would expect most who engage on the BFF are mostly believers (lean believer).   Some are skeptics.  The breakdown is unknown by me, but I would guess 80% of the posters on the BFF believe in Bigfoot or leaners, 20% being skeptic non-believers.

 

This DOES NOT make it an agenda.  An agenda might assume some master tenets about Bigfoot are the rule of the day.  Anyone violating that dogma would be out the door.  I don't see it.  In my time here I don't think I have ever witnessed it.

 

It is true reasonable rules apply to the BFF.  For instance, it is forbidden to engage in politics or religion on the BFF.   That is not different than topics off-limits at the typical Thanksgiving Dinner.  This doesn't make it an agenda but guidelines of civility and keeping things on topic.  Can you imagine in today's day and age if Politics alone were allowed to be mix in to the BFF conversations and threads?   No thanks.

 

 

 

There has correctly been rules and boundaries to skeptics and believer alike.    For example:   While most believe Bigfoot is thought to be some human like animal some might believe Bigfoot is an alien visitor for Mars.    If they do, no one will stop them from expressing this idea. They would just be encouraged to take it to a thread specific to this idea.    

 

We have had a few posters who were not just skeptics but skeptics who were frankly borderline Trolls and troublemakers.    I personally had no problem with these people even when we didn't agree so long as they were polite.   I like opposition and discussion to keep our arguments and beliefs sharp and to challenge what we think we know.  But it is NOT an agenda to ban such people when they just refused to operate under the rules.  This doesn't mean an agenda banned their ideas.   Had they followed civil conduct and the rules they would still be here.    

 

We should all seek quality not quantity.  We should celebrate cleaning up the BFF.  

 

If you say, "there is an agenda", can you outline the specifics of this agenda?   

[norseman]

Just now, Backdoc said:

 

 

I've never felt there has ever been any agenda on the BFF.  

 

If by agenda, you mean most on the BFF believe in Bigfoot that might be true.  That doesn't make it an agenda more so than a reasonable demographic breakdown.  I would expect most people who go to a Country Western bar tend to like country music.  Makes sense. 

 

 

I would expect most who engage on the BFF are mostly believers (lean believer).   Some are skeptics.  The breakdown is unknown by me, but I would guess 80% of the posters on the BFF believe in Bigfoot or leaners, 20% being skeptic non-believers.

 

This DOES NOT make it an agenda.  An agenda might assume some master tenets about Bigfoot are the rule of the day.  Anyone violating that dogma would be out the door.  I don't see it.  In my time here I don't think I have ever witnessed it.

 

It is true reasonable rules apply to the BFF.  For instance, it is forbidden to engage in politics or religion on the BFF.   That is not different than topics off-limits at the typical Thanksgiving Dinner.  This doesn't make it an agenda but guidelines of civility and keeping things on topic.  Can you imagine in today's day and age if Politics alone were allowed to be mix in to the BFF conversations and threads?   No thanks.

 

 

 

There has correctly been rules and boundaries to skeptics and believer alike.    For example:   While most believe Bigfoot is thought to be some human like animal some might believe Bigfoot is an alien visitor for Mars.    If they do, no one will stop them from expressing this idea. They would just be encouraged to take it to a thread specific to this idea.    

 

We have had a few posters who were not just skeptics but skeptics who were frankly borderline Trolls and troublemakers.    I personally had no problem with these people even when we didn't agree so long as they were polite.   I like opposition and discussion to keep our arguments and beliefs sharp and to challenge what we think we know.  But it is NOT an agenda to ban such people when they just refused to operate under the rules.  This doesn't mean an agenda banned their ideas.   Had they followed civil conduct and the rules they would still be here.    

 

We should all seek quality not quantity.  We should celebrate cleaning up the BFF.  

 

If you say, "there is an agenda", can you outline the specifics of this agenda?   

He is gone bud. 💥