SWWASAS Posted February 21, 2016 BFF Patron Share Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) Freelygiven: "Is it the BFRO? FB isn’t really that. That producer seems to have a lot of control over the whole thing. I wonder why BFRO would turn it down." I submitted that and two other reports to the BFRO report section on the BFRO website. I was reluctant to do that because of revealing locations, but think it important that BF contact be part of data bases someplace. I have never been contacted by anyone from the BFRO for any of the reports. Apparently the Finding Bigfoot people have access to the BFRO reports. When I mention my report experience here, now and then a forum member in the BFRO will pop up to defend them. Their excuses are no longer credible to me. Edited February 21, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest freelygiven Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 You're between a rock and a hard place, SW. Feels like some sort of unintended betrayal. Then you have folks like me jumping on the bandwagon just to muddy the waters further. At least I haven't been out in the field yet, but I'd like to be. Your secret is safe with me. Hang in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted February 22, 2016 BFF Patron Share Posted February 22, 2016 (edited) The only way BFRO reporting effects me is that it cannot be trusted or used as a current data base. For there to be betrayal, I would have had to have some association with the organization, and I have not. The last listed report in Clark County Washington as of this morning is 2003. That is 13 years ago. That report led me to my active research area and most of my findings. Without current data, others looking for research areas are going to be hampered. As I found, situations in areas change and what might be an active area can go inactive very quickly. In some ways the BFRO reminds me of some of the secret religious orders. You have to be invited to join, you have to believe in their interpretation of what BF is or is not, and you will be thrown out for believing different. Edited February 22, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maxtag Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 The only way BFRO reporting effects me is that it cannot be trusted or used as a current data base. For there to be betrayal, I would have had to have some association with the organization, and I have not. The last listed report in Clark County Washington as of this morning is 2003. That is 13 years ago. That report led me to my active research area and most of my findings. Without current data, others looking for research areas are going to be hampered. As I found, situations in areas change and what might be an active area can go inactive very quickly. In some ways the BFRO reminds me of some of the secret religious orders. You have to be invited to join, you have to believe in their interpretation of what BF is or is not, and you will be thrown out for believing different.I think I have a similar outlook and take on BFRO however my interpretation of BFRO is one from an ignorant side. My research and net noodling has stayed clear of BFRO for the most part after some quick pondering this was what I came up with. -read or was told this was Matt Moneymaker. Never cared for him, his approach, and his stupid BS like errikson. -too much stagnation and corrupt data that can never in my opinion Help move things from the current state of BF which is no where closer. -anytime I have attempted to weed thru the sightings I end up more frustrated reading nonsense that CAN be explained by some simple logic. -people are nuts. -the website feels like it's from the 80s I expect boy george to be on a banner at anytime singing "do you really want to hurt me? " -Matt Moneymaker My opinion only which is based off nothing but how I feel and some old fashion common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest freelygiven Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 The only way BFRO reporting effects me is that it cannot be trusted or used as a current data base. For there to be betrayal, I would have had to have some association with the organization, and I have not. The last listed report in Clark County Washington as of this morning is 2003. That is 13 years ago. That report led me to my active research area and most of my findings. Without current data, others looking for research areas are going to be hampered. As I found, situations in areas change and what might be an active area can go inactive very quickly. In some ways the BFRO reminds me of some of the secret religious orders. You have to be invited to join, you have to believe in their interpretation of what BF is or is not, and you will be thrown out for believing different.I think I have a similar outlook and take on BFRO however my interpretation of BFRO is one from an ignorant side. My research and net noodling has stayed clear of BFRO for the most part after some quick pondering this was what I came up with.-read or was told this was Matt Moneymaker. Never cared for him, his approach, and his stupid BS like errikson. -too much stagnation and corrupt data that can never in my opinion Help move things from the current state of BF which is no where closer. -anytime I have attempted to weed thru the sightings I end up more frustrated reading nonsense that CAN be explained by some simple logic. -people are nuts. -the website feels like it's from the 80s I expect boy george to be on a banner at anytime singing "do you really want to hurt me? " -Matt Moneymaker My opinion only which is based off nothing but how I feel and some old fashion common sense. Quite an exclusive club. Perhaps elsewhere there is a more cutting edge that's just not for public consumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maxtag Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 I'll stick to watching reruns of the Lil Rascals for their little club. It's entertaining and who don't like buckwheat and spanky... I really need to analyze my dislike of Matt Moneymaker I don't even know the guy. I think it's the Erikson thing that rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe he was a victim.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted February 23, 2016 BFF Patron Share Posted February 23, 2016 The Erikson / Moneymaker thing was a business deal gone bad. I wonder if Moneymaker saw the video, made some calls, then decided it was not worth the one million. Something that costs that much has to be pretty good on its own to justify paying that much up front because you want to recoup your investment. And if it was that good, Erikson could have just turned around a sold it to someone else. No one seems to be buying it in more ways than one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maxtag Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Nahh the whole thing smelled like a duck. Like pretty much everything else once you begin digging in. ( in regard to BF) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest freelygiven Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 I'll stick to watching reruns of the Lil Rascals for their little club. It's entertaining and who don't like buckwheat and spanky... I really need to analyze my dislike of Matt Moneymaker I don't even know the guy. I think it's the Erikson thing that rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe he was a victim.... Moneymaker isn't a big problem for me, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. As I say, just mute them when they're talking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts