Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence

[hiflier]

Hello Nakani,
 

Hello, sorry for the late reply, my wife shot a moose on her way to town yesterday and I had a lot of groceries to deal with.That's a first for me to hear. Congratulate her. As for you and the "groceries" I only have one comment: "Paper or Plastic!"

I'm gonna have to say no, I don't think Bigfoot exists. It's not a conclusion I wanted to arrive at. I would love to have my mind changed, like I said before,that is a big part of my participation here, I want to see some evidence that I can't explain away.Well enough said and thank you for the candid reply. As far as evidence that can't be explained away? yeah, me too. But TBH I also lean toward the evidence being out there somewhere. Thought you'd like to know my position as well.

[Airdale]

I’m not sure that we are actually seeking a solution. On page 16, post 314, I presented a workable solution that requires only the participation of those serious about keeping discussions free of trolls/scoftics/denialists, your choice, and the existence arguments engendered by their posts. It will work, either by natural attrition as they tire of not receiving responses or by simply letting them and those who can’t resist replying continue their verbal sparring in the “ignoraverse†(for the one or two who haven’t figured it out, my newly coined term does not refer to ignorance but the state of being ignored). This does not require any rule changes, reporting, or increased workload for the moderators, simply cooperation in using an existing feature of the forum.

 

Since posting that solution, I’ve seen no comments or discussion about it. No one has even said I’m so full of it my eyes are brown (they’re actually hazel). Nothing at all. That tells me one of two things, either everyone has put me on their ignore list, or there is really no burning desire to solve the problem.

[hiflier]

Hello Airdale,

I saw your suggestion way back just so you know. I've been a bit tied up to work out a couple of details. One being one which many are familiar with which is a member may be on ignore but if another poster who doesn't have the person on ignore quotes them in a response then the ignored member's post becomes visible.

The second thing I haven't looked at is if both members are on ignore then if they quote each other do the quoted posts appear even though the ignored member's original posts themselves don't. No one I don't think is going to ignore the same members so there will be cracks in the wall?

Maybe a Mod or an Admin can wade in here and explain the details for you and me if need be. Or maybe you, me and a third member willing to experiment with it here on this thread could test things out.

Edited August 29, 2015 by hiflier

[Guest DWA]

I’m not sure that we are actually seeking a solution. On page 16, post 314, ...

I'm trying to get there.  (Sheesh.  19 pages.  377 posts.)  I've got a long Ignore list and am...um...getting better...and...um...better at actually Ignoring it.

 

But I'm down on reporting any attempts to bring the exist/don't into a thread that's not about that.  That's happening from now on.

 

We should be able to fix this using current Forum features...which events indicate not enough are using.  (For example:  all the thin blue lines I see bloom on a thread after I post something provocative.)

[hiflier]

Hello DWA,
 
Is it your intention to provoke now that you've mentioned it.
 
Aside from that what news can you shed on the ignore feature. If you ignore someone is there no post at all even with a quote embedded in the post from someone else?
 
 
(Hmmm. Either a hit and run or I really am on ignore.)

Edited August 30, 2015 by hiflier

[Guest]

 

We should be able to fix this using current Forum features...which events indicate not enough are using.  (For example:  all the thin blue lines I see bloom on a thread after I post something provocative.)

No wonder he never thinks he's wrong.

[Guest DWA]

.................[snip]

In short, the philosopher, Sherrilyn Roush, thinks that what some of the Sasquatch researchers are doing is far from crazy, and in fact is a very good thing.

 

" ... Sherrilyn Roush, left, an associate professor of philosophy, considers the similarities between Bigfoot and meteorites - and the difference between science and philosophy - at the Hearst Museum's Bigfoot display, which includes text she wrote for the exhibit. (Deborah Stalford photos) - Bigfoot casts a philosophical shadow"

 

article at http://www.berkeley....7_bigfoot.shtml

 

From the link:

 

"People should feel more entitled to go out and investigate things that scientists might say don't exist," declared Roush, citing "the broader purpose of science to find out what's going on in the world..What I'm saying is that the lay public can actually help science, and has a right, even a responsibility, to do so."

 

That responsibility is not being discharged by people shouting down things with which they are uncomfortable for no other reason than their discomfort.  Which is why people doing that get opposed here.  Which is why this board is not being helped, but rather eroded, by allowing that evasion of responsibility to go on here unchallenged.  Ignored posts - regardless how many ignore them - are still up there, and still mislead people trying to figure out how to think about this.

 

I'm trying Airdale's approach to this.  But the moderators here have a responsibility to make sure this board discharges its responsibility to science.  Unless they want it not just to be a joke, but an irresponsible joke.

Edited August 30, 2015 by DWA

[hiflier]

Hello Airdale,

 

Well then you lucky dog, you must not be on DWA's ignore list but then you know how the saying goes: If at first you don't succeed........

Edited August 30, 2015 by hiflier

[Trogluddite]

I’m not sure that we are actually seeking a solution. 

Airdale, 

 

I trust that the Steering Committee and Management Team are working, behind the scenes, to resolve this issue in conjunction with the money issue (if that still remains an issue).  They have no shortage of ideas, thanks to this thread.

 

It seems in a few other threads that posters are self-policing themselves. Hopefully, the catharsis from here will purge the system for awhile. 

[Airdale]

Breathes sigh of relief!

 

If someone quotes and responds to the ignored one, they too go on the list. With the latter, if the problem is resolved in the way I, at least, would prefer and the trolls roll up their tents and depart for greener pastures, then the responders could get a break if folks are feeling charitable.

 

WRT to differences in the ignore lists, I suspect that there is a core group that would show up on 85 to 90 percent of the lists. And 75 percent of that core list would show up on all the ignore lists. There is always the chance for a flyer, but I'm working on a standard deviation basis, more or less. If even 25 of the regular, thoughtful members participated it could turn the tide, but the more, the merrier.

 

We don't have to be rude or call anyone out. Let them figure it out. As evidenced by my previous post, when you don't get any feedback it gets your attention. When someone doesn't get any feedback for a dozen posts it should begin to dawn on them that this isn't the JREF's (or what ever their current nom-de-plume is) BFF any more. C'est la vie!

 

Trog, the "we" I was referring to are those following and posting in this thread rather than the forum generally. I would certainly welcome a top down solution, but in the mean time I'll keep on keepin' on.

Edited August 30, 2015 by Airdale

[hiflier]

Hello Airdale,

I think the light bulb is going on. This thread for all it's stumblings has really exposed the heart of the matter. For me at least I thank you for your concern for the Forum. Folks here are generally just as concerned for the health of the Forum but I think felt powerless to turn things around for themselves. The Mods and Admins walk a tightrope every day trying to allow as much freedom of expression as possible but this thread presented a staging ground to hammer out matters and I very much thing we've turned the corner. Not perfectly, but turned it nonetheless.

[chelefoot]

This thread has been good. I try to be objective and fair when enforcing the rules. But some things are going to be a judgement call - It helps to know how everyone feels about how we should be dealing with these kind of issues in order to make the forum run smoother and more to the liking of the membership. That's what it's all about.

[hiflier]

Hello chelefoot,

That IS what it's all about. It's everybody's Forum after all.


This vvv is a very witty priceless retort:

 

We should be able to fix this using current Forum features...which events indicate not enough are using.  (For example:  all the thin blue lines I see bloom on a thread after I post something provocative.)

No wonder he never thinks he's wrong.

 

I still chuckle when I read it.

Edited August 30, 2015 by hiflier