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

[norseman]

^^^^^^^^

And you dont think that we were all in the boat with you??? So now your cynical, and so now we all have to listen to your cynical posts day in and out. Why? I guess I' ll never understand your motivation.

If I was in your boots where my mind had been made up for me that this subject is a bunch of horse manure? I would join a fly fishing forum or something......gee whiz.

 

Why not just put him on ignore? That's what it's for.

Because he can steer threads, because most do not exercise that option. Besides anytime anyone quotes him in their response he shows up anyhow.

.....

THE BFF IS NOT A RESEARCH ORGANIZATION!!!!!!!

 

Perhaps not.  Perhaps it will successfully roll along for many years operating as the best little "woo-house" in Texas.  However, there was a time when it was possible for people interested in researching Bigfoot could find information of value in the general forums.  That seems to have faded into the morass described in the OP.  While there are still members interested in having critical discussions and weighing evidence at least somewhat impartially, it feels like you have to search harder and harder to find them and you have to have your discussions quickly before a thread becomes derailed. 

 

If the BFF's goal/core mission is to be just another internet coffee chat club social gathering where people can discuss Bigfoot, perhaps it should make that clear and drop other pretensions, like the SSR, or moderating threads to ensure that discussions stay on point.

 

Just feels like trying to ride two horses going in opposite directions w/one saddle.

I know which direction I'd like it to go but its not up to me.

[WSA]

@ Trogludite>>>> Sure. That is only reasonable.

I would suggest this discussion will go much further if the members resist the urge to get in their evidence/no evidence digs.

[masterbarber]

The BFF is open to anyone who can follow the rules and conduct themselves in a respectful manner. If you feel a member(s) is personally annoying, use the ignore feature. If you feel someone is violating a rule, use the report feature at the bottom of each post. The staff on this forum do an outstanding job but they are not mind readers.

 

And let me say this-  If you are an individual who believes that Bigfoot does not and cannot exist, you log on for the sole purpose of reading the content and mocking the membership here and elsewhere....I can tell you that there is a growing intolerance to that mindset on this forum. 

[Cotter]

I have not been here very long but have discovered that skeptics are treated like blasphemers even by members of the steering committee.

 

 

excuse my temerity by asking for "plausible" explanations instead of crackpot theories

 

Oh please, I haven't seen you ask for any plausible explanations.  Mostly comments about tin foil hats and 'I ain't buying it' responses.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

There's a difference between engaging someone in a conversation in order to learn/understand that person's opinions/beliefs and engaging a someone in a conversation in order to say "you're wrong!".

 

I see more of the latter than the former on these forums.

[Cotter]

Since 'crackpot' theories are being discussed, along with 'conspiracy' theories.

 

I wanted to share a list of crack pot/conspiracy theories that *GASP* were shown to be true.

 

http://listverse.com/2013/05/02/10-nefarious-conspiracies-proven-true/

 

Government lying, hiding, and covering up....it happens......

[Guest WesT]

I have not been here very long but have discovered that skeptics are treated like blasphemers even by members of the steering committee.

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me! Or maybe a "crackpot theory".... can't decide which.

[Trogluddite]

The SSR is not a "pretension".

G,

My bad, not my intention to pull down the SSR, but to highlight that serious research isn't a good fit on a fan-blog, if that's the direction things go in the future.

[Rockape]

It's not always what you say but how you say it. I often qualify my doubt in BF by saying things like, "if bigfoot does exist" then offering my opinion on the subject at hand. I don't believe I have ever had a "true believer" jump me for saying that. But then, I am open to the idea. If I had made up my mind that Bigfoot can't possibly be real, I wouldn't waste my time on the subject.

 

The problem seems to lie with those who are decided on both sides of the issue. If for whatever reason you are certain Bigfoot does exist, that is fine, but you have to understand many of us aren't and we question to help us determine what we personally feel is valid or not.

 

Those who are convinced that Bigfoot does not exist in turn needs to realize those of us on the fence want to discuss certain topics without them devolving into an existence/non-existence war. Sometimes the existence/non-existence discussion has to be a part of the conversation, that's understandable; but it seems that whenever it is brought up from either side, the other side feels the need to interject. And while there is nothing wrong with offering a different opinion, that's what this is all about, those discussions seldom pertain to the subject at hand but instead take us off the rails into the existence/non-existence war.

 

For those folks on both sides of that war, you should start a thread on that subject alone to fight it out. Keep it out of threads unless it pertains directly to the subject at hand please. Leave the other threads for honest discussion. The rest of us would greatly appreciate it.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Rockape

[BobbyO]

 

And let me say this-  If you are an individual who believes that Bigfoot does not and cannot exist, you log on for the sole purpose of reading the content and mocking the membership here and elsewhere....I can tell you that there is a growing intolerance to that mindset on this forum.

Boom !!

The boss nails it...

[beerhunter]

And let me say this-  If you are an individual who believes that Bigfoot does not and cannot exist, you log on for the sole purpose of reading the content and mocking the membership here and elsewhere....I can tell you that there is a growing intolerance to that mindset on this forum. 

The atmosphere has become such that fence sitters and folks who search for the truth are scoffed at as much as the knowers,. Newbies most likely won't join the forum to discuss as the BF subject has evolved into "crackpot theories" and proponents are label as delusional - as some are allowed to clearly assert here.

[masterbarber]

Send suggestions to your steering committee representatives.

[chelefoot]

And while we are on the subject (sort of)... We need moderators. If you would like to be considered, please PM an admin.  

[Bodhi]

 

I'm not sure whether the opponent positioning and it's input has any material effect on the matter.  It may ruffle feathers and it might make some uncomfortable but has it ever stopped anyone from pursuing the issue?

I agree, other than some members being offended and leaving on their own, the answer is no. Yet you are trying to weasel out of the real issue, which is that it has stopped members from participating in the BFF, thus injuring it.

 

The bigfoot question is not unlike the old argument of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

So is string "theory", the difference is that dorky fantasies are labeled scientific, when in fact they are not.

 

As far as I know nobody has ever collect a feather from the wing of and angel so there isn't any hard proof.  It seems to be about the same situation for bigfoot belief.

Nobody has ever solved string theory equations either, much less even proposed a way to confirm the theory experimentally, so it's all just belief, just like BF.

The question we are asking here is whether trollish behavior like the one you excibit here, should be tolerated. I think more aggressive moderation is in order.

 

I see this as intimidation. It's a problem.

I have not been here very long but have discovered that skeptics are treated like blasphemers even by members of the steering committee.

 

 

excuse my temerity by asking for "plausible" explanations instead of crackpot theories

^^^ This. This times a thousand.

[Guest Crowlogic]

A tipping point has been reached.  It's been brewing for a while and more than one bigfoot related enterprise has commented on the dry spell of new credible activity.   The problem is if the subject at hand is real those significant events  happen without a timescale or predictability.  A bigger problem is that the issue cannot afford any more mega frauds.  No more bigfoot in the freezer or Todd Standings.  Yet they generate  tremendous interest and breathe welcomed life into the system at least until the game is found out.  It's kind of like the old straighten up an fly right routine.   The big question is can it?

 

Yes I'm a skeptic but as Norse said about predictability it's possible to predict which way I'll go.  To understand the skeptical position that might tilt in favor of bigfoot is the occurrence of something that defies a predicted outcome.   There haven't been too many challenges like that of late.