Should Bigfootery Have An Ethics Board

[hiflier]

*sputter* *gasp* *choke* (and one of those special moments). ANYONE would only be effective if supported and has access to information and also has the resources available to vet that information. But thanks anyway. By the time anything like this would be up and running I'd probably be long pushing up daisies. This of course is only a fact finding mission to test the waters for a general yay or nay posture in the community.

 

Evaluating data is only one side of the coin. The ethical side is the other. The former is relatively straight forward. The latter is a nightmare. I dare say any inclination to pull this off will quickly disappear when the "B" side comes to this table. It won't be pretty.

Edited May 4, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest DWA]

Hmmm ... point was lost.  Let me try asking a different way.    In what way have the attempts to behave unethically harmed any bigfoots?   How many have been killed by pro-kill groups' deliberate efforts?  How many are in cages?   How many are subject to devious biological experiments?   Total of ... none ... right?

 

Beyond those, there are no other issues of ethics, only issues of reputation whether personal or of the community.   Prioritizing saving face is the antithesis of ethical behavior.  

 

Do right ... and let the chips fall where they may.   It's really very simple .. until you start rationalizing doing wrong things for self-serving reasons.

 

From a practical standpoint, what is a board of ethics going to do, come take my audio recorder because I won't publish my recording?   Confiscate my trail cam because I don't share the pictures?   Take Norseman's ammo?   Go to Georgia and confiscate freezers?   Be realistic ... what teeth does a board have?   And a person who actually does get proof?   What influence is that board going to have if they take it to news media and have their story aired?  

 

From here it seems a misguided feel-good effort with no value.    A dog with no teeth, just yap.   Nobody.  Cares.   Remember Blazing Saddles?  "We don't need no steeenking badges."    That's the real world situation.   There's no point in pretending otherwise.  

 

Go do what you're going to do.  Go not do what you're not going to do.   Let your personal conscience be your guide.  I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to be realistic.

 

MIB

This.

 

Too many are trying to put way too many straws on this camel.

 

The fallacy is the setting up of This Whole Structure Of You Right You Ain't...when no one even demonstrably knows what's up.

 

Why erect a superstructure over nothing?  Go find the animal if you are so inclined.  All the info you will need is in front of you.  Just ask NAWAC.  Just ask The Oly Project.

 

(No.  They need to prove zero to you.  They've *seen* them, and don't care who thinks what about that.)

[hiflier]

Oh yes, let's not rock the boat. Safer to keep everything just as it is and listen to your grumbling about science falling down instead. Easier to rail against something that will not give you the time of day. Safer.....much safer. Better to keep one's head down and work on diffusing and undermining efforts to correct the situation. yep. Just keep hammering away that the status quo is just fine the way it is and belittle anything attempting to make things better. Steady that boat at all costs. No progress on the Sasquatch front? Then all is well according to DWA. Steady as she goes.....and full speed...to nowhere.

Edited May 4, 2016 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Continuing....on the matter of ethics...

Lets say hypothetically a new member comes onto the BFF claiming a Class "A" encounter. Full description with all the elements that say yes, it sure sounds like a BF. The thread is then populated by members of the community and the usual questions are asked and more details are brought out by the newbie. Somehow though it is discovered the new member had been lying about the encounter right from the start. While perusing other websites it is also discovered that the same person joined several other Forums and told the same story on each one.

What would this Forum do and what action would it then take? Would the member get a warning? Be banned and told never to come back? What would the members think and how would they react once the truth came out that the new member had fabricated the event? Would they hit the report button? Ask that the newbie get a warning? Call for the person to be banned?

In the "real" world of the Forum would there be any repercussions at all for such behavior? If not might it then open the door further for hoaxing members and staff? If no action is taken would members lose any respect they may have had for the Mods and Admins? If action is taken how severe might it likely be? Remember, this is a hypothetical.

Edited May 5, 2016 by hiflier

[ShadowBorn]

Define ethical ? That would be my problem, how would one go about ethical if science needs a body. But once one knows you are out to kill one , there is a human side to it. This is the ethical side that people may see wrong, why? cause DNA says that it has Human in it. Would it be considered murder if attacked  or provoked  and you enforced lethal force? So define ethical? How far can us Humans go? or should it be kept in the shadows only to be opened at a later date? Is it a crimminal act? and are we not acting as a board of ethics now? if we ask for the truth? again define ethical? The way I see it is that discisions are made at the time of discovery. Rather it be a good HD camera but others say that this is not good enough so where are the ethics there.

 

Should this be how the board handle this if agreed upon by all the organizations and not to mention the individuals who are in the field looking for this creature now.Is it feasable and managable that it will hold up to scrutiny from all entities, a nuetral board. A Board that can set up individuals in search for the truth who are experienced and selected.

 

Selected individuals like men in black testing the field using science, to get to the truth. Now this is just my opinion . Good idea , needs work and people to come on board with it for it to work.

[Guest DWA]

Sure, wanna listen to me, why not.  Don't follow leaders, watch yer parking meters, is what I prefer.

 

Don't you see what a bigfoot ethics board would look like?  THIS SITE IS IT.  Oh.  It isn't?  Who are you proposing makes all these rules no one needs?

 

There's nothing at all about this that will advance the objective.  Sitting around waiting for The Next Video To Debunk is quite the way to go, eh?  What has that gotten us?  What will this get us?

 

No one can tell me that.  Huh.

[hiflier]

@ Shadowborn- Not that kind of ethics. The kind of ethics I described in post #34.

@ DWA- Leaders...? Rules...? Sitting around Waiting...? Whatever are you talking about?

Read post #34. and give me an opinion about something that you may understand for a change.
My guess? You'll side-step the whole thing or at least put your usual extreme spin on itjust to make it look bad. Just like you always do.

Edited May 5, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest DWA]

OK, so you haven't seen Footers In 'Authority' for more than enough decades now to see where this is headed.  'kay then!

[hiflier]

Thanks for you typical non-answer. Care to try again? Post #34

[gigantor]

Hiflier,

 

Have you looked at the MUFON Science Review Board?

 

While I'm not a UFO proponent, their model seems to be successful in a community very similar to ours. You may want to study it to see how they did it and borrow some of their ideas / formats.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Perhaps a nice demonstration of track hoaxing and hoax track identification would add some ethics to the conferences.  Since London and Elbe can't be waved about as genuine anymore maybe a good demonstration on what to look for would help.  Same with costume tell tale signs.  

[hiflier]

MUFON is tainted. I wouldn't trust Jan Harzan, the Director, as far as I could throw him. Too  much history with Robert T. Bigelow and his Black Triangles/ Skinwalker Ranch stuff. RTB is now tied in with contracts with NASA and was the FAA's choice a while back for pilots and U.S. citizens to report UFO's to as the FAA was no longer going to take reports. The other big reporting center NUFORC has a director who was MUFON's head state investigator for years for Washington State. MUFON, NUFORC, NASA, Bigelow, and the FAA are all in bed together.

 

I look up every night and have never seen an UFO in over 50 years and yet MUFON gets hundreds of reports every month and NUFORC at least that if not more. Howzat happen?

 

But thanks anyway

Edited May 5, 2016 by hiflier

[gigantor]

Just because MUFON board members may be tainted (I don't know either way) doesn't mean you should ignore the scheme. Their model is successful.

 

I'm suggesting a similar model for your proposal, not tainted board members...

Edited May 5, 2016 by gigantor

[hiflier]

Hey Crowlogic, check out post # 34 and tell me honestly and without bias what you would do or what you would expect to have done with the hypothetical member who fabricated the encounter report. Can't seem to draw any proponents to address it.

[hiflier]

@gigantor, yes I know that's what you meant but couldn't resist the rundown on the Humans running the show. I'll check it out but this isn't my model don't forget as it's not my place to chose one but I'll look at it anyway. Kinda hard to think that after all this time the BFF doesn't have one. The BFRO? Who knows. I doubt they have an ethics side to any evaluation system they may have set up. I'm not shooting from the hip on that either- I have my reasons for saying so.