Expedition Bigfoot :Travel Channel

[bipedalist]

36 minutes ago, NatFoot said:

 

I'm guessing the groups there are offline/not here?

 

Question for the leadership team here @gigantor, how do we get these folks in the fold?

 

Is it a boosted premium section, something else?

 

Well Joe Beelart of this forum, wrote a book about some of that area, Oregon's Bigfoot Highway.  Reading that goes a long way to understanding the density and history of sightings up to the current day, with great maps and everything.  He goes out and has partnered with Cliff Barackman on some expeditions commercially.  He also will take out friends into the forest. 

[MIB]

12 minutes ago, NatFoot said:

What if we did?

 

Yeah, what if we did?   

 

Realistically .. not happening.    Go back to the BFF bylaws.   This site is here to promote TALK, not facilitate research.    They are researchers, not talkers.    As long as BFF is BFF, we're not relevant to doing research, we just TALK about it.  

 

MIB

[Franco]

But yet we offer, suggestion, diagnoses, perspective and help to wanna be researchers... You know like me...lol... I think BFF evolving into a destination for researchers to share is a natural progress

[Huntster]

I think it's a better beginning point and sharing site than destination fir experienced researchers.

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, MIB said:

As long as BFF is BFF, we're not relevant to doing research, we just TALK about it.  

 

There it is, folks, so check your pin-maps and hit the woods  

[zman1967]

i have watched a lot of the mountain monsters episodes and maybe once they actually fired a weapon.  Even the Alaskan monsters show never actually discharged a weapon that I can remember.  I doubt if they are even loaded since it is all BS anyhow

 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, MIB said:

 

Yeah, what if we did?   

 

Realistically .. not happening.    Go back to the BFF bylaws.   This site is here to promote TALK, not facilitate research.    They are researchers, not talkers.    As long as BFF is BFF, we're not relevant to doing research, we just TALK about it.  

 

MIB

 

I think the researcher section and the SSR is a step in the right direction.

 

 

[SWWASAS]

36 minutes ago, Huntster said:

I think it's a better beginning point and sharing site than destination fir experienced researchers.

Agreed.      Experienced researchers are the speaker fodder of BIgfoot Conferences even though some have not had contact with BF for decades and in some cases ever.    They know how to beat their own drum and expect adulation when in most conferences I have attended there are people in the audience with more BF experience.    I think a researcher forum would be like a carnival  bumper car ride of big egos.   

[MIB]

1 hour ago, Franco said:

But yet we offer, suggestion, diagnoses, perspective and help to wanna be researchers... You know like me...lol... I think BFF evolving into a destination for researchers to share is a natural progress

 

I don't think that can go far enough without a change to the charter / bylaws.  

11 minutes ago, norseman said:

I think the researcher section and the SSR is a step in the right direction.

 

Absolutely agree, but it is "pay to play", and that keeps some people who might have something to contribute out.    We're asking them to pay us to share their data ... hmmmm.   I see a problem with that paradigm.

 

11 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

I think a researcher forum would be like a carnival  bumper car ride of big egos.   

 

It would take tight reigns / active moderating.  A step toward doing that could be to have each researcher moderate / approve all posts to their own research section rather than allowing comments from any premium member.    

 

Ultimately, they have to want to play nice, they have to want to cooperate, or they'll just take the ball we want them to share with us and go home.    If we want their participation, we have to find something they want that we can give, and we have to make it easy for them, otherwise they have better things to do with their time.     That includes enticing them to play nice with people they consider rivals.

 

MIB

 

[Huntster]

^^^^ Agreed. I have been paying attention for the activities of a formerly renowned researcher who has gone noticeably quiet. I'm not sure if he has given up the chase or has gotten disgusted with something and just gone quiet with his continued search. I'm hoping it's the latter........

[NatFoot]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

Like what?

 

Make it premium with credentials verified before posting, even for couch posters like me.

 

Make me post my name, DOB, reason for posting but behind a premium barrier. 

Edited November 26, 2019 by NatFoot

[SWWASAS]

Many of the real researchers here do not post much.   We had some that were driven out of the forum by the hard core skeptics   I don't know if others look around at times  just to see what is going on.     If they don't,    seems like they have a self imposed isolation going on.      Now and then we get  Madison/Northwind types that keep things interesting with real field work.    When major events happen to most researchers no more than once a decade,   it is nice to hear about others having success in the dry spells,. 

[gigantor]

20 minutes ago, MIB said:

It would take tight reigns / active moderating.  A step toward doing that could be to have each researcher moderate / approve all posts to their own research section rather than allowing comments from any premium member.    

 

We do have that capability. Not only that, but each researcher can make their section "invitation only", so they decide who has access.

 

20 minutes ago, MIB said:

We're asking them to pay us to share their data ... hmmmm.

 

No, we're asking them to help pay for the server and software. It's only $20/year!

[MIB]

31 minutes ago, gigantor said:

No, we're asking them to help pay for the server and software. It's only $20/year!

 

From your perspective.  Not from their perspective.   

 

MIB 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

39 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

Many of the real researchers here do not post much.   We had some that were driven out of the forum by the hard core skeptics   I don't know if others look around at times  just to see what is going on.     If they don't,    seems like they have a self imposed isolation going on.      Now and then we get  Madison/Northwind types that keep things interesting with real field work.    When major events happen to most researchers no more than once a decade,   it is nice to hear about others having success in the dry spells,. 

We do research in the Upstate South Carolina/Western North Carolina/Smokeys region.  The only other places online that I have tried to interact with other enthusiasts have been on Facebook groups.  That went over about as well as can be expected, and I learned to not put too much out there.  Healthy skeptism is good, however I am not trying to prove or sell anyone anything so I don't want to spend all of my time dealing with hostile comments.  There is a segment of the population who live to try to prove that people like us are crazy or flat out snake oil salesmen.  

 

I will say that I have been perusing the old BFF 1.0 posts that I gained access to with my premium membership, and the forum did seem much more hostile and combative back in the day.  I can see where people were ran off.  

 

I will say that trying to attract 'professional' researchers could be a double edged sword.  So many people who devote a large amount of time to the subject and maintain a web presence use that time and presence to non-stop attack other people in the field.  I know that this area of interest attracts tends to attract some less than honest people who are just looking for attention, but some of these researchers have no actual research on their sites...just page after page of who has managed to offend their sensibilities now.

Edited November 26, 2019 by BlackRockBigfoot