The BFF V The BFRO Forums

[MikeG]

When you sign in do they try and sell you a premium membership or whatever the hell they call it?

It used to be policy to PM every member who qualifies to offer them the "benefits of membership" of the Premium section. You have to have posted 75 times, be 18 or over, and have 2 or less strikes on your disciplinary record to qualify. I have no idea what is going on over there these days.

 

[Volsquatch]

All the best members of the BFF either left, got banned, or came over here. There is no one left to have an intelligent conversation with over at the BFF about this or any other lunacy that crops up.

The BFF had been hurtling down the pipe toward the septic tank for years. It didn't do much damage when it finally arrived - all the romantic rejects that were flushed out of there years ago gave a soft landing.

I started this thread there back in 2010(when I was still under the silly assumption that there was hope for that forum, and yes I have many threads and responses saved to my PC for future reference and I don't have to pay to go read them):

quote name='Volsquatch' 2/4/10
From another thread(so this is not immediately considered a derail and automatically shelved):

quote name='Blackdog' date='Jan 26 2010, 10:57 PM' post='577746']
I can assure you Tim, this isn't the "old BFF". :
/quote

After doing a lot of catching up here by reading over the forum and some closed threads(I've been away a lot lately and haven't had an internet connection to visit here very often), I can assure you that I can and will agree with you, wholeheartedly.

I've had a lot of time to think while I've been away on long drives, and I've come to realize that you(among a select few others) are one of those people whom I could truly consider a lifelong friend. Through thick and thin, from argument to agreement and any misunderstandings in between, we've always managed to keep that one very important thing in common - common sense and a sense of decency toward it. Many of those with that trait have left the building, and I can respect(and totally understand) that decision. Those rare, lone sentinels who've chosen to stay here and try to fight the tide also have my respect....but from everything I've read, I'm convinced their efforts have become a losing battle.

From another, very important thread which has been allowed to fall by the wayside:

quote name='Paul1968UK' date='Oct 29 2009, 01:45 PM' post='565604'
....

Having said that, I truly believe BFFs days are numbered - there will come a day when the only people posting here are those who haven't sided with one group or another - when that happens, by default BFF itself becomes one of these 'groups', and when that happens, we will simply turn out the lights and close the doors. In addition, forums now 'compete' with social networking sites like Facebook, where I and many of my bigfoot contacts do the 'socialising' that we once did here.

It is a natural rise and fall - it happens to every popular forum on the Internet. BFF is no different.
/quote

Without some sort of major overhaul, including a change in name, and a different set of guidelines initiated, I think the time may have come to "turn out the lights and close the doors".

Once, a very wise and insightful person here told me that he was proud of me for being able to "grow with the forum", and for my realization that things change over the course of time...but we both agreed that one thing MUST stay the same, and that is common sense and a strong defense against romanticism and the spreading of ********.

I fear that those whom may have once held the temerity to flip the switch to the "Off" position(or to make the strong and necessary changes to reflect reality) have either left altogether simply given up, and those that do remain may have "grown with the forum" a little *too* much, and have become a part of the fabric of the very entity of which it has been allowed to become.

From what I've seen in some of the more recent threads, apparently, the BFF's have, for the most part, become nothing but an internet chat room surrogate for those who refuse to grow up and realize that playtime is over. That is not the case in every thread, but the balance weighs heavily towards it. In the old days, we had our times of fun with various threads, but there was still a heavy air of seriousness leveled toward this subject, and any seedlings of bull **** or romanticism were quickly nipped and not allowed to flourish. Where did the seriousness of this issue go off to? I can assure you that it's not here, not at this place, not now. Granted, this started a long time ago, and one of the main catalyst was the forceful placing of taboo on the apt and definitely fitting term of "Romanticism".

If this forum is allowed to remain open, it would probably be a good idea to rename it something along the lines of "The Forums Loosely Surrounding the Subject of Bigfoot", and possibly revamp the subtitle into something like "The web's most popular one stop shop for sasquatch talk, but mostly because anything goes as long as no one is offended in the process". I mean, it still reads, in part, the antiquated and long-time-unfunny quip of "genuine, non-frozen, not a suit in a freezer" for heaven sake, and the person who interjected that part was the forum founder, who has resigned his position as Chief Administrator, dropped any power position he once had, and is now, apparently, not even a participant here any longer(I hope I'm not the only one who can see this blatant incongruousness). Now, even his successor, Paul1968UK has resigned his position as "Chief Administrator". In my opinion, these events(coupled with the current forum atmosphere) serve as strong indicators of some deep-rooted problems.

From what I've read, on this forum, the subject of "Bigfoot" has truly been allowed to slip into the realm of fantasy and self-indulgence. That was *not* the original purpose or goal, although I think that ship may have sailed a long time ago.

Will my opinions here be allowed to stay in the open? Will they be hidden from public view and a stern PM sent my way because I said something out of line? Will my thoughts on this matter be belittled and shrugged off? Or, will a civil, level-headed discussion be held regarding this issue(which is my hope). Given the current state of affairs, it will be interesting to see how this is handled.

Something definitely needs to be done, but what? Or, is it truly too late to save this place?

As always, JMHO.

I was immediately raked thoroughly across the coals for daring to point anything like this out. How dare I interject something like THAT into a forum that had "evolved" to such a hallowed and sheltered place of "higher education" concerning all things Bigfoot.

This thread brought fit after fit of red-faced, panty-knotting, gut-busting hissy fits from all the dreamy-eyed lovers of the "Big Fuzzy" who were "offended" by such utter nonsense. The high pitched wails and accusations of "troublemaker" could be heard echoing all across bigfootdom, along with shrill screams to the effect of "you dinosaurs go start your own forum!". The call to arms was in full swing against the dirty heretic who dared start such a thread on the "new and improved" BFF - secret meetings were held and torches were lit in preparation to drive-out the common sense ASAP.

My response, a few days later:

quote name='Volsquatch' 2/12/10
I've been checking in and reading when I can, using my cell(I've been away from a computer for a while, I can't make an actual post on the forum from my cell for some reason).

I started this this thread because *I*(among others, thankfully) actually care about this forum and the keeping the entire field in general in a state of reality and not fantasy. I did *not* start this thread to "cause trouble" or get any sophomoric "***** and grins" whatsoever(although, admittedly, I sure have raised an eyebrow of surprise once or twice).

Just after I started this thread, a very concerned Admin asked me a serious question in PM, it was to exactly which of the guidelines I'd change, or what I'd add to them. To them, I say thank you, seriously. I actually took almost every free moment I could spare to work on that. I actually sit down and reviewed the entire set of guidelines, writing down and making changes and deleting those which I felt had become useless and out of date. I made notes as to my reasons on every change and every addition. That did *not* take just a few minutes, let me tell you, especially reading from the viewscreen of a damn cell phone.

If that's considered(by some) as me coming here simply to "stir the ****" or cause trouble, then excuse the hell out of me for taking time out of my life to actually devote to what I'd personally consider the bettering of this forum.

The lone concerned Admin notwithstanding, I have now came to the stark realization that I've wasted a whole lot of time on something that probably will never be considered or even fully appreciated by the entire staff.

quote name='Redwolf' date='Feb 5 2010, 11:22 PM' post='579325']
I did a lot thinking today and I realized that there is no way to bring back the old days. It's impossible given all the changes that have occurred in this field and in our individual lives.
/quote

I've done a lot of thinking myself, Red. I completely agree with your above assessment. There really is no way to bring back the "old days", or any real semblance of what many of us here can agree upon was the "way it was".

So, are we now to be given the ultimatum of either asking questions to those who will never understand why you're asking them, putting up with their tantrums(and the protection thereof) because they're feeling "persecuted" for simply being asked a question, or getting the hell out and starting our own forum? Would someone please explain to me why it is that those who would be coddled and sheltered because they might feel some tinge of "persecution" for even being asked a question are now being held in higher regard than those of us who fought like hell to keep the truth in and the bull **** out of this place? Go start our own forum? Not no, but hell no! WHY should we have to do that? Others HAVE done that, yes they have. These are people with good heads on their shoulders and a low tolerance for BS. Even after they started their new forum, they used to come here sporadically, but apparently they've now left this place altogether. That is a tragedy, and just another casualty stemming from this "new way" of doing things. I used to have some problems with their decision in that regard. Hell, I used to have problems with them too if you get right down to it. That was ALL due to misunderstandings that had been left too long to fester. Thankfully now, after many phone conversations and a better understanding of where we *all* were coming from, I can say that I call them true friends and would trust my life with them in the field. But, sadly, on the other hand, I can now honestly say that I'm pretty sure I understand why they felt they had to leave this place.

quote name='GuyInIndiana' date='Feb 6 2010, 08:47 PM' post='579476'
I don't think anyone would rationally disagree with you there Robert. The problem seems to stem from people being questioned about something they stated or claimed, and because some people come to the forum (any forum for that matter) wearing their defensiveness on their sleeves, they take ANYthing said to them as though "them's fightin' words".

Yes, there's always good, better and best ways to ask something or to make a comment, but just because someone is questioned doesn't mean they're being insulted. Some people just love to be the victim.
/quote

Completely agreed. 110%

quote name='Blackdog' date='Feb 10 2010, 12:03 AM' post='580013'
You guys have fun with the stories, but my prediction for 2010,11,12, etc... is that every time someone says that they have something, they will conveniently have nothing of substance to back it up and when challenged they will disappear. (Where the heck is Rick Noll anyway?)
That's the history of bigfoot and as far as I can tell that's the future.
Wake me up when there is something substantial.

Signed,
A proud Oldtimer, a proud Meaniehaed, and a guy who used to have fun with the subject.
/quote

They(or their fantasies) will *not*(nor never) disappear if they're coddled and made to feel right at home.

This is why simply "asking questions" here is definitely not the solution, not anymore.

Do I have a solution? No. Not now. Why? Because my suggestions would now be useless.

I'll also sign off as another "proud Oldtimer, a proud Meaniehead, and a guy who used to have fun with the subject".

There may come a time, in the future(and I hope like hell this happens), when I'll again feel comfortable posting and contributing to this forum. I really hope that day comes....but if I am to be banned for starting this thread, or making this reply, for simply stating how I feel, then I guess I'll just lumber off to the tar pit and wait on my like-minded brethren to eventually join me.

If I remember correctly(I'm not a member there now, I'm permanently suspended because I refused to give up my old account), the thread was shut down soon after.

I hope Bipto(the original founder of the BFF) is proud of what his creation has become, and what has become of all of our old postings that many of us old-timers fought so hard to protect. He once tearfully pronounced that the "forum doesn't really belong to him anymore, but to us, obviously.", proud in the fact that he had so many level headed critical thinkers on board. This was when he was a fan of applying some necessary skepticism toward the subject. My, how times have changed.

 

[Jodie]

Thank you Volsquatch, that was enlightening. I think the BFF was always that way from its inception. This type of propoganda has gone on for years over a creature that doesn't exist.....how do you place reality standards on something that can't be found?

You can't make something scientific, or "more real" if it can't be proven, the closest you can get with that is a form of psuedoscience. It is irrelevant whether you promote the romanticism or the pseudoscience stance of the subject, and has been for the last 48 years. It all remains faith based.

No matter the outlook it seems to be related to a particular mind set that attracts footers, whether they participate at the BFF, or not. I believe hoaxers have picked up on this tendency and have exploited it, therefore anyone voicing descent over the staus quo is looked on as being "undesirable". Let the lunatic fringe have the place.

http://http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Psychology-of-Conserva-by-Joe-Parko-120622-336.html

 

[RedRatSnake]

Quote:
quote name='Blackdog' date='Jan 26 2010, 10:57 PM' post='577746']
I can assure you Tim, this isn't the "old BFF". :
/quote
After doing a lot of catching up here by reading over the forum and some closed threads(I've been away a lot lately and haven't had an internet connection to visit here very often), I can assure you that I can and will agree with you, wholeheartedly.

I am confused on this post ~ Why is it you used a quote from BD to me?

Tim

 

[OntarioSquatch]

That was a fascinating read Volsquatch. I've noticed the Bigfoot romantics as well and I can see that it takes its toll on the subject. It's actually one of the reasons I come to the JREF.

 

[Jodie]

OS do you sometimes feel like a square peg trying to fit into a round hole?

Right now, I think you are the only proponent that posts over here on a regular basis. I can see the attraction though, it saves time to come here to get to the point of the matter rather than wading through pages of the same story there.

 

[GT/CS]

And the folks here are a lot smarter, have more common sense, and are probably better looking!

 

[Jodie]

I don't know about the better looking part because Bart Cutino would vbe hard to beat in the looks department.

 

[RedRatSnake]

By himself in a pair of hiking shorts with a few days beard he ain't a bad looking guy, but standing next to footers with a goofy look on his face he don't do much for me,

Tim ~ lol

 

[Jodie]

The man is pretty in every picture I've ever seen of him. I also think Dr. Meldrum is good looking too but in a different way.

 

[RedRatSnake]

"O" Jezz what did I get myself into, time to go open up a Swank Mag and forget this reputation damaging episode away ~

Tim ~ hahahaha

 

[River]

I'm pretty on the inside! My guts rule.

 

[Jodie]

Nope River, you are pretty on the outside too, well at least your abs are anyway.

 

[StankApe]

jeeeeeeez , get a room eh?

 

[Jodie]

Stank Ape, unfortunately, I equate him with his avatar, but he makes up for it in humor.

 

[RedRatSnake]

He is a footer, he believes in the monkey and the cult, he also is heavily involved with promoting the lie, just another loser in my book no matter what he looks like.

Tim ~

 

[OntarioSquatch]

Bart is an honest man and also seems to be good guy. I don't like it when people are looked down upon just because they are a footer. It's not right.

 

[StankApe]

Bart is an honest man and also seems to be good guy. I don't like it when people are looked down upon just because they are a footer. It's not right.

(just to kill the thread)

I'm sure Josef Goebbels was a heck of a nice fellow! But unfortunately , you get judged by your, you know, deeds and words in this society.

 

[RedRatSnake]

Bart is an honest man and also seems to be good guy. I don't like it when people are looked down upon just because they are a footer. It's not right.

Do you know him personally, do you hang with him and know his friends, do you live near him and see what kind of life style he has, etc ~ ?

Turned that queer guy talk around quick huh! ~ lol

Tim ?

 

[Resume]

Bart is an honest man and also seems to be good guy. I don't like it when people are looked down upon just because they are a footer. It's not right.

See, ask most people who know me and they'll tell you I'm . . . Okay, that's a bad example.