• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

BLAARGing

Status
Not open for further replies.
As somebody who's into Civil War civilian reenacting in a fairly serious way (storyline continues 36+ hours, no breaking character, no hidden modern stuff), and who's married to a Christian theist, I can see something like BLAARGing as a combination of the two.

The Civil War reenacting is, absolutely no doubt, pretend. No one thinks it's real; it's purely acting. But one can suspend disbelief while it's going on, like getting caught up in watching a movie or playing a video game, only it's live, interactive, open-ended, all-sensory, physically challenging, and therefore even more thoroughly engaging. You can't glance around and see the rest of the theater or the couch or take a break; it's always there, for the pre-agreed time. There are only a handful of events like this a year in the nation and even some of the participants blow it off and sneak in modern breaks, but some don't, and among those, at the "best" events, it's great.

Okay, but that's not like BLAARGing, because the emotional fun aspect is there, but when it's over, nobody believes it was real.

So then there's religion. Religion seems a kind of BLAARGing, because there's no stepping back when it's over; it's supposed to permeate all of life all the time and be "real." And most of the time, dedicated Christians (or other theists) act seamlessly, as if it is real, and claim it's real.

But when push comes to shove, they have bigfoot-like ways to justify the obvious unreality: "God answers all prayers but sometimes the answer is no," "God works in mysterious ways," "God has a plan and we just have to trust in it, even though we can't understand it."

The excuses sound similar to responses to the hard questions of why bigfoot doesn't leave tracks or DNA samples in areas where he's widespread, why he can't be found in hunted-over areas, etc. It's a way to keep the game going, that anyone not invested in the game would see as obvious excuses, but those emotionally invested in the game see justifying the game as the highest priority.

So you combine the fun of going out in the woods and pretending to find clues to bigfoot, with the emotional reward of keeping the game going by talking about it and, on some level, actually believing it's real in between, yet apparently deep down knowing it's not real and therefore reaching for excuses that those not emotionally invested would see as illogical far-stretched attempts at explanations.

I dunno. I don't fully grasp the psychological whys and wherefores, but the parallel to theism and the behavior of some theists just seems to fall in the same category, that's hard to define, but...
 
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
Thanks for understanding. Are you another footer-hating denialist?
Click to expand...
Bye OS.

ETA: BTW a little something to refresh your memory. It's from the Elbe trackway thread:

OS (talking to Tontar who has been accused by some footers to have made the tracks): "At this point I don't think it's necessary to get a confession from you, but it would be nice if "footers" got an apology"

RRS: "Why?"

OS: "Whether you believe Sasquatch exists or not, the fact is he fooled them and is denying it."

Castro: "Are you one of "them"?"

OS: "Yes"

Castro: "OS, I don't mean to be rude or sententious but who told that the tracks were the "real deal"
and who told they were faked and why did you choose to believe those who claimed they were real?
You did make a choice, didn't you? Nobody but you is responsible for your choice IMO."


OS: "I think I know what you mean and you're right. I should use "me" instead of "them" "
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
The BLAARGing meme sucks. At first it seemed like a joke, but now it's turned into something else. It's done nothing but impair people's understanding of the individuals who research and discuss this phenomenon. Maybe that's the whole point of it though; a blurry definition used as a solution for the lack of understanding of what's really happening. This is far from critical thinking.
Click to expand...

Who's ability to understand the "researchers" of the Bigfoot phenomenon is being impaired?
I'm pretty confident it's no one on this forum.
Please demonstrate where this term is having such impact on the perception of Bigfeet "researchers" outside this forum or in this fourm for that matter.

Que up the tears......
[IMGW=480]http://i796.photobucket.com/albums/yy242/RCM944/21F052ED-82EB-4566-8B54-AA059B9EED57.jpg[/IMGW]

Edited by Agatha: 
edited to shrink picture size. Please use the thumbnail link from photobucket if your picture is likely to stretch the page, or use [IMGW=value] tags.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Castro said:
Bye OS.

ETA: BTW a little something to refresh your memory. It's from the Elbe trackway thread:
Click to expand...

Why not use something more recent to discredit my thinking skills? I didn't even remember that one. Looking back, it seems ridiculous now. Though I still think Bigfoot is real, my view of things has changed a little since then.

BLAARGing/hoaxing does damage bigfootery, much like how lying damages things in life in general, but I've noticed that people can't tell the difference between a role player and an actual believer; a con-man and a gullible religious proponent with a PhD. Things like blobsquatches, claims of video taken at 15 feet and withholding evidence are sure signs of role playing. If someone had video of Bigfoot, I can guarantee they would upload it to YT within hours just to prove the people here wrong. Role players are basically attention-seekers IMO, but proponents aren't the only ones who chase their carrots

MEoBssI.jpg
 
OntarioSquatch said:
Why not use something more recent to discredit my thinking skills? I didn't even remember that one. Looking back, it seems ridiculous now. Though I still think Bigfoot is real, my view of things has changed a little since then.

BLAARGing/hoaxing does damage bigfootery, much like how lying damages things in life in general, but I've noticed that people can't tell the difference between a role player and an actual believer; a con-man and a gullible religious proponent with a PhD. Things like blobsquatches, claims of video taken at 15 feet and withholding evidence are sure signs of role playing. If someone had video of Bigfoot, I can guarantee they would upload it to YT within hours just to prove the people here wrong. Role players are basically attention-seekers IMO, but proponents aren't the only ones who chase their carrots

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/MEoBssI.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

How is what your doing not attention seeking?
You know exactly what the response to your position is going to be here. You have nothing to back up your claim and are constanly posting inflammatory over-dramatic statements ungrounded in reality.
Sounds like an attention-whore to me ;)
 
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
Why not use something more recent to discredit my thinking skills? I didn't even remember that one. Looking back, it seems ridiculous now. Though I still think Bigfoot is real, my view of things has changed a little since then.

BLAARGing/hoaxing does damage bigfootery, much like how lying damages things in life in general, but I've noticed that people can't tell the difference between a role player and an actual believer; a con-man and a gullible religious proponent with a PhD. Things like blobsquatches, claims of video taken at 15 feet and withholding evidence are sure signs of role playing. If someone had video of Bigfoot, I can guarantee they would upload it to YT within hours just to prove the people here wrong. Role players are basically attention-seekers IMO, but proponents aren't the only ones who chase their carrots

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/MEoBssI.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...
What I see is that you used your selective memory to help your point. It doesn't help your credibility to say the least.
 
Pup said:
So you combine the fun of going out in the woods
Click to expand...

I think it important we note that the most distinctive feature about bigfoot gamers is that they rarely, if ever, get out in the woods.

First, by what standard should we judge this con-job? The top level bigfoot "field researchers" need to be judged not by comparison to residents of apartments in NYC who never get outside the concrete jungle, but by people who actually do field research, who work in the forests, or who are avid and experienced outdoorsmen.

We have one here who has, to my recollection, gone out once a year on highly touted "expeditions" that are nothing more than car camping. Another testified to having taken his first trip recently since last spring, in explanation for how wiped out he was hiking on a groomed trail mothers take their baby strollers on.

The group that appears to be making the most noise about field research is the Area X buffoons. You have the founder of the Bigfoot Forum heavily involved in this, and they are committing tax fraud by writing off their vacation expenses as "charitable contributions" for what they claim is habitat preservation. The donations they receive and use for funding themselves would also be taxable income were it not for this tax fraud scheme. But they spend very little time in Area X.

I've flown into research sites like the Toolik Lake facility up here, where the field researchers were spending months on site. Not a week-end camping trip, but MONTHS. I was pretty amazed at the level of accommodations and food service on the North slope of the Brooks Range. Holy cow.

Here is the Organization of Biological Field Stations for a comparison to what real-world field stations are like in contrast to Area X:

http://www.obfs.org/

These stations vary from a few acres to thousands, but immediately you can see how they differ from the gamers. The station locations are public. There are internships, fellowships, classes, sponsored research, etc. ongoing more or less continuously instead of rare, short, secret trips to a hunting cabin.

It becomes obvious how little the gamers do in contrast to how much legitimate field researchers do, and instead the gamers are doing a lot more talking about it. The BFF, the websites, radio shows, etc.

The most famous of all due to the television show was the Bigfoot Field Research Organization that merely collected stories from other people. That is not field research. The full extent of their research was to telephone people who submitted bigfoot sightings.

Once you have gained that notoriety as a "field research" organization then you have to prove up on it with some kind of handwaving about actually being in the woods. So they did drive to places, camp for a very short time, and pretend. The TV shows are now the so-called field research.

This is the very top level. Doing near zero by comparison to bona-fide field researchers.

The garden variety gamers are the ones consuming their propaganda. Their field research is watching episodes of Finding Bigfoot. Participating in forums. Reading bigfoot books.

A recent innovaton for the top guys scamming money is their paid "expeditions" to public parks, arranged in off-season times so that they don't have so many picnickers, hikers, and Frisbee golf players around them. Those types of activities do fit the model of combining enjoyment of the woods with the game itself, but this is such a tiny (and new) aspect of the bigfoot game constellation that it misses the main thrust of it:

Pretending from your living room.
 
Checkmite said:
You are describing "LARPing"...

<snipping for brevity>
Click to expand...

Alternate reality gaming is a moving target for defining, and there is no agreed-upon standard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_reality_game

The one central tenet that we observed about it was the denial it is a game.

The bigfoot game is certainly an alternate reality, and they deny it is a game, it involves live action (rarely), meaning getting out in the woods, so we have adopted the acronym that includes all of these aspects. That doesn't mean it is settled, but I think the bigfoot game is important for showing the diversity of alternate reality games in general.

The bigfoot game does not have a puppet master nor a defined time frame, which gives it an enormous advantage over other alternate reality games. Those aspects of other alternate reality games limit their popularity.

This is one that anyone can play at anytime, even alone in their home, yet enjoy the comfort of knowing millions of others are playing the game too. You can play the game with a non-believer over coffee at work. You can play it against skeptics on this forum.

So these are advantages over other alternate reality games and what we have to do is expand our understanding of alternate reality games by seeing BLAARGing as an example of it rather than saying BLAARGing has to be exactly like some of the others.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Alternate reality gaming is a moving target for defining, and there is no agreed-upon standard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_reality_game

The one central tenet that we observed about it was the denial it is a game.

The bigfoot game is certainly an alternate reality, and they deny it is a game, it involves live action (rarely), meaning getting out in the woods, so we have adopted the acronym that includes all of these aspects. That doesn't mean it is settled, but I think the bigfoot game is important for showing the diversity of alternate reality games in general.

The bigfoot game does not have a puppet master nor a defined time frame, which gives it an enormous advantage over other alternate reality games. Those aspects of other alternate reality games limit their popularity.

This is one that anyone can play at anytime, even alone in their home, yet enjoy the comfort of knowing millions of others are playing the game too. You can play the game with a non-believer over coffee at work. You can play it against skeptics on this forum.

So these are advantages over other alternate reality games and what we have to do is expand our understanding of alternate reality games by seeing BLAARGing as an example of it rather than saying BLAARGing has to be exactly like some of the others.
Click to expand...

Millions??? Try hundreds.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Alternate reality gaming is a moving target for defining, and there is no agreed-upon standard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_reality_game

The one central tenet that we observed about it was the denial it is a game.
Click to expand...

Which is a misunderstanding of what you actually read.

The "denial it is a game" aspect of ARG's is on the part of the individual game's creator (or creative team). The in-game puzzles, clues, and communications they create are designed to look like they weren't made specifically for the purposes of a game. A website for an "evil corporation" that is the primary antagonist in the game, for example, will look exactly like a legit website for a "real" corporation. NPCs created for the purpose of the story, interact with each other as if they really are spies, or corporate agents, or whatnot. They will provide game information without acknowledging that it is game information. The players recognize the clues because they know what to look for; but there's nothing on website itself that will explicitly say "this is a fictional website for a game". Players themselves do not "deny it is a game"; in fact they collaborate on websites that are by-name dedicated to alternative reality games. One such forum I belong to even has a rule, prohibiting puppet masters or other game agents from posting on the forum "in-character" as NPCs from a game. In ARG etiquette, players themselves "roleplaying" some kind of "character" in the game-space is verboten and is usually perceived as an attempted game-jacking.

The lack of a puppet master you mention somehow gives the bigfoot fantasy an "advantage" over "other alternative reality games" is in fact one aspect (among others) that positively demonstrates the bigfoot fantasy isn't an ARG. An ARG is a directed event consisting of a story that is designed and facilitated by one person or group of people, which is "played" by another. The story has a beginning, a middle, and an end, like any plot.

An open-ended "let's pretend there's a bigfoot and we're going to do bigfooty things" fantasy is not a "game", in the same sense as an ARG. It has no structure, no written plot, no win condition, and no definite end. It is simply LARPing - like, as has been mentioned before, a Renaissance Fair where people participate in an open-ended "let's pretend we're medieval knights and we're going to do knighty things". In order for bigfootery to constitute an ARG, there has to be a definite plot, written by a specific person or creative team, for the benefit of players (as distinct from the creative team), with a definite resolution that the players work towards.
 
Last edited:
Checkmite said:
Which is a misunderstanding of what you actually read.

The "denial it is a game" aspect of ARG's is on the part of the individual game's creator (or creative team). The in-game puzzles, clues, and communications they create are designed to look like they weren't made specifically for the purposes of a game. A website for an "evil corporation" that is the primary antagonist in the game, for example, will look exactly like a legit website for a "real" corporation. NPCs created for the purpose of the story, interact with each other as if they really are spies, or corporate agents, or whatnot. They will provide game information without acknowledging that it is game information. The players recognize the clues because they know what to look for; but there's nothing on website itself that will explicitly say "this is a fictional website for a game". Players themselves do not "deny it is a game"; in fact they collaborate on websites that are by-name dedicated to alternative reality games. One such forum I belong to even has a rule, prohibiting puppet masters or other game agents from posting on the forum "in-character" as NPCs from a game. In ARG etiquette, players themselves "roleplaying" some kind of "character" in the game-space is verboten and is usually perceived as an attempted game-jacking.

The lack of a puppet master you mention somehow gives the bigfoot fantasy an "advantage" over "other alternative reality games" is in fact one aspect (among others) that positively demonstrates the bigfoot fantasy isn't an ARG. An ARG is a directed event consisting of a story that is designed and facilitated by one person or group of people, which is "played" by another. The story has a beginning, a middle, and an end, like any plot.

An open-ended "let's pretend there's a bigfoot and we're going to do bigfooty things" fantasy is not a "game", in the same sense as an ARG. It has no structure, no written plot, no win condition, and no definite end. It is simply LARPing - like, as has been mentioned before, a Renaissance Fair where people participate in an open-ended "let's pretend we're medieval knights and we're going to do knighty things". In order for bigfootery to constitute an ARG, there has to be a definite plot, written by a specific person or creative team, for the benefit of players (as distinct from the creative team), with a definite resolution that the players work towards.
Click to expand...


Sounds like you're ARGing.

Anyone for pictionary?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom