Calling Captainkillmore

[Smokebender]

hey smoke did cpt. klmr ever straighten out the situation with the you know who, over at the you know where

Still nothing except once again, Bossberg in yet another new thread tells a newbie to search Captiankillmore.

[nelson]

Hmmmm, why dont you give Larry a call and ask him if he tried, thats if you have his #.

[finlander]

I did a search for Capt's threads and all that came up was some trailer stories and some sketches in and around 2006. I dont understand it all cause I am new here.  Can anyone add any else in  a pm?

[Smokebender]

Hmmmm, why dont you give Larry a call and ask him if he tried, thats if you have his #.

I did call Larry and he made it clear to me that he had been banned. He was none to happy about it and had not been given any reason. I'll call him again for an update.

[Smokebender]

It's a long story. Hang in and it will become clear soon. The outcome on this will tell much about bfro.

[McCabe]

Waiting patiently...
I really want to give the BFRO the benefit of the doubt. This activity does nothing for them other than to make them look bad, and that's just more of the old distasteful politics of the BF world. Nobody needs it.
Can it really mean that much for the BFRO to dissuade activity on this forum? I mean, come on. How many of us are there here? Five? Seven? Even a dozen? How could this possibly detract from the BFRO message/philosophy? Aren't we all in this for the same reasons?
And why wouldn't CaptainKillmore want to post messages on a board that is more local? It makes plenty of sense, and it in no way means he's taking anything from the BFRO. It's only information, and sharing it doesn't take anything away from anybody.

Still waiting to see if they just made an error...and will soon fix it.

[nelson]

I'm there with ya, now I'm really curious to see how this pans out

[finlander]

I didnt even know they had been planning a tv show. I knew there was something brewing north of the border.  I think the 'R' in their title is for 'research', not regret.

[Smokebender]

Side note: This is the first line of a poster at bfro. Ater 441 posts ssm129 feels the need to say this, and I quote.

"I hope I don't get in trouble for asking this question because I certainly DON'T mean to cause any commotion.
Please don't kick me off the site for an innocent question.  ."

Talk about walking on eggshells. Sad but true.

[McCabe]

I noticed that too.

Some of that can be chalked up to an overactive imagination (her post sounded like she was afraid of strangers). But the "getting kicked off the site" part is what really got my attention.

I've also been wading through some of the old threads from 2005 on BFF...wow. Not pretty. That's when the BFRO had it's "mass exodus". Sure, there are hard feelings being expressed from those that were kicked out, which probably had a lot to do with those that left on their own. And I have no idea what the BFRO's side of the story is. But it was pretty painful just to read that stuff.
This is exactly the kind of political stuff that this field of study DOES NOT NEED, yet is so prevalent between some of the organizations.

I'm quite certain that I don't have the whole story, and I might never get to hear it. If it means sifting through another several hundred public posts, then I don't want to know. It has no bearing on my research.

In the immortal words of Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along???"

[Smokebender]

I've seen this type of thing many times on bfro. It's odd that so many are afraid to post what's on their mind.

I"d like to read some from the BFF "mass exodus" time line. Would you send me a link? I'm not sure how to find it.

I'm unable to find anything older than 2006 at bfro, but that would fit the M.O. would it not?

[McCabe]

Here's a link to a whole bunch of threads. Be prepared, they are all very long reads full of negative sentiment. Interspersed among the posts are a few in defense of the BFRO, but they (BFRO) are by no means "adequately represented" on this forum. In other words, you're not going to get their side of the story from this link. But there is plenty of available info from which to base the beginnings of an opinion. Here it is:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=13898&view=findpost&p=292016

These are accounts of those who left or were kicked out, along with a whole bunch of hard feelings. The basic gist of the sentiments seem to be philosophical differences, meaning some folks felt that profit (in the form of expedition fees) was becoming more important than the research. There are other sentiments expressed as well that pertain to the management structure and methodology. And the finger pointing is almost exclusively at the man in charge.

There is also some allusion to the degradation of report investigation and the overall change in what types of reports are getting published compared to those published previously. The focus (according to these posters) has shifted from analytical research to selling expedition spots. If this is in fact the case, then the term "philosophical differences" would seem to make sense. But again, the BFRO point of view is not seen in these threads, and I'm not sure if it is available for public view.

Make sure you've got some time, all of the threads listed in that link are long...

[finlander]

Holy cow!  I did not know all of this was going on.  I just go there to see the reports. Been doing that for several years now. It wasnt until recently that I scrolled down far enough to see the forum areas.  I still look there for reports. But now I question all that I have read.  Is MM his real name?  Anyone ever see or meet him???   I remember times when I tried to bring up the bfro site, and couldnt, they wanted 'donations' if i remember to keep the site open.  If all of this went down in 05, who's left?  New researchers for them/him might not know of all this, right, cause it has been hidden?.?  WHY would one want to become a member anyway??  If I had the time and I lived in N California and there was alot of action in my area....the next few months ought to be interesting to watch if more unfolds.  Sad, sad...

[McCabe]

Yes, it is sad.
But it does help to explain the banning of folks with an MBR tag in their signature.

However, that BFRO database of sightings is still an invaluable tool. I think I might be more skeptical about Class B sightings posted in the past few years, but the bulk of the info can't really be judged based on the recent politics, can it?

CAN IT?

Even with all of the stuff becoming apparent, I still want to give the BFRO the benefit of the doubt where the recent bannings are concerned (meaning you MBR guys). They can, at any time, reinstate all of you who were banned. It's not a perfect solution, but it is a definite gesture that says, "sorry guys, let's all play nice."



EDIT: Oops, have I been incorrectly saying "MBR" when it should be "MBG"? Dang it, sorry about that (if I'm wrong).

[Smokebender]

Here's a link to a whole bunch of threads. Be prepared, they are all very long reads full of negative sentiment. Interspersed among the posts are a few in defense of the BFRO, but they (BFRO) are by no means "adequately represented" on this forum. In other words, you're not going to get their side of the story from this link. But there is plenty of available info from which to base the beginnings of an opinion. Here it is:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=13898&view=findpost&p=292016

These are accounts of those who left or were kicked out, along with a whole bunch of hard feelings. The basic gist of the sentiments seem to be philosophical differences, meaning some folks felt that profit (in the form of expedition fees) was becoming more important than the research. There are other sentiments expressed as well that pertain to the management structure and methodology. And the finger pointing is almost exclusively at the man in charge.

There is also some allusion to the degradation of report investigation and the overall change in what types of reports are getting published compared to those published previously. The focus (according to these posters) has shifted from analytical research to selling expedition spots. If this is in fact the case, then the term "philosophical differences" would seem to make sense. But again, the BFRO point of view is not seen in these threads, and I'm not sure if it is available for public view.

Make sure you've got some time, all of the threads listed in that link are long...

If you use this link be sure to go to page one of the thread there. The first post quote was written by mm. Read it for insight to the type of person he is and how he runs the bfro. The threads this link offers tell the truth. It's not the bfro truth, just the real truth. Read the very first post quote, then ask yourself, what type of person posts like that and why. To what end? What good can it do? Very telling indeed.