PHEW! Today on the paracast forums

[Hoffmeister]

Well I have to say today has been one of the most interesting days on this forum that I have seen in a long time. I have been reading the posts all day (sometime when I should have been working ) and have been enthralled by the skirmishes around Ted Philips and Louis Jarvis.

Here's the thing I have learnt today:
1. The Paracast has a real definite divide between the perspectives of its members on the topic of the paranormal.
2. To cater for these different perspectives, the show perhaps either needs to bring in another Co-host who asks slightly tougher questions (but in a polite manner) or have the current hosts do it themselves
3. The forum members who are being more skeptical of the guests, and posting some of these skeptical criticisms also need to remember that there is a proportion of listeners to the show who either

A) Don't like to question guests so much and just like to listen to their stories whether they believe them or not (and if they get enjoyment from that then why not?​

B) Are interested in the people and personalities in the paranormal 'field' as much as they are the topics that the people are talking about, so don't much care about hounding them with demands for evidence​

4. People need to not get upset by the tone that some people write their posts in, because getting upset by someone who you don't know, and who probably lives 100's of miles away from you, isn't healthy
5. People who are less skeptical of guests need to not get so wound up by those who are being skeptical
6. Paradoxically, I think there might be people interested in this topic who will happily call Stephen Greer, or Alfred Webre a 'nut' or a 'wacko', yet will get upset when a guest such a Louis get labelled with the same tag even though his stories are almost as outlandish and have about the same amount of evidence to back them up.

Its these pitched battles on the forums that can often make the Paracast message board so good.
Perhaps the place will become even better if each time we right a message.... we all make an effort to 'stop', re-read it before we post, and think to ourselves "is there a way In could re-write this so that it will be less offensive/antagonising, and therefore promote a more mature and balanced conversation within the thread".


Peace

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Well I have to say today has been one of the most interesting days on this forum that I have seen in a long time. I have been reading the posts all day (sometime when I should have been working ) and have been enthralled by the skirmishes around Ted Philips and Louis Jarvis.

Here's the thing I have learnt today:
1. The Paracast has a real definite divide between the perspectives of its members on the topic of the paranormal.
2. To cater for these different perspectives, the show perhaps either needs to bring in another Co-host who asks slightly tougher questions (but in a polite manner) or have the current hosts do it themselves
3. The forum members who are being more skeptical of the guests, and posting some of these skeptical criticisms also need to remember that there is a proportion of listeners to the show who either

A) Don't like to question guests so much and just like to listen to their stories whether they believe them or not (and if they get enjoyment from that then why not?​

B) Are interested in the people and personalities in the paranormal 'field' as much as they are the topics that the people are talking about, so don't much care about hounding them with demands for evidence​

4. People need to not get upset by the tone that some people write their posts in, because getting upset by someone who you don't know, and who probably lives 100's of miles away from you, isn't healthy
5. People who are less skeptical of guests need to not get so wound up by those who are being skeptical
6. Paradoxically, I think there might be people interested in this topic who will happily call Stephen Greer, or Alfred Webre a 'nut' or a 'wacko', yet will get upset when a guest such a Louis get labelled with the same tag even though his stories are almost as outlandish and have about the same amount of evidence to back them up.

Its these pitched battles on the forums that can often make the Paracast message board so good.
Perhaps the place will become even better if each time we right a message.... we all make an effort to 'stop', re-read it before we post, and think to ourselves "is there a way In could re-write this so that it will be less offensive/antagonising, and therefore promote a more mature and balanced conversation within the thread".


Peace

Well said and you bring up great points.
The forum is at it's best when there is lively debate. With the show's expansion into broadcast radio, new members are signing on and there is an even wider range of views.

Good stuff.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

I'll be the first to admit that it is extremely difficult to be all things for all people. Everybody seems to forget a few things: 1) The show is gaining a completely new additional audience. 2) I'm new at this. I don't have Gene's many years of radio experience. 3) Many of the guests I have brought on are my friends of many years. Just because they are my friends doesn't mean I believe everything they say. I'd like to see how well any of your can pull a Biedny on a friend that you've known and respected for years. Now, having said this, I invite you to listen to the upcoming show on Ray Stanford. He is a real mercurial, hair-trigger guy, but he has been put on notice that I will be playing hard-ball (I think I used the analogy of "Mike Wallace.") You can say what you want about "love fests" and letting people tell their stories etc, but the co-hosts and Gene have a tough job being all things to all people. I don't hear anyone complaining about the Leslie Keane show and our approach, (or maybe I missed some negative posts). So, in closing, I think there is hope for me and my aspiring carnivorous Biedny approach, but I'll let you decide if this is so.... >>>>>>O'Brien leaves to go file his teeth and claws and practice grinding his teeth in the mirror grr-grrr-GRRRR

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I'll be the first to admit that it is extremely difficult to be all things for all people. Everybody seems to forget a few things: 1) The show is gaining a completely new additional audience. 2) I'm new at this. I don't have Gene's many years of radio experience. 3) Many of the guests I have brought on are my friends of many years. Just because they are my friends doesn't mean I believe everything they say. I'd like to see how well any of your can pull a Biedny on a friend that you've known and respected for years. Now, having said this, I invite you to listen to the upcoming show on Ray Stanford. He is a real mercurial, hair-trigger guy, but he has been put on notice that I will be playing hard-ball (I think I used the analogy of "Mike Wallace.") You can say what you want about "love fests" and letting people tell their stories etc, but the co-hosts and Gene have a tough job being all things to all people. I don't hear anyone complaining about the Leslie Keane show and our approach, (or maybe I missed some negative posts) so maybe there is hope for me and my aspiring carnivorous Biedny approach? I'll let you decide....

The Leslie Kean episode was a fantastic episode, satisfying both "skeptics" and "believers" and everyone in between. She made for an excellent guest with well organized thoughts and no outlandish claims.
Someone like Jarvis is a polarizing figure, as can be seen in the thread about that episode. I can't imagine being in the position of grilling a friend of mine on a show that goes out to thousands of listeners. I don't envy what any of the hosts have to do.

A

 

[Hoffmeister]

Chris

I don't necessarily think you need to become the one to go 'Biedny' on people. I think what you bring to the show by being yourself is both valid and appealing to many Paracast listeners.
I think:
a) You are someone who can think outside of the box and open up thoughtful possibilities
b) You explore theories about the possibilities of the UFO phenomenon being something other than 'bang on metal' saucers from extraterrestrial worlds
C) You add humour at times

Whilst 'I personally' am not that bought in to the trickster / crypto's ideas, nor am I particularly interested i them, I do believe that these topics are very popular in paranormal research today and therefore what you bring to the table will no doubt appeal to many Paracast listeners. Let me just say I admire the tough work you guys do to keep this show running, and if I were in your position, I think I would probably just have you play to your strengths (i.e coming up with thought provoking ideas etc) , and maybe bring in another person in to ask some of the tougher / more direct questions.

Thanks for your efforts so far.

 

[pixelsmith]

Well I have to say today has been one of the most interesting days on this forum that I have seen in a long time. I have been reading the posts all day (sometime when I should have been working ) and have been enthralled by the skirmishes around Ted Philips and Louis Jarvis.

Here's the thing I have learnt today:
1. The Paracast has a real definite divide between the perspectives of its members on the topic of the paranormal.
2. To cater for these different perspectives, the show perhaps either needs to bring in another Co-host who asks slightly tougher questions (but in a polite manner) or have the current hosts do it themselves
3. The forum members who are being more skeptical of the guests, and posting some of these skeptical criticisms also need to remember that there is a proportion of listeners to the show who either

A) Don't like to question guests so much and just like to listen to their stories whether they believe them or not (and if they get enjoyment from that then why not?​

B) Are interested in the people and personalities in the paranormal 'field' as much as they are the topics that the people are talking about, so don't much care about hounding them with demands for evidence​

4. People need to not get upset by the tone that some people write their posts in, because getting upset by someone who you don't know, and who probably lives 100's of miles away from you, isn't healthy
5. People who are less skeptical of guests need to not get so wound up by those who are being skeptical
6. Paradoxically, I think there might be people interested in this topic who will happily call Stephen Greer, or Alfred Webre a 'nut' or a 'wacko', yet will get upset when a guest such a Louis get labelled with the same tag even though his stories are almost as outlandish and have about the same amount of evidence to back them up.

Its these pitched battles on the forums that can often make the Paracast message board so good.
Perhaps the place will become even better if each time we right a message.... we all make an effort to 'stop', re-read it before we post, and think to ourselves "is there a way In could re-write this so that it will be less offensive/antagonising, and therefore promote a more mature and balanced conversation within the thread".


Peace

you forgot one

7. It is possible to be banned 3 times and return to The Paracast. (altho I have to wash Genes car everyday)


I have often wished I could take something back after I posted something. Sometimes I write the post and leave it on the screen until morning, I often find myself wondering why I wrote such a thing and delete it.

 

[SoCalGNX]

I have not been following all the drama but I will try to catch up. Here is the deal - I don't get to listen to the podcasts in a timely manner. Sometimes its a few weeks before I am able to listen to them. I come to the forums and read the posts that are interesting. My thought is if you don't like a podcast or don't like a forum topic AVOID IT. There are some people who have been on the podcasts at various times, and here in the forums, who I have found to be (a) odd (b) outright liars (c) deluded (d) media whores etc. I think others are very interesting, thought provoking, intelligent etc. I read and listen to what is of interest and discard the rest. The Paracast isn't "one size fits all". What I find interesting may bore the hell out of you and vice versa.