I never thought I’d see TF go like this.

I was a little peeved when the Ross Pros and Cons felt like it was just supposed to be Pros. I do think objectivity went a little skewed on that thread.

Since the Ross thread proper apparently has enough discussion to warrant over 100 pages, I don’t think making subtopics to streamline counts as making the site "All about Ross", and I certainly don’t see anyone trying to discourage posters from talking about other subjects.

As far as dragging names thru the mud, most of these names are already out there in the public. Ross is just one more. He can’t be libeled or defamed as he is deceased. We likely will not solve this case on one of these forums or sites about Z, but we definitely won’t if we can not zero in on Suspects.

As far as the Ross stuff, here’s what irritates me. People that think Ross may be Z, are taking part in posts on the Ross thread discussing clues, and finding more ways to investigate him,and all the while, People that clearly doubt Ross is a Suspect, continue to post doubts about him. Again, maybe it’s just me, but if I don’t think a Suspect is Z, I simply do not post in a thread about the Suspect, as I personally feel it’s a waste of my time, which is why you don’t see me ever posting in several Suspect threads. But hey, that’s just me. Whether or not somebody thinks Ross is a good Z Suspect or not, I could care less, it won’t sway me from my research. Same goes for any other Suspect I am researching.

I can’t and won’t apologize because Ross is getting a lot of interest or attention. People will post about what they are interested in and what is a hot topic. I can’t control that, and just because Ross is of great interest now,and generating Buzz, that doesn’t mean that this site has become a ‘site about Ross’. Last I looked, there are lots of Suspect threads for people to look thru and post in. If you don’t think Ross is a viable Suspect, then that’s your right, feel free to find a Suspect you like.

I’ve always felt that there are enough actual FACTS to go on in this case without driving a spike up some innocent person’s arse.

The ENTIRE "POI" aspect – ‘Lets’ dig up his entire life!" – has always turned me off. I suppose it is why I stick to the ciphers, the known letters, and such.

They can’t ALL be Zodiac. Most likely, none of them are/were. And I have no interest in being part of a "ghoul-squad" digging up details of the dead. That’s just my opinion.

-glurk

I agree with this.

It’s hard to find the right balance on a board like this, though. I can understand that people get carried away. It’s possible for anyone with an Internet connection to dig up all sorts of personal information these days, and most never stop to think about what they’re actually doing. I’m guilty of this myself, I’m sure.

The POI focus – if we can call it that – of boards like this one, is pretty much inevitable at this stage, though. Most people who now take an active interest in the case seem to do so from some kind of POI angle or other. Very few remain focused on the evidence itself. The ciphers are an excellent case in point: How many are trying to solve the 340 without having some – usually horribly unlikely – “suspect” in mind?

You see new members both here and at TV’s board who seemingly think “having a POI” is some sort of prerequisite. “I don’t have a POI – yet. Still torn between Gyke and Darlene Ferrin’s evil twin.” It’s almost a popularity contest in some cases. And people who are new to the case can easily get the impression that there is actually something to these “suspects” who have been promoted at different times, as though they were an official part of the case, on par with the evidence.

There are thousands of names that can be dug up and scrutinized. Doing so makes very little sense, however, unless there is something there – something which stands out clearly and warrants further research. Then we might legitimately do some prying, in a respectful and careful manner. Most names people come up with are not in the above category, though. There is nothing compelling about them whatsoever. The only possible reason for bothering with them at all is the principle that no stone should be left unturned. I’m not sure I believe in that principle, actually. Not when you can’t go about turning those stones without violating someone’s privacy – or memory.

Oh well – it’s not all bad, I guess. I actually do believe – unlike some – that a widespread interest in the case is a good thing. The price to pay for that – is unsavory nonsense, lots of it, unfortunately.

People that think Ross may be Z, are taking part in posts on the Ross thread discussing clues, and finding more ways to investigate him,and all the while, People that clearly doubt Ross is a Suspect, continue to post doubts about him. Again, maybe it’s just me, but if I don’t think a Suspect is Z, I simply do not post in a thread about the Suspect, as I personally feel it’s a waste of my time, which is why you don’t see me ever posting in several Suspect threads.

that sounds dangerously like "i don’t want to hear from anyone who doesn’t agree". maybe that’s not how you meant it but i think that’s what riled up the foreigner as well. part of what keeps the checks and balances of a board like this is precisely that those who don’t agree feel the right to chime in and say so. i personally don’t think it’s a waste of time to evaluate someone’s theories, including suspects, and help make them stronger by pointing out flaws. in fact, over the past year that’s one of the main things i really like about this messageboard. if you don’t accept the criticism then you end up with a lot of one-sided theories that are weakened by the fact that those who disagree don’t post in those threads. just my 2 cents, i’m not trying to make things worse, etc.

As far as the Ross stuff, here’s what irritates me. People that think Ross may be Z, are taking part in posts on the Ross thread discussing clues, and finding more ways to investigate him,and all the while, People that clearly doubt Ross is a Suspect, continue to post doubts about him.

If people just say “nah, don’t think it was him” over and over again, then tell them to stop or get banned. You have the authority to do that – and it would be legitimate in my opinion.

But saying that people can go elsewhere and post about a suspect they like is not going to accomplish anything good. It shouldn’t be about liking a suspect on a scale from one to ten. Ultimately, it should be about dissecting both the evidence itself and our various interpretations of this evidence. If the latter is illogical, if the focus is wrong, if you put an unreasonable amount of emphasis on B and far too little on A – then I have to say so.

And then you can retort: I’m wrong, I’ve missed the point, I’m not looking at the full picture. And so we move on – hopefully getting a better understanding of both the evidence and the POI in question. If I refrain from making those – critical – comments, and just stick to posting about what I like (in which case I’d never post, because I don’t really like any of the proposed suspects), then what? Well, in my particular case there would no great loss – but if ALL of the “naysayers” refrained from making a nuisance of themselves, would that really be beneficial to the progress of the Ross investigation/research?

People that think Ross may be Z, are taking part in posts on the Ross thread discussing clues, and finding more ways to investigate him,and all the while, People that clearly doubt Ross is a Suspect, continue to post doubts about him. Again, maybe it’s just me, but if I don’t think a Suspect is Z, I simply do not post in a thread about the Suspect, as I personally feel it’s a waste of my time, which is why you don’t see me ever posting in several Suspect threads.

that sounds dangerously like "i don’t want to hear from anyone who doesn’t agree". maybe that’s not how you meant it but i think that’s what riled up the foreigner as well. part of what keeps the checks and balances of a board like this is precisely that those who don’t agree feel the right to chime in and say so. i personally don’t think it’s a waste of time to evaluate someone’s theories, including suspects, and help make them stronger by pointing out flaws. in fact, over the past year that’s one of the main things i really like about this messageboard. if you don’t accept the criticism then you end up with a lot of one-sided theories that are weakened by the fact that those who disagree don’t post in those threads. just my 2 cents, i’m not trying to make things worse, etc.

Not sure where you got that from, but it’s okay. What I said was, I don’t care whether somebody likes or doesn’t like a Suspect of mine, plain and simple….it’s not going to change my approach, or my investigating. Again, every person is allowed to have an opinion, that’s what’s great, even if we don’t agree with each other. Again, just my personal opinion, but if I don’t think a Suspect is Zodiac, I view it as a waste of my time posting in that thread, but judging from the Ross threads, not everybody views it the same way, which is their right-hey it’s their time, if they want to waste it on somebody they don’t think was Z, more power to them

As far as the Ross stuff, here’s what irritates me. People that think Ross may be Z, are taking part in posts on the Ross thread discussing clues, and finding more ways to investigate him,and all the while, People that clearly doubt Ross is a Suspect, continue to post doubts about him.

If people just say “nah, don’t think it was him” over and over again, then tell them to stop or get banned. You have the authority to do that – and it would be legitimate in my opinion.

But saying that people can go elsewhere and post about a suspect they like is not going to accomplish anything good. It shouldn’t be about liking a suspect on a scale from one to ten. Ultimately, it should be about dissecting both the evidence itself and our various interpretations of this evidence. If the latter is illogical, if the focus is wrong, if you put an unreasonable amount of emphasis on B and far too little on A – then I have to say so.

And then you can retort: I’m wrong, I’ve missed the point, I’m not looking at the full picture. And so we move on – hopefully getting a better understanding of both the evidence and the POI in question. If I refrain from making those – critical – comments, and just stick to posting about what I like (in which case I’d never post, because I don’t really like any of the proposed suspects), then what? Well, in my particular case there would no great loss – but if ALL of the “naysayers” refrained from making a nuisance of themselves, would that really be beneficial to the progress of the Ross investigation/research?

That’s where the pros & cons section comes in to play

That’s where the pros & cons section comes in to play

Alright.

That wasn’t what I hinted at, though. Criticism amounts to something more – and something more valuable – than simply throwing out cons against a proposed suspect. You can’t really comment on something posted in the general thread by adding some sort of “con” in the other thread. That will never work, and if this is adhered to, it will effectively put a stop to people commenting at all in the main thread if they disagree with something.

Your take on, say, POI criticism is – well, noted. But I don’t agree with it. I think criticism should always be welcomed and that it’s never a waste of time unless it’s mindless and petty.

It’s your show, though. I’ll respect your wishes.

Glurk’s post reminded of what happened on Reddit immediately after the Boston Marathon bombing. Many amateur sleuths on Reddit starting digging around, and found images of Sunil Tripathi who ended up looking a lot like Tsarnaev, the actual bomber. Turns out Sunil had nothing to do with it. But the fervent suspicion generated by Reddit users only hurt Sunil and his family.

If they had correctly identified the bomber, they would have been hailed as heroes. But instead, the Reddit general manager had to reach out to the Tripathi family to apologize for the actions of Reddit users.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/22 … t-20130422

So I guess the point is: Don’t be wrong. Or, don’t allow your wrongness to hurt people.

One thing to also keep in mind is that people on this board come from different parts of the world and from different backgrounds. Communication can be a little bit of a problem at times, especially over the internet. In person it is much easier to understand someone and tell when they are being sarcastic or serious or being an a-hole or whatever. I think it is great that we can express our opinions, but a couple people seem to have a problem with that. I have seen it only a couple of times on this particular site to tell you the truth and that is great. Other sites I have been to have a lot of this and a ton of negativity. That is why I choose to post on this site far more than any of the others. Criticism is not a bad thing at all, but there is a nice way to go about it. If I disagree with a theory or a suspect/POI, I have no problem saying so, but I try my best to explain why and in a manor to where I won’t make anyone mad or hurt their feelings. And again, I think when doing things like this it all comes down to communication. When I saw TF’s original post here I thought maybe she was just taking something the wrong way. So everyone please just keep that in mind. I’m sure I post things sometimes that not everyone can understand what the hell I am saying.