Slappy,
These sites are proprietary; that is, they are owned by someone. Darren Lee owns MABRC. Bill Graham owns BFS.
As owners of the sites, they have almost unlimited proprietary rights--as long as it stays within the law--to do what ever the want to do on their sites.
I've had my experience with MABRC and Darren--and Randy and Bulletmaker and whoever. I registered at MABRC and did some posting there. When Darren posted about his "research site" being despoiled by persons described by "locals" as a little white guy and an Indian in a silver-grey pickup, obviously meaning John Phillips and Steve Sommers (sp?), I posted the question, How did the locals who supposedly saw these two know that John was an Indian since he, like me, doesn't appear that much to be one? I don't recall the details of the subsequent posts, one or more by Randy, but when I attempted to post replies to attacks, Darren's moderator locked the thread. When I objected, I think by PM, to not being allowed to respond to the somewhat nasty posts, I was banned. And the original question was never answered!!! Darren's failure to answer the question told me, and everyone else, more than he would have.
What I'm saying is that I have experienced something like what you have--if I get the drift of your posts correctly. I'm not, however, spending any of my time trying to vindicate myself. It isn't that important. And I think that you should attempt to "bring closure" to your experience and not waste time trying to vindicate yourself. I was, btw, reinstated on MABRC. I just checked to see if I could still log in there, and I can.
The kind of exchanges that we keep having, although they do elicit posts, probably drive away more posters than any site can stand to have driven away. Forget Darren Lee and MABRC, do some posting here on other subjects, and let's enjoy ourselves. I'm not saying that you are vindictive, but you sound vindictive in your posts. I've made the mistake of being vindictive, but vengence belongs to God, not to us. I can't remember where I read that, but I did read it somewhere.
Speaking of other subjects, Darren has posted some pictures of track casts indentified as made by bigfeet. Some of those pictures showed casts of tracks that were very human looking--elongated and showing an arch and other details. Others were of casts of tracks that were not human looking--shorter, wider, boxier and not showing much detail. If I recall my post correctly, I observed that the first group looked like a very large human track and that the second group looked as though they might have been make with something like an inflated balloon. There was very little if any ridge detail. I asked Darren, pointing that I was unaware of any species that left two different types of tracks, Are there two different types of bigfeet? I never got an answer to that question either--but Darren has the right to not answer my questions and to not answer yours. So does Bill.
What do you think about those different types of casts?
Are some hoaxes?
Which ones, in your opinion?
Are there two types of bigfeet?
Is it possible that one comes from a young bigfoot while the other comes from an older one?
Are they all hoaxes?
Are we out there having fun looking for a "rural myth"--a first cousin to an "urban myth."
Bye, at least for now, folks.
