'Missing 411', by David Paulides: Tracking unusual missing persons cases

[Teresa]

Thank you for the update Kalibex, I'm glad to hear that.

 

[kalibex]

Well, this is interesting development.... Mr. Paulides requested, through an intermediary (who talks to him and is also in the new group) that I and the other admin for the 3-day old, recreated 'Missing 411 Forum' facebook group step down as admins, and let him be the only admin for now...though he promised to let us back on as admins once we did that.

Not put-out by that; he's been burned a lot. I can see why he'd want a Good Faith gesture.

So we've done so, and are awaiting further developments... :)

 

[Keit]

Well, this is interesting development.... Mr. Paulides requested, through an intermediary (who talks to him and is also in the new group) that I and the other admin for the 3-day old, recreated 'Missing 411 Forum' facebook group step down as admins, and let him be the only admin for now...though he promised to let us back on as admins once we did that.

Not put-out by that; he's been burned a lot. I can see why he'd want a Good Faith gesture.

So we've done so, and are awaiting further developments... :)

Well, it does sound logical and fair. After all, the group was created based on his work. Perhaps it's the best way to end all the nonsense and waste of energy. Actually, it would be probably even better for him to remain the only admin for now, and add others as moderators and such, if needed at all.

 

[Beau]

Well, this is interesting development.... Mr. Paulides requested, through an intermediary (who talks to him and is also in the new group) that I and the other admin for the 3-day old, recreated 'Missing 411 Forum' facebook group step down as admins, and let him be the only admin for now...though he promised to let us back on as admins once we did that.

Not put-out by that; he's been burned a lot. I can see why he'd want a Good Faith gesture.

So we've done so, and are awaiting further developments... :)

Well, it does sound logical and fair. After all, the group was created based on his work. Perhaps it's the best way to end all the nonsense and waste of energy. Actually, it would be probably even better for him to remain the only admin for now, and add others as moderators and such, if needed at all.

Yeah, I can't really blame David for engaging in a little scratch test. He's seen that there are people out there that have ulterior motives when getting involved in his work, so it's smart on his part to try and ferret out anyone like that as quick as possible. He probably won't have much time to dedicate to the group anyway, but he may want to choose his admins himself.

 

[kalibex]

He probably won't have much time to dedicate to the group anyway, but he may want to choose his admins himself.

Well, he better chose someone eventually... I also very much doubt he has time to muck about on Facebook.

Bottom Line, he's got a group now that no one else will mess with, unlike last time.

 

[Beau]

He probably won't have much time to dedicate to the group anyway, but he may want to choose his admins himself.

Well, he better chose someone eventually...

Why do you say that?

 

[JEEP]

He probably won't have much time to dedicate to the group anyway, but he may want to choose his admins himself.

Well, he better chose someone eventually...

Why do you say that?

Just speculation, but my thought is he probably doesn't even want a Facebook page or the work that would come w/ it - but if he allows it to continue, I would think he would have to get admins to handle the responsibilities of it. Is he aware of this forum and the support being given by chance? It was certainly great that Kalibex swooped in to fix a bad development that could have caused David a lot of grief! Kalibex!

 

[kalibex]

He probably won't have much time to dedicate to the group anyway, but he may want to choose his admins himself.

Well, he better chose someone eventually...

Why do you say that?

Group ain't going to run itself. It's appropriate that it's his again, but it's already a thriving little community; needs that oversight. (Even though I can no longer see them, I can practically feel the 'join group requests' piling up in the queue....)

 

[Mark]

He probably won't have much time to dedicate to the group anyway, but he may want to choose his admins himself.

Well, he better chose someone eventually...

Why do you say that?

Group ain't going to run itself. It's appropriate that it's his again, but it's already a thriving little community; needs that oversight. (Even though I can no longer see them, I can practically feel the 'join group requests' piling up in the queue....)

My perspective is that now he has the FB group and he is sole admin, everyone could leave him to it and he'll do what he'll do. If he notices activity and finds it valuable then maybe he'll commit time to it.

 

[Keit]

Group ain't going to run itself. It's appropriate that it's his again, but it's already a thriving little community; needs that oversight. (Even though I can no longer see them, I can practically feel the 'join group requests' piling up in the queue....)

Well, from the Work perspective, it could be a great opportunity to practice lack of identification. And as m said, David will do what he will do.

 

[Voyageur]

My perspective is that now he has the FB group and he is sole admin, everyone could leave him to it and he'll do what he'll do. If he notices activity and finds it valuable then maybe he'll commit time to it.

Can only add that David is a pretty astute guy, and if he does commit time to this and notice things need to get done, I'm sure he will seek out help as need be.

 

[kalibex]

Can only add that David is a pretty astute guy, and if he does commit time to this and notice things need to get done, I'm sure he will seek out help as need be.

Here's hoping. He removed at least one person (maybe 2 - the other person might have left on their own) from the group; no notice to the group as per the original group rules. I then removed those rules that I had uploaded, since he obviously decided not to abide by the group consensus (a poll had been taken). His group; his call, now, of course. I hope he sees fit to someday upload his own policies, so that people actually have a chance to understand, so they can avoid breaking whatever rule it was that got those 1 -2 people removed.

Would have been nice if he had ever communicated directly to me, to request the admin switch-over, etc. All was through a third person. Call that over-identification or self-importance as you like, but, would have been, as they say, basic courtesy.

Possible part of the lesson is... a person is not the same as their creative output, and it may be unwise to confuse the two.

 

[hlat]

Here's hoping. He removed at least one person (maybe 2 - the other person might have left on their own) from the group; no notice to the group as per the original group rules. I then removed those rules that I had uploaded, since he obviously decided not to abide by the group consensus (a poll had been taken). His group; his call, now, of course. I hope he sees fit to someday upload his own policies, so that people actually have a chance to understand, so they can avoid breaking whatever rule it was that got those 1 -2 people removed.

Would have been nice if he had ever communicated directly to me, to request the admin switch-over, etc. All was through a third person. Call that over-identification or self-importance as you like, but, would have been, as they say, basic courtesy.

Possible part of the lesson is... a person is not the same as their creative output, and it may be unwise to confuse the two.

He just went through an attack and almost lost his Facebook group page. He has to take defensive action now. The old group and old rules are gone after the hijack. I would've done the exact same thing and removed all admins that I didn't know well. Since he doesn't know you well, it makes sense to send a third person to talk to you instead of exposing himself to possible attack from you. I understand why you think it is basic courtesy for him to contact you directly, and it might be under non-attack circumstances. This is self defense mode, and how would he know that you weren't a potential attacker who swooped in? So it is reasonable and logical not to communicate with you directly. I also think it's reasonable after what just happened to remove people bothering him in the new group that is only a few days old.

The fact that you are feeling something negative validates in a way the concern that you might be a possible attacker against him. It might even be a lack of courtesy on your part to criticize him given the attack he just experienced, especially your jab about the person and creative output.

 

[Horseofadifferentcolor]

Can only add that David is a pretty astute guy, and if he does commit time to this and notice things need to get done, I'm sure he will seek out help as need be.

Here's hoping. He removed at least one person (maybe 2 - the other person might have left on their own) from the group; no notice to the group as per the original group rules. I then removed those rules that I had uploaded, since he obviously decided not to abide by the group consensus (a poll had been taken). His group; his call, now, of course. I hope he sees fit to someday upload his own policies, so that people actually have a chance to understand, so they can avoid breaking whatever rule it was that got those 1 -2 people removed.

Would have been nice if he had ever communicated directly to me, to request the admin switch-over, etc. All was through a third person. Call that over-identification or self-importance as you like, but, would have been, as they say, basic courtesy.

Possible part of the lesson is... a person is not the same as their creative output, and it may be unwise to confuse the two.

Are you certain that this third person is actually in contact with David? How do you know they are telling the truth?

 

[kalibex]

The old group and old rules are gone after the hijack.

Except...these rules were the new, re-created version of the group's rules that were consensus-voted on, because he hadn't contacted any of us and we couldn't assume he ever would, so we figured we'd better go ahead and... Oh, never mind. As I said, he can arrange it the way he wants. And he has; he has sorted out his Moderator situation now, so that he won't have to be there all the time to administer, but in such a way that no one can ever mess with his status again. He is the group Owner and can't be ousted.

The fact that you are feeling something negative validates in a way the concern that you might be a possible attacker against him. It might even be a lack of courtesy on your part to criticize him given the attack he just experienced, especially your jab about the person and creative output.

Let's put it this way - he has a reputation as being...well, being prone to being 'rude' to people online. I assumed for a long time that that reputation was all psyops defamation; after all, he'd been mercilessly trolled over on Amazon, etc., and it was vile. But I have to say...well, I can now see why some of his online modus operundi comes across as 'rude'. He's definitely the take-no-prisoners type; I suspect many of you will nod, saying to yourself, 'As it should be; his work is too important to worry about the offended sensibilities of others.' I get that. Am I willing to work under his rules (which, it has become clear, include summary ejection with no notice or explanation, from the group at any time by the group owner - despite the group having requested admin transparency regarding moderation decisions)? Yes. His research, and him feeling comfortable in his own group, is absolutely more important than my (and a bunch of others') sensibilities being offended by his online M.O. It just...really surprised me. You don't get a hint of that (at least I never did), from his interviews and the recordings of his public appearances.

Still, I scratch my head.... there's people who swear they weren't disrespecting him (that they could see), that they were actually posting something in support of Paulides, and yet ended up blocked by him. Assuming that, say, 4D STS wasn't subtly influencing the posters in some way that they simply couldn't see that what they had posted was offensive to him, well... some people have expressed that they feel they've been exiled - forever - for no obvious reason. I guess I'm being a damned over-empathetic fool in terms of feeling sympathy for those folks who claim honest bemusement over their exile. Because I know they'll never, ever get back in.