Confirming facts is more important than investigator reliability. The presumption of a reliable investigator has thrown bullshido off many a time.
Typical, a big sweeping, over-generalization, that would leave me to guess at what you are referring to. Not worth my time.
1 Like
Its pretty clear. Facts of an issue should take precedence over an investigator’s reputation.
1 Like
Don’t disagree with the last statement. Its the previous “many a time,” statement I disagree with.
Similarly as staff, if you don’t know who is doing your investigation, even if they are anonymous to the public, you can get surprised by whatever baggage they arrived with. For example if they belong to a rival school, and never shared that information with the readers at the beginning.
1 Like
Is there an archive of previous investigations that haven’t been written up? Would it be worth taking the time to link all of the investigations to this new bullshido site as well?
I think a part of that has to do with investigative standards for ascertaining fact. If an investigation is 100% fact with no fat and no BS, it doesn’t matter who wrote it. If an investigation is all emotional vitriol and demonization, that’s a red flag regardless of the author. Its just sloppy work…
1 Like
By the time the write-up process was finished, I would say that our reports were on point and were not demonization. For example the tone in the Brian Bonderant (sp) report was greatly changed after it went through its second draft, to be less over the top.
If there is a published report you are thinking of, from 2004-2013 tell me, and I’ll address it. For example was I too tough on Paul V. Nope, he had two restraining orders against him and I discussed the threats that made the court decide he had met the applicable standard.
1 Like
I’m more so thinking process wise. Lets make it impersonal and take a look at something like politics. I don’t care too much about it, but I’m a skilled political investigator. This gives me an interesting perspective as I watch two heavily polarized teams fight.
IMO, the foremost investigative flaw in the game is asking the other guy or an estranged party to provide information. For example, I was watching the news on a political incident when they called up a researcher. Turns out the “researcher” was a noteable domestic terrorist. And as opposed to facts and evidence, he provided his opinion with the inference that it was fact based.
Second issue is the conflation of counterfactualism and counternarrativism. When people get too riled up its tempting for investigators to put together a counterfactual, narrative based report or to reject evidence that counters a narrative. This I’d say is probably the biggest issue in investigations everywhere.
Blatant example I saw and called out because it was so stupid, was a guy claiming that Proud Boys didn’t have plates in their carriers. Of course they did and I explained from a financial standpoint why this is the case. He figured it was acceptable to make up and include deragatory info about people he didnt like and add it as fact.
All of this can be done with a flat, unbiased sounding tone. Thats why I think its important to take the human element out of things and just focus on facts.
1 Like
In the absence of a specific critique of a specific report we published from 2004-2013, I’m not personally interested in arguing for the sake of arguing.
I’m literally not talking about you.
The old investigative thread section contained multiple threads that were not written up. You can look there.
You can request from Phrost that he restore a link or links to the old reports. I’m no longer involved, so I’m not going to spend my time. Ball’s in your court, you make it happen, don’t request other people do it for you. That was one of the problems with our investigations, too many people who wanted to tell other people how to do things without doing any work themselves.
I’m not asking people to do anything for me. This is what I’m talking about. Investigational procedure isn’t about US. I do it for a living now and I’m speaking not just on martial arts investigations, but on the state of the field in general. Bullshido was about par for course, but the field itself is in dire straits.
I’m also not holding you responsible for Oden’s division.
1 Like
Hi Osiris:
Sorry the last post was directed towards the guy who started this thread, Doninha.
I didn’t incorporate his last post in my post hence the confusion.
Sam
Didn’t see the letter up there. My bad. Sorry about that and in that context, I agree. Start the investigation you wanna see.
And so the last investigation was in fact an investigation to find out what happened to the investigations.
We are the peoples front of Judiah
1 Like
I never requested anybody do anything for me, nor would I expect them to. Again, I have very little idea what’s going on and as you mentioned there are several years worth of threads to parse through to get a clear picture. This conversation has been illuminating though. I seem to have triggered a touchy subject.
Thats some SCP 001 type shit. Lol.
But seriously, there should be more. You wouldn’t believe whos hiding in the dojos.
1 Like
Easily and by far, the most important investigative report Bullshido.net ever produced. The piece of resistance. It’s all turtles down from then on.
When my own kung fu masters bring up Shaolin Do with a “uh…” moment talking about made up bullshit, you won, and won big, measured in aeons.
That depends on how you measure reputations, because anyone can claim anything is a “fact” but we rely on people with positive reputations and not negative ones to valuate “facts”.
Right now I’m arguing with one of Phrost’s Facebook trolls whether or not moving water can freeze into ice. He’s built pools for 40 years, but I daydream and doodle in fluid thermodynamics.
Which “reputation” is more valuable?
Invest-i-gation, means to what? Follow the money, it works every time.
ALL of the old threads are still there, in a read-only form.
If you are having trouble finding something specific, please let me or @Phrost know.