First, any "real" time traveler has the opportunity to read through the threads before registering.
That's an excellent point, KT, and though you directed it to Twilight it is a point totally lost on Pamela.
The would-be TT's that have appeared here on a bi-weekly basis for the past ten years have and do read the site
before they register, log on and fire away with their sagas. They know what to expect and log on anyway. They make informed choices.
"Pamela Defense? We ain't got no Pamela Defense. We don't need no Pamela Defense! I don't have to show you any stinkin' Pamela Defense!"
Well, you know what I mean. They really don't need Pamela to jump to their defense considering that they knew what they were getting into.
They choose to go ahead with their stories, for the most part, for one of three reasons:
One, knowing what others have faced, i.e. forewarned thus forearmed, they believe that they have prepared themselves for the criticism and accept that as a challenge to overcome. They want to pull off what the rest haven't been able to. They want to out-Titor John Titor. It's a game. No problem.
The second general class are the ones who have also read the site and come on for the specific purpose of setting up people like Pamela so that they can have a horse laugh at them. I do have a problem with that class of TT even though the intended "victims" rarely even realize what the game is really on about except for the rare case where the OETWO fess's up.
The third general case, who again have read the site, are the ones who tell their tale and they end the game by saying that it was all some sort of experiment to see how far they could go before even the Believers' sense of credulity was stretched to the breaking point, they're writing a book and the experiment was to gather information for the book or the experiment was to gather information for some other reason.
Three different motivations with one constant - they've read the site, know the main players, realize that the main players are rather consistent and know what to expect. That's the definition of playing fair. We hear their stories. We get what they are saying. Most of the members quickly pick up on how weak the storylines are and pick them apart.
The real whine isn't that people aren't being fair or are being mean. No, the whine really breaks down to one of frustration because they were unsuccessful in their attempt to get the critics to cross to their side. It's not the critics' collective fault that the would-be TT posts logically inconsistent or outright contradictory statements that are picked up on and made points of criticism.
What Pamela would like to see is for every OETWO to come on, post without criticism and face such deep and revealing questions as what is your favorite food, what does money look like in your time, what is your favorite color? Any other "probing" questions are to be framed as leading questions that imply (or even directly state) the expected answer. No problem as far as it goes but those questions don't reflect the general tone of the forum, don't hold any particular interest for the general member of the forum, reveal nothing of note about the TT and reveals too much about the questioner. No problem asking them but to expect everyone else to hang on their every word and to follow suit with their questions is expecting just a bit too much. People ask their own questions for their own reasons and in a manner that they feel comfortable with. How they choose to move the discussion forward is up to them - not Pamela. There is a feedback mechanism at work here that is far more effective than whining that directs the general tone of our discussions. It's called choice.
And I did mention that Pamela's whine about members driving others away cuts both ways. She drives many members batty and eventually drives them away. The biggest single complaint made about her has always been the same - she wants to control the game, she meets the would-be TT's in private, hand feeds and preps them and brings them on with canned questions. Their perception is that she wants to be the center of attention even transcending the attention afforded the would-be TT himself. It started on Titor Day 2, has continued and has seriously cut into her credibility. The tactic is old, tired and it does drive people away. The very name of this thread clearly indicates the issue for those critics.
The second most "popular" criticism concerns her insistence on people having an "open mind" when her mind on the same subject(s) is closed, locked and welded shut. Their perception is that "open mind" for her is a code word for "I want it my way".
The third long standing criticism is that her whine about fair play reveals a hyprocracy. She has no such criticism for those who support her side and use the same tactics against "the other side" that she condems them for - and that she actively encourages it. No problem having allies but the complaint about fair play is vaccuous given the hyprocracy.
These are well deserved criticisms that are not secrets. They've been made on this and several other sites many, many times over the past ten years.
Of course, she has every right to do any and all of that. She can argue her points any way that she wants to argue them. She does have to 'get over it" in the sense that she believes that she has a right to expect that everyone else will change their tactics because she desires it. That's self delusion.
That Pamela's tactics do drive some people away is not in any sense a whine of my own. It still falls back on the aforementioned feedback mechanism - choice. It's not just the would-be TT's that read the site before choosing to register, log on and post.
Everyone does it. When they come on they know who Pamela is and what she's all about. If her tactics end up driving them away so be it. There are other sites and they will find one that fits their mold. In the mean time 50 others will do the same and two or three will end up being long term members here - no different than it has always been.
