We want Jenny to be found and we want her husband and family to know what happened. That reason for being here hasn't changed. Everything, whether little or big, that we talk about revolves around that goal. When information is sparse we go off on tangents or sort of spin our wheels and try to understand what is impossible to understand. I think that's part of the WS experience. JMO MOO
This is a discussion, not judgement, not a debate or an argument. We can explore any aspect of a case as long as we don't violate TOS. That has rarely happened on this thread. We all bring varied personalities to the thread. Some are dramatic, some are researchers, some are logical, some are empathetic, etc...we look at the case from different angles and through different lenses, but we respect the process and the posters.
When I don't understand why someone wants to discuss something, or I disagree with the way or frequency they discuss it, I've learned not to participate. I figure if the subject is one that they are interested in it's really not my place to shut them down or cause them to feel they have to defend their choice. I can try to change the subject, but I'm not a mod. If it gets bad in the TOS sense I report posts, but I never threaten to do it or say I've done it.
If I get tired of a subject I leave the thread, as I did when the discussion about whether a mountain lion could have taken DeOrr Kunz or whether polygraphs are useful...went on for days and days. When I made a silly joke about the mountain lion discussion starting up again my post was deleted. I mean, all I did was post a "run for the hills" emoji.
But I can understand that mods prefer subjects to ebb and flow naturally and that there aren't efforts to stop discussions or subtly criticize those who want to continue as I did with my emoji.
That's been my experience on most threads and I'm sure we can continue that here. We're a good bunch! :balloons:
JMO, MOO, etc
