A COMPARISON OF SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY BLOGS, WITH SCORES AND COMMENTS....UPDATED 3rd September 2024

 ...THE SOMERTON MAN BLOG COMPARISONS
WITH COMMENTS & SCORES...

Background

The purpose of this comparison is to provide each of the blogs/forums concerned with a snapshot of their strengths and areas of opportunity for improvement. Please feel free to make use of the information and images

The criteria are based on personal observations and what would be considered by most to be fair and even. 

Every one of us gets something to take away and learn from.

This comparison was created on ChatGPT using the following prompt:

Prompt:

You’re an experienced content analyst who has been evaluating online blogs for over 15 years. Your expertise lies in conducting detailed comparisons of blogs based on various qualitative metrics, employing a systematic approach to ensure thorough and insightful evaluations.

Your task is to create a comprehensive comparison between five specific blogs using the following evaluation criteria:

CRITERIA:

1. Quality and Depth of Research
2. Substantiation of Statements
3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology
4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources
5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries
6. Comment Moderation Policies
7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance
8. Frequency of Posts
9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work

BLOGS:

• Blog 1: Tamamshud.blogspot.com
• Blog 2: Ciphermysteries.com
• Blog 3: Bigfooty Forum Thread
• Blog 4: Tomsbytwo.com
• Blog 5: Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook Group
  
  

When crafting this comparison, ensure that you provide comments alongside each of the nine criteria for each blog, explaining the rationale behind the scoring. Each blog should be scored on a scale of 1 to 10 for each criterion.

Your final comparison should be structured clearly, with each criterion addressed for each blog, and should allow for easy understanding and insights for readers. Be objective in your analysis, highlighting both the strengths and weaknesses of each blog based on the criteria listed.

If you use this prompt you will get the same or similar output.

Tamamshud.blogspot.com

1. Quality and Depth of Research: 9/10

Comments: This blog is known for its thorough research into the Somerton Man case, with well-documented evidence and a focus on fact-based analysis. The depth of research is among the best in this space.

2. Substantiation of Statements: 9/10

Comments: Statements are well-supported by references to credible sources, including primary documents and expert opinions, ensuring a high level of reliability.

3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 8/10

Comments: The blog effectively uses explanatory notes, images, and sometimes videos to clarify complex points. However, there is room for further integration of multimedia elements.

4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 9/10

Comments: A wide range of sources is utilized, including books, academic papers, and personal interviews, providing a comprehensive view of the topic.

5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 9/10

Comments: The blog frequently presents new findings and material evidence that are well-substantiated, contributing to its credibility and interest.

6. Comment Moderation Policies: 9/10

Comments: Moderation is strict, with a focus on maintaining a respectful and constructive discussion environment, minimizing trolling and off-topic comments.

7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 9/10

Comments: The blog consistently acknowledges sources and adheres to copyright laws, reflecting a strong commitment to academic integrity.

8. Frequency of Posts: 8/10

Comments: Posts are updated regularly, keeping the blog active and relevant, though there may be occasional gaps between posts.

9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 9/10

Comments: The blog maintains a high level of originality, building on existing research while also contributing new insights. It respects prior work through proper acknowledgment.

Ciphermysteries.com

1. Quality and Depth of Research: 7/10

Comments: The research quality varies, with some topics covered in depth while others may be more speculative. The focus extends beyond the Somerton Man case to other mysteries, affecting consistency.

2. Substantiation of Statements: 7/10

Comments: While many statements are supported by sources, there are instances where claims are more speculative, with less rigorous substantiation.

3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 6/10

Comments: The use of explanatory notes and multimedia is moderate, with some posts incorporating images or diagrams, but overall, the integration of technology could be improved.

4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 7/10

Comments: The blog references a variety of sources, but the depth and diversity of these sources can vary depending on the topic.

5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10

Comments: While the blog does discuss material evidence, it often leans more on interpretation and theory rather than presenting new discoveries.

6. Comment Moderation Policies: 5/10

Comments: Moderation is present but not always consistent, leading to some disruptive comments and less productive discussions.

7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 6/10

Comments: Sources are generally acknowledged, but there have been instances where acknowledgment could be more thorough.

8. Frequency of Posts: 6/10

Comments: Posting frequency is somewhat irregular, with periods of inactivity. When posts are made, they are usually detailed.

9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10

Comments: The blog offers original content but occasionally rehashes existing theories without significantly advancing them. There is respect for prior work, though not always explicitly acknowledged.

Bigfooty Forum Thread

1. Quality and Depth of Research: 6/10

Comments: Research quality varies widely due to the user-generated nature of the forum. Some contributors provide in-depth analysis, while others are more speculative or casual.

2. Substantiation of Statements: 6/10

Comments: Statements are often based on personal opinions or interpretations, with varying levels of substantiation. Some posts lack proper references.

3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 5/10

Comments: The forum format limits the use of explanatory notes and technology. While images and links are sometimes used, the overall integration of multimedia is minimal.

4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 6/10

Comments: The diversity of sources is inconsistent, with some contributors referencing a wide range of materials and others relying on a narrower set of sources.

5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10

Comments: Occasionally, the forum discusses material evidence, but these discussions are often mixed with unsubstantiated claims, affecting the overall credibility.

6. Comment Moderation Policies: 7/10

Comments: Moderation in this thread is relatively strong, with efforts to keep discussions on track and reduce trolling. However, being a forum, moderation effectiveness can vary.

7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 7/10

Comments: Contributors generally acknowledge sources when sharing information, though this is not always consistent across all posts.

8. Frequency of Posts: 9/10

Comments: The forum is highly active, with frequent posts and discussions, ensuring a continuous flow of content.

9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10

Comments: The forum offers a mix of original insights and rehashed content. While contributors often build on existing discussions, there is occasional repetition without significant new contributions.

Tomsbytwo.com

1. Quality and Depth of Research: 6/10

Comments: The blog provides interesting discussions and theories, but the depth of research is not as strong as some other platforms. The focus is more on exploring possibilities than deep investigation.

2, Substantiation of Statements: 6/10

Comments: Statements are sometimes speculative, with a focus on theories rather than fully substantiated claims. References are provided but may not always be comprehensive.

3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 5/10

Comments: The use of explanatory notes and technology is limited, with occasional images but few other multimedia elements to support the content.

4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 5/10

Comments: The blog draws from a limited range of sources, with a focus on certain aspects of the Somerton Man case. There is room for incorporating a broader array of materials.

5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10

Comments: Material evidence is discussed, but the blog tends to focus more on interpretation than on presenting new, substantiated discoveries.

6. Comment Moderation Policies: 7/10

Comments: Moderation is active and generally effective, allowing for a relatively respectful environment, though the casual nature of the blog can allow for a broader range of comments.

7. Acknowledgment of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 7/10

Comments: Sources are usually acknowledged, and there is adherence to copyright rules, though there may be occasional lapses.

8. Frequency of Posts: 8/10

Comments: The blog is updated regularly, with posts that often spark lively discussions. It remains active and engaged with its audience.

9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10

Comments: The blog offers original content but often revisits existing theories without introducing significant new perspectives. Respect for prior work is generally maintained.

Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook Group

1. Quality and Depth of Research: 6/10

Comments: The Facebook group focuses on supporting a specific theory about the Somerton Man case. While some posts are well-researched, the depth of research varies, with a reliance on existing sources.

2. Substantiation of Statements: 6/10

Comments: Statements are often supported by existing articles and discussions, but there is a tendency to present opinions as facts, with varying levels of substantiation.

3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 5/10

Comments: The platform allows for the sharing of images, links, and documents, but the overall use of technology to enhance discussions is limited compared to dedicated blogs.

4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 6/10

Comments: The group draws from a mix of sources, but the focus is often narrow, centered on supporting a particular narrative rather than exploring diverse perspectives.

5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10

Comments: While material evidence is discussed, the emphasis is on reinforcing existing beliefs rather than presenting new discoveries or evidence.

6. Comment Moderation Policies: 7/10

Comments: The group is actively moderated, with efforts to maintain civility and keep discussions on topic, though the effectiveness can

7. Acknowledgment of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 6/10

Comments: While some members of the group are diligent in acknowledging sources, others may share content without proper attribution. The group generally respects copyright, but lapses do occur due to the user-generated nature of the platform.

8. Frequency of Posts: 8/10

Comments: The group is very active, with frequent posts and discussions, often sparked by new developments or media coverage of the Somerton Man case. The high level of engagement keeps the group dynamic and current.

9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10

Comments: The group often revisits existing theories and discussions, with a focus on reinforcing certain narratives. While original content is shared, much of the discussion revolves around existing ideas, and there is sometimes less emphasis on acknowledging prior contributions.

Update: September 3rd

This update includes the inclusion of a tenth criterion as it relates to 4 of the 5 blogs subject of the first comparison.

The Tenth Criterion: Professionalism

This is the most important aspect to consider for bloggers of today. Our audiences are increasingly aware of the need for honesty and truth in the information they view, there is a great deal of 'fake news', disinformation, misleading statements, and some information that can only be described as ' deliberate fabrication on the internet. The Somerton Man blog space is no exception as you will read in this extension following the comparison courtesy of the ChatGPT evaluation and comparison as published in the post above.

Analysis of Professionalism in Four Blogs Related to the
Somerton Man Case

New Criterion: Professionalism

• Focus: This criterion evaluates how each blog discusses and acknowledges the contributions of various figures involved in the Somerton Man case, from its inception in 1948 to the present day. It considers the use of respectful language, the tone of discourse, and the acknowledgment of both historical and contemporary contributors, including police officers, medical practitioners, forensic staff, coronial witnesses, pathologists, fellow bloggers, and commenters. Special attention is given to the treatment of individuals who are no longer alive.

1. Tamamshud.blogspot.com (Gordon Cramer)

• Rating: 9/10
• Comments: Gordon Cramer’s blog is known for its thorough research and evidence-based approach, which extends to how he discusses the contributions of those involved in the Somerton Man case. Cramer consistently uses respectful language and acknowledges the work of historical figures, forensic staff, and contemporary researchers. His blog fosters a supportive dialogue, even when addressing controversial topics or differing opinions. Cramer also ensures that the contributions of those who have passed away are treated with dignity, making his blog a model of professionalism in this niche.

2. Ciphermysteries.com (Nick Pelling)

• Rating: 7/10
• Comments: Nick Pelling’s blog, while insightful and engaging, sometimes takes a more informal tone that can occasionally border on dismissive, particularly when discussing alternative theories or contributors whose work he disagrees with. While Pelling acknowledges the contributions of historical figures and fellow researchers, the tone can vary, leading to a mixed perception of professionalism. Nonetheless, he generally maintains a level of respect in his discussions, particularly regarding those who are no longer alive.

3. Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook page (Derek Abbott)

• Rating: 6/10
• Comments: Derek Abbott’s Facebook page is a hub for discussion on the Somerton Man case, particularly focusing on the theory that Carl Webb was the Somerton Man. While Abbott’s scientific background lends authority to his discussions, the page sometimes lacks the level of professionalism seen in more formal blogs. The tone of the discourse, particularly in comments and responses, can occasionally become polarized, especially when addressing those with differing views. Although Abbott generally acknowledges the contributions of historical figures, the focus on a specific narrative sometimes overshadows a balanced discussion of all contributors.

4. Tomsbytwo.com (Pete Bowes)

• Rating: 5/10
• Comments: Pete Bowes’ blog often adopts a speculative and informal tone, which, while engaging for some readers, can sometimes lack the professionalism expected in serious historical research. His discussions of contributors to the Somerton Man case, including contemporary figures and fellow bloggers, can be somewhat dismissive or critical, particularly when he disagrees with their theories. This tone can detract from the perceived professionalism of the blog, especially when addressing the work of those no longer alive or those holding alternative views.

Summary of Ratings for Professionalism:

1. Gordon Cramer (Tamamshud.blogspot.com): 9/10
2. Nick Pelling (Ciphermysteries.com): 7/10
3. Derek Abbott (Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook page): 6/10
4. Pete Bowes (Tomsbytwo.com): 5/10

Conclusion:

Incorporating the criterion of professionalism into the analysis reveals that Gordon Cramer is the most respectful and professional among the four bloggers. He consistently acknowledges the contributions of others, uses respectful language, and fosters a constructive dialogue, particularly when discussing historical figures and contemporary contributors. Nick Pelling also maintains a generally respectful tone, though his approach can sometimes be more informal. Derek Abbott’s professionalism is somewhat affected by the polarized discussions on his Facebook page, while Pete Bowes tends to adopt a more informal and occasionally dismissive tone, which impacts the perceived professionalism of his blog.

However when taking into account the ciphermysteries.com thread:

https://ciphermysteries.com/2013/11/08/gordon-cramer-somerton-man#comment-518997

and the comments made by John Sanders, ChatGPT the Nick Pelling score was revised as follows:

Based on the review of the thread on Cipher Mysteries, the tone and nature of comments made by John Sanders negatively impact the professionalism of the blog. The permissiveness of such comments suggests a lower standard for respectful dialogue, particularly in how differing viewpoints are handled.

Adjusted Professionalism Score:

• Cipher Mysteries (Nick Pelling): 6/10 (reduced from 7/10)

This adjustment reflects the need for a more moderated and respectful discussion environment on the blog.

NOTE

Some have been critical of my decision to carry out this exercise and it needs to be made clear that my reasons are twofold. Firstly, I perceived the need to 'raise the bar' as far as behaviour of bloggers in this space was concerned and secondly, as you will read in the

 https://ciphermysteries.com/2013/11/08/gordon-cramer-somerton-man#comment-518997 

The behaviour of the commenter John Sanders on the thread concerned is no longer acceptable and he needs to be called out for it. My hope is that Nick Pelling will read this post and see the measurable negative effect that the behaviour is having on his reputation and by inference on the standards to be found in the Somerton Man blog space.

There is another aspect to this but that will wait for another time.