BCC Readers: Who (or What) Are You?

At BCC we constantly attend to the issues that drive people to come here, who they are, really, and what they expect from us. BCC labs has cooked up some devices to assist us in answering these questions (we’ve tentatively called them “polls”). With your assistance, darkness will be beaten back into obscurity and light will flood the secret corners of the monstrous many-roomed manor that is BCC.

In thanks for your participation, we can reveal that BCC has only one perma, (you know him or her by the handle mmiles) who is indeed a permanent resident of a certain kind of hospital: The Kramer Home for the Unrehabilitatable.


  1. What’s the correct option for the first question if ‘I check out articles whenever Google Reader gives me a new one’ is my answer?

  2. I hope you are not collecting all of this personal data in order to start selling ads. Plus, I have been hanging out here for over five years, and who the heck is Steve Cannon?

  3. Poll 2 should have an option : “I only read BCC for the sideblog”.

  4. Well, kevinf, clearly you have never consulted the emeritus listing!

  5. mikka, don’t make trouble.

  6. kevin,

    I’m surprised that you haven’t heard the legend of Steve Cannon.

    Some say that Steve Cannon was the creator of this blog, and that for many years he held this place intact by the sheer force of his immense sanity. Then one day Steve Cannon vanished. Some say he went away to the East and took up an oriental life of indulgence and luxury, but no matter. Some say that one day he will return and bring this blog back to reason from the landfill of godless speculation, navel-gazing and Marxism that it has become.

    I do not know if Steve Cannon is true. But I hope to God that he is, and that someday he returns. Because I check this blog no less than once every ten minutes while I’m awake, unless I have had to spend an undo amount of time in the bathroom where I don’t have internet access, and so that the blog has become my sole source of spiritual content, It is my spiritual life blood, and my blood has gone black, or at least a kind of unhealthy dark brown.

    Oh, come back, come back Steve Cannon, and save the day!

  7. Steve G. That may be true, but it’s in poor taste to say in public.

  8. “Some say that one day he will return and bring this blog back to reason from the landfill of godless speculation, navel-gazing and Marxism that it has become.” Count me as sharing in this hope. Oh, and Kristine asked me to tell you, it’s “undue.”

  9. may or may not relate to the survey: When more than 4 years ago I started reading BCC, y’all looked kind of fringy. The more I read, the more mainstream I realize you are. Says more about me and the Church than about you.

  10. EHS, BCC is so broad in its scope that “fringe” simply cannot do justice to its awful strangeness.

  11. Kristine hovers over my grossly ungrammatical life like a kind of ghostly reminder of a better world that I will never know.

  12. So say we all, Thomas, so say we all.

  13. Amen to #12

  14. On Relationship to Mormonism you don’t have a category for former Mormons.

  15. Susan, we had that category, but the ghost of Scott B. forbade it.

  16. There is also is no category for formerly held leadership callings but now has medical condition that makes church attendance impossible. Since I barely get the sacrament brought to me twice a year, trying to get someone to come for a temple recommend interview would be pushing my luck. Lol.

    I am pretty sure I found BCC when I was told that the drive to even twice a month counseling sessions were damaging my body. Since church is twice the distance, I couldn’t justify going for the 20 minutes I could stand before my whole body was shaking. (Yes, I know, TMI.) I understand that a number of answers were inside jokes, which is fine, but if each had “other” as an option, with the promise to she a comment, you might get more complete ideas about where people find value.

    Personally, I would be very curious to know how’s my people have their own personal blogs, are permas on other blogs, and how they see BCC as part of their lives as writers. I am always surprised, when I remember to check, that link to BCC quotes are almost always clicked on, in my personal blog posts, making me think that my readers probably don’t read BCC, even though it is on my blog roll.

  17. Julia,

    As to “lives as writers” – there is a lot of writing that goes on here, most of it good or better to superb, but I consider what happens here more like conversation than, say, correspondence. I’m not a writer in any meaningful sense, and, in fact, I don’t much like writing. My own blog bears this out. I have things I’d like to express, but they are an awful lot of work. More work than I generally have time or energy for, though my intentions are always to do it. One reason I continue to do BCC is that others do the heavy lifting and I can play the fool.

  18. i have seem mmiles walking around freely. i may or may not have been living in or visiting the Kramer Home…

  19. mmiles has many personas and they seem to change yearly. That being said, BCC is not responsible for your visions, “real” or otherwise.

  20. Is waiting for Scott B. to come back a vain and foolish desire? (Much like Scott B. himself, which is why I want him back.)

  21. I was introduced to BCC almost 5 years ago when I googled something about President Monson and came across “Monson’s Age Considered” by JNS, whose articles and insight I have always loved since. I sure wish he were still writing here.

  22. Over five years – check more often than daily, but don’t comment as much as I used to comment (and, yes, that is obvious to anyone who was around 4-5 years ago)

  23. Brian, Scott B. is like Howard Wolowitz’s mother.

  24. No questions about the volume of lurkers? I’d be curious to know what percent of readers come for the articles and discussions but don’t comment

  25. Mark Brown says:


    That information is only found in the sealed portion of the blog.

  26. One more reason to hope for the return of Steve Cannon

  27. I’m here as a thorn in your flesh, to chastise you, and prod you towards repentence.

  28. On the first poll, if you had included “Rebecca J” with or as an additional line to Kristine, that would have been the obvious choice for me.

    I’m always wishing for more of John C.’s polls, and this one satiates me for now.

  29. MidAgeRegGuy says:

    Interesting poll, and interesting results.
    This is my first comment.
    Mostly I am curious which is why i visit here. Guess i am a “lurker”.
    My girls would call it “stalking” or “creeping”

  30. In the spirit of “your” seeking to understand your readers/participants:

    While I have been visiting this “forum” for 5+ years. That is how I refer to it when speaking with a friend that is unaware of it. Forum sounds like a better use of my time than “blog.” I infer that one or a few people formed it and have added a few posters to their insiders’ group over the years. This small group do all the work of writing posts. Therefore, I can understand and have empathy for the many insider comments. After all it is this fraternization, conviviality, and shared interest in doing some critical thinking about “our” Mormon culture, history, and teachings that created the forum and motivates its owners’ continued work. But, dare I call it cliquishness, does reduce the credibility of the forum somewhat.

    I do not much enjoy when (on occasion, with particular posts) forums of “this” genre, that derive from often overly-academic or overly-intellectual sources (Dialogue, on occasion), become less than fully accessible to those of us that are not academicians, or well-read philosophy majors. Similarly, insider banter is not fully accessible to me.