Letter to Paul Holthus

[Anonymous]

Good, then I have nothing to worry about, right? Just trying to get to the facts.

The exchanges here do get heated, but since the last episode it's gotten much more civil. In fact, you cannot deny that this statement is true in almost EVERY forum here. Vehemence and passion cannot be denied, though. If folks are afraid to post, there's not much I or anyone else really can do. I stayed off this forum for a long time simply because I knew that I would be speaking from a position of ignorance. Of course, I'm the kind of person who would readily admit to that, as well.

Then again, I am not the kind of person who would think to contact a board mod or administrator to tell them that I'm afraid to post anywhere, either. I guess I'm just funny that way.

 

[MaryHM]

Sorry guys, but here's a startling revelation. There are a lot of negative things in this industry and a lot of negative things concerning MAC. I'm not here to post "Look at me! I got a hand caught green mandarin and firefish today. Gee whiz, I'm so environmentally minded and caring!". I'm here to talk about the tough issues. And you know what? Tough issues are tough to talk about and tough to read about. No one wants to know that the reefs are being killed because of cyanide use. They don't want to hear it. I deal with these people everyday. "Well, Big Boy Wholesaler XYZ says all of their fish are net caught." There's a positive statement. You guys want to hear that ad nauseum? Well, it's what has been told to people for decades. How about "The cyanide problem has already been eradicated in the 80's. It's not a problem anymore." That's positive sounding to, but just as much a lie. How about "There is no cyanide problem in the Philippines. Our crack team of PI exporters has deemed it so". That one came direct from the Philippine Tropical Fish Exporters Association (the one that is now supporting MAC). That sure is a positive statement! But is it true? Nope. If people want feel good, fluffy, warm-fuzzy feeling information then don't come here. If you want the truth, no matter how hard it may be to comprehend or hear, then welcome aboard!

And by the way, it's the people who don't understand the issues or are just starting to come up to speed (by their own admission) that want this to be the happy, happy, joy, joy forum. I find that interesting.

 

[Len]

Mary,
Since you're not getting my point, let me demonstrate one (of many) examples of what I don't want to see:
"MAC is the evil that little children speak of under their sheets at night....the dread that wisps up those hairs on the back of your neck. the bolts that bind the post that Mary beats her head against, be afraid, very afraid."

I tried my best not to publically hightlight any individuals, but I'm left little choice because obviously you misconstrued my appeal to this forum. No one is asking for a "happy happy joy joy" forum. I am merely asking that you post with constructive intent, never for the sole purpose of denegrating or devaluing. That isn't unreasonable to ask, is it?

 

[MaryHM]

Len,

I know it's hard to believe, but not all of my posts are directed at you.
That last one was more for Lee. But while you're at it, you can point out James' little "loonie" comment earlier. :lol:

 

[Len]

touche!

 

[Anonymous]

ok- so can someome please point out to this member of the 'cultish peanut gallery' some of the positive concrete actual RESULTS that MAC has accomplished up until now, that were their initiative, and work?

i'm hate cults, but i'm a dead head, btw :wink:


p.s.-things that are 'in the works', etc. don't count, and things that were either started as a result of pressure from 'outside parties', or from enforcement thereby, do NOT count

tia

 

[Anonymous]

Just because you're in the know doesn't extrapolate to others being so.

LOL, Seamaiden. I have never been called in the know. Everything I know about the issues here I've learned within the last year and can be easily found on the internet by doing a little reading or by contacting some of the contributors to this forum.

Indeed. My own research only goes back a few very short months. And, that is my point, it only takes a bit of research, however, I also know (from my experience here and on wetwebmedia) that many, many people want information handed to them, they simply can't be arsed to go look for it on their own, or they simply haven't got enough time in the day. I am hoping to make it easier for them. I don't think you can really disagree, can you?

The negative issues about MAC can be found on nearly any thread in this forum. Any of them. Any. Ad nausium Why are so many so terrified that someone might come here and not immediately see the MAC-bashers concerns? I, for one, do not want negativism to be the first thing a new person sees when they come here. I've talked with many hobbyists that say: "I don't visit that forum - it's just one big groan(*) and moan session." I do not want these typical, but environmentally conscious hobbyists, to tune out the central message here.

I cannot disagree here, however, I think it's a little extreme to say they're "terrified", no? Many of the hobbyists I've spoken to seem to wish to remain ignorant of the issue, effort has more to do with it than fear.

I do understand the concerns regarding MAC; but bickering, argument and accusation will do little to cause any person or entity to change.

Well, considering what many have or had been trying to do (much action, not just words), both positive and negative, in regards to setting this non-government organization on the path to true success, without much success, what would you propose? To my mind this is indeed how things get changed, in fact, the squeaky wheel does get the grease, does it not? What grease will be applied to the wheel that appears to be rolling smoothly?

What can cause an NGO to change its agenda? It is not complaints, it is money. Why not form an NGO competitive with MAC and create what you perceive to be a better ecological reform model and a superior certification process? Between Steve, Mary, Horge, Ferdinand, Jamie, Peter and yourself all the expertise and personnel necessary is available.

Ok, wait just a minute here. What I'm perceiving is that you seem to have put words into my "mouth". I have made some observations, and tried very hard to be very diplomatic. Yes, I've seen things that give me pause, but I have never claimed to be an expert (ex-spurt! ), so I am not really sure where you've drawn this conclusion.

Also, I respectfully disagree with your assessments on how to effect change. What reason is there to bring about change if things appear to be just hunky-dory? At this point, our going back and forth debating the debate itself is worse than the original debate.

If your group is more effective than previous NGOs, and get the word out regarding your success, your group will get the funding that previously went to the other groups. Competition is good. Competition will affect change in the status quo.

Maybe so, but I'm not looking to start my own group. I am still trying to figure out where to add my efforts, that's all.

I get the strong feeling that you'd like everyone to simply accept the party line and the status quo.

Would you say that to my face? I will not accept the status quo until the earth is better ecologically everywhere, both on land and sea. I've spent my entire life and career on improving the environment. We have similar goals, your strong feeling is absolutely not correct.

Yes, if it were what I perceived while speaking directly to you, I would say that. Please accept my apologies, I do believe we've crossed wires here. I was speaking specifically to the topic/organization being discussed here. I never, in any way, meant to state or imply that you are uncaring. I can only say that this was my perception based on the tone of some statements you've made.

We all really do want the same thing here, the difference is how this change can be affected. I've already stated that I feel that, from a hobbyist's perspective, certification by a highly scrupulous body is really their only means of ensuring conscientious purchases. Let's see if we can make the most viable bodies ethical and scrupulous.

 

[flameangel1]

Len,,
On several occasions now, you have stated that you did not know much about the issues about which many of us are so "cultish" and passionate about. As such, you really should not expect those of us who do KNOW the issues, to just make "chit chat".
Constructive suggestions HAVE been made-OVER AND OVER- but have been ignored- for YEARS!!!
Now we are yelling loudly and CLEARLY, we expect ANSWERS-not just silence and written proposals that sound good when sneaked out to us, but actually are only proposals written by a bunch of "Hyatt hotels, first class tourists" and not by those of us in the trenchs. This may not be a happy, happy forum, but it is about what we, the working people in this industry/hobby , FEEL.

John , with his humour, posts things that show his disdain for our opinions, infers that we are simple minded and cultish when we disagree with what MAC expects to hear, but that is tough- we are not mice following the pied piper !!! Those of us who post passionately REALLY care about these issues !!!! If anyone is afraid to post, well, if you cared as much as those of us who do post, you would be more afraid NOT to post. As many have said in many ways, accepting the status quo will make it remain the status quo. But if we yell loud enough, things will change !!!!!!!!!!

 

[flameangel1]

also, for those who say we "groan" and ***** a lot on here, well, learn more about the issues involved or take up skiing or golf for a hobby.
Because, if things arent fixed and cleaned up soon, there wont BE any thing left to fix up or clean up !!!!!!!!

 

[liquid]

Len,,
On several occasions now, you have stated that you did not know much about the issues about which many of us are so "cultish" and passionate about. As such, you really should not expect those of us who do KNOW the issues, to just make "chit chat".

Speaking for myself, I know I am not asking people to make "chit chat." I'd like to see the issues discussed (heated discussion perfectly fine and welcomed) but I would also like to see respect for each other. The posts that go overboard IMHO are the ones that border on libel where personal attacks are made -- calling people stupid, @$$h013$, making false claims without backing opinions up with fact, etc, do nothing to further anyone's cause. I am NOT singling out anyone in this, btw. Just some general observations I'm making as an outsider looking in.

This may not be a happy, happy forum, but it is about what we, the working people in this industry/hobby , FEEL.

I don't think anyone's asking for this to be a "Barney" forum where we all sing "I love you, you love me" stuff. I know I'm not. I hate Barney! :twisted: This just wouldn't be the Industry forum if this were the case. Heated debate is perfectly fine with me. People have very deep rooted opinions and feelings about the issues and I'm glad that we can discuss these issues in a forum such as this. I know that when I was at IMAC, we had a couple comments at our booth about this forum -- how it is helping to discuss problems and issues that directly affect the Industry. We want to see this continue!

<snip>As many have said in many ways, accepting the status quo will make it remain the status quo. But if we yell loud enough, things will change !!!!!!!!!!

I think everyone's for change in the Industry. I know I am! Without everyone here discussing the issues I don't think things would be moving forward (albeit somewhat slowly) as they are.

Thoughts?

Shane

 

[Anonymous]

Why not form an NGO competitive with MAC and create what you perceive to be a better ecological reform model and a superior certification process? Between Steve, Mary, Horge, Ferdinand, Jamie, Peter and yourself all the expertise and personnel necessary is available. If your group is more effective than previous NGOs, and get the word out regarding your success, your group will get the funding that previously went to the other groups. Competition is good. Competition will affect change in the status quo.

Seamaiden,

I don't see where I'm putting words in anyone's mouth. I'm providing a very viable, constructive and positive alternative to MAC-bashing. With so many "industry types" worried that MAC could victimize those that are working for true reform it seems very reasonable to form an alternative to MAC. Just the suggestion of a competitive NGO could cause increased interaction of the established NGO's with the public. I keep hearing it suggested that MAC is the only game in town. Why not create or help create another game? There is plenty of expertise in this forum to get the job done.

I feel that very little change has happened with MAC due to the taunting, ranting, and raving here. Concerns have been elevated by John Brandt due to the constructive conversations at this forum, however. The negative taunting matches just don't cause much change. The many personal conversations and correspondences with MAC personnel by frequent contributor's here have done much more to elevate concerns.

I mean no ill will,
-Lee

 

[MaryHM]

I feel that very little change has happened with MAC due to the taunting, ranting, and raving here.

Lee- Three words for you. Cyanide Detection Test. If we had not been causing such an uproar in here about it's non-implementation then MAC would not be moving forward with it right now. So to say that this forum has had little effect is dead wrong.

 

[Anonymous]

Why not form an NGO competitive with MAC and create what you perceive to be a better ecological reform model and a superior certification process? Between Steve, Mary, Horge, Ferdinand, Jamie, Peter and yourself all the expertise and personnel necessary is available. If your group is more effective than previous NGOs, and get the word out regarding your success, your group will get the funding that previously went to the other groups. Competition is good. Competition will affect change in the status quo.

Seamaiden,

I don't see where I'm putting words in anyone's mouth. I'm providing a very viable, constructive and positive alternative to MAC-bashing. With so many "industry types" worried that MAC could victimize those that are working for true reform it seems very reasonable to form an alternative to MAC.

Understood, it's a matter of perspective, yes? However, the statement I've italicized gives me pause. Semantics is a tricky, bumpy road, but I have not perceived anyone as saying they feel MAC would "victimize" anyone. Squelch and silence detractors, yes, but victimize...? I simply see it differently is all.

Just the suggestion of a competitive NGO could cause increased interaction of the established NGO's with the public. I keep hearing it suggested that MAC is the only game in town. Why not create or help create another game? There is plenty of expertise in this forum to get the job done.

Oh no, MAC is not the only game in town! For instance, we have CORL (Coalition Of Reef Lovers), headed by one Mike R. King. Then we also have OVI (Ocean Voice International), yes? There are two right off the top of my head. Competition is already here.

I feel that very little change has happened with MAC due to the taunting, ranting, and raving here. Concerns have been elevated by John Brandt due to the constructive conversations at this forum, however. The negative taunting matches just don't cause much change. The many personal conversations and correspondences with MAC personnel by frequent contributor's here have done much more to elevate concerns.

I respectfully disagree. MAC was resistent to change long before it became the subject of such heated debate on this site. Elevated concerns are good, yes, but what actual change has been effected?

I mean no ill will,
-Lee

Neither do I. Maybe we can count each other at the very least as friendly acquaintance who respectfully disagree on some matters, yes?

Very much off-topic, but pertinent as well...I've pointed out only once before, but I'd like to again, that we Americans owe a great debt to the people of the Philippines for their bravery and sacrifice during the last world war (look for a book called "Ghost Soldiers", written by Hampton Sides--this piece of work both broke my heart and inspired it as well--about rescue of the POW's of Bataan). We're stepping on a lot of toes if we don't show some respect.

 

[Len]

Judy,
I don't have much to add to what I've already said here. Reread my posts and you'll find I address everything you talk about. You've pretty much repeated Mary's sentiments in principle.

If anyone is afraid to post, well, if you cared as much as those of us who do post, you would be more afraid NOT to post.

It's unreasonble to require everyone to have the same constitution as yourself or others in this forum. It's been suggested to me that this forum is the most intimidating of all Reefs.org's forums, not because of the content of discussions but because of the tone projected in here. I'm simply endorsing we shed unconstructive negativity to bring more individuals into our dialougue. I'm not suggesiting we stop having contentious debates (I encourage it!) - just make sure there's a point to them other then deriding another individual or institution.

But if we yell loud enough, things will change !!!!!!!!!!

Just to throw in my two cents: My interpersonal experiences have told me that yelling doesn't promote my cause. In fact, I find it engenders defiance more then anything else.

 

[JennM]

Speaking for myself, I know I am not asking people to make "chit chat." I'd like to see the issues discussed (heated discussion perfectly fine and welcomed) but I would also like to see respect for each other. The posts that go overboard IMHO are the ones that border on libel where personal attacks are made -- calling people stupid, @$$h013$, making false claims without backing opinions up with fact, etc, do nothing to further anyone's cause. I am NOT singling out anyone in this, btw. Just some general observations I'm making as an outsider looking in.

Shane

Well I'm not singling any individual out either, but when site admins and moderators are the ones doing the name-calling, it all goes to hell in a handbasket, doesn't it? (I'm singling out a group of individuals LOL).

By and large, I see people being respectful of one another even while being called "cultish" and "loony" and other interesting adjectives, but if people construe arguing a point and backing it up with facts, as "bashing" well that's not our fault.

I see lots of "bash the post, not the poster" and as far as I'm concerned, that's fair game. You want to post a Pollyanna view, be prepared to have it challenged. Doesn't mean you won't be entitled to respond in turn - just means that you're going to get a barrage of replies to the contrary.

I haven't posted on any other forum at RDO in a very long time. I used to be a regular in the general forum, but I got really tired of watching the flamethrowers come out every time a newbie posted about his new anemone, or his new tangs, or whatever. There's a diplomatic and tactful way to tell a person that the choice they made may not have been appropriate. I got tired of the hostility there, and I haven't been back. Perhaps things are different now, but I don't care to find out. BTW, I was never flamed - but I felt that anything helpful I could say would be obscured if the person was run off by a tirade of flamethrowers. It's rather ironic that we in the biz who have grown a thicker skin, are now asked to "play nice".... And I've run a message board on an unrelated topic for about 4 years now, and it gets pretty heated sometimes, and I have NEVER EVER had an email from somebody "afraid to post" because there was too much controversy. Perhaps there are some who would be intimidated by a heated discussion, they can either choose not to participate in that particular discussion, or not even read it, but to complain to a moderator about it, well I find that highly irregular. We don't bite here.... not at first anyway

I think those here who have been involved in the long term (and I an still fairly "new" on the scene myself), who have tried to fix the problems from within, and have had their help and advice rejected and dismissed, have exercised amazing restraint! They are still repeating their points clearly, concisely and backing them up with facts. Yeah they get a bit excited sometimes, I think I would too if I'd been repeating the same thing for years and years and being ignored. I've had trouble keeping my cool with customers who keep making the same mistakes over and over, because they don't listen - I can only imagine how frustrating dealing with an NGO with no real firsthand industry experience could be.

OH and I don't think another NGO is the answer either - haven't we seen enough of that? More suits aren't going to solve the problems. More tax dollars and grant dollars administered by bean counters and pointy-headed pencil pushers are not going to fix the problem while they jet around the world, business-class, staying in fancy hotels, putting on a show for those who put on a show for them.... we've been there, tried that, failed at it. Several times....

Put real money to work on real trainings, by real industry professionals, using real nets with real divers... the real net-caught fish will follow.

Jenn

 

[Anonymous]

47 days and counting. I'm past my threshhold of belief!

 

[liquid]

Well I'm not singling any individual out either, but when site admins and moderators are the ones doing the name-calling, it all goes to hell in a handbasket, doesn't it? (I'm singling out a group of individuals LOL).

Point taken. If at any time you see any of the Admins or Moderators or anyone else for that matter doing this, please let us know. This is an image that we do not want to portray for the management here. All we ask is for respect for one another and an atmosphere were we can discuss the issues at hand and how to resolve them.

I haven't posted on any other forum at RDO in a very long time. I used to be a regular in the general forum, but I got really tired of watching the flamethrowers come out every time a newbie posted about his new anemone, or his new tangs, or whatever. There's a diplomatic and tactful way to tell a person that the choice they made may not have been appropriate. I got tired of the hostility there, and I haven't been back. Perhaps things are different now, but I don't care to find out.

Things have changed outside this forum. Sometime when you have the chance, head topside and see what you think. I know that we are working very hard at reigning in flamimg/trolling.

Shane

 

[JennM]

Point taken. If at any time you see any of the Admins or Moderators or anyone else for that matter doing this, please let us know. This is an image that we do not want to portray for the management here. All we ask is for respect for one another and an atmosphere were we can discuss the issues at hand and how to resolve them.

Shane

Bygones are bygones (honestly), and I hate to dig this up again, BUT... the last time I did this, nothing was done for 10 days. At that time it was finally resolved, and to my satisfaction, however, it kinda blew some of the faith I had in the admins... The name calling, while I don't really care - I don't take it personally, isn't giving me a warm fuzzy either. It shows that the issue is not really resolved, and it lowers the standard and sets a poor example. I've been called worse (and dare I say it? By better people *g*! :lol: ) but to an "outsider looking in" it might harm the credibility of both parties - the name-caller, and the named. In this case, just because we're not towing the party line, we're being dismissed as being freaks or lunatics - and as I mentioned the other day, it seems that is happening more lately - almost like a "scare MACtic" to discourage others from voicing dissent. "If you don't play the game, and blindly follow along, you must be nuts." But I digress...

Like I said, bygones are bygones, and this point is well off the topic of the thread, but since you brought it up, I just thought I'd point it out.



Jenn

 

[mkirda]

OH and I don't think another NGO is the answer either - haven't we seen enough of that? More suits aren't going to solve the problems. More tax dollars and grant dollars administered by bean counters and pointy-headed pencil pushers are not going to fix the problem while they jet around the world, business-class, staying in fancy hotels, putting on a show for those who put on a show for them.... we've been there, tried that, failed at it. Several times....

Put real money to work on real trainings, by real industry professionals, using real nets with real divers... the real net-caught fish will follow.

Jenn

Jenn,

How about an NGO formed by hobbyists, expenses paid for by the board out of their own pockets, with all donations (100 percent!) going to pay for net trainings?

Nancy put forth this very idea earlier- maybe we want to revisit it.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[JennM]

In theory, Mike, it's a great idea. Problem is, how are we going to get hobbyists to pry their wallet open to do it?

I founded the reef club here. For the first 3 years, membership was free. Now we charge dues, and most of the regular attendees have anted up - but some only did so for the 10 % discount at area shops - the dues pay for themselves in a tangible way at the cash register.

Only a small percentage of my customer base belongs to the club - this despite my passionate "pushing" of the club. APPMA stats that I researched for my business plan stated that only about 29% of hobbyists ever join an aquarium society or club - so that's a small fraction of the hobbyist community at large that we might reach. The rest don't know, don't care - for the most part. Convincing them to cough up money for some abstract notion like net training or a certification program is going to be unlikely.

I'm not trying to rain on anybody's parade -- I don't have anything "positive" to offer as an alternative, but I DO think that Mary's netting fund is a great start - but I think a large part of that was funded by the industry itself - retailers in particular.

Jenn