• Why not take a moment to introduce yourself to our members?

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Burring your heads in the sand is not good for this hobby. Why not actually challange what I have stated.......why is it that 98% of all small fish {blennies Gobies etc } only come from PI and are not even offered from other places?
_________________
Pain Management Forum
_________________
Honda Civic Si
 

clarionreef

Advanced Reefer
Location
San Francisco
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
What?
Overstocking on little gobies and blennies is common enough with us here at Cortez Marine...then again collecting with nets has always allowed us to catch more of course... and with very little mortality.
We're going to have to put redhead gobies and sailfin blennies on sale next week to get rid of them.
Steve
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalk,

You ever heard of Catalina gobies, neon gobies, or gold neon gobies? How about green banded gobies? Atlantic sailfin blennies? Jawfish? Royal grammas? Black cap basslets? Swissguards? Etc.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Ok. Since I'm the moderator I have a new rule. You can't post highly debatable information from "unknown" sources. If you can't name your source to back up your argument, don't bother posting. I'm going to make that akin to trolling and will delete the post. The only people who can't name their sources are those who are either lying or their sources have something to hide.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Most of the gobies I get from PI can also be obtained from the Solomons. Examples:
Pink Spotted Watchmans
Scissortails
Barred Gobys
Clown Gobys (green, yellow, & black)
Citron Gobys
Banded Gobys
Lawnmower blennies
dragon (bullet) gobies
Asst. Sand Sifting Gobies- I don't have the genus in front of me, but I think it's Valenciennea or something like that.
Blue Gudgeon

Things I can't get anywhere but PI:
Green Mandarins
Scooters
Firefish
maybe a few others

Obviously they are much cheaper and more plentiful from PI than Solomons. I won't argue that.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
MaryHM":2y0dsx1k said:
Ok. Since I'm the moderator I have a new rule. You can't post highly debatable information from "unknown" sources. If you can't name your source to back up your argument, don't bother posting. I'm going to make that akin to trolling and will delete the post. The only people who can't name their sources are those who are either lying or their sources have something to hide.

Mary,

I personally don't think that is good idea. I would highly urge you not to adopt such a policy.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Give me a good argument on why I shouldn't, and I'll consider it. I'm not a dictator- yet ;)

My reason: Because when people post something that is quite inflammatory based on "secret sources" it causes trouble. Our topics here are passionate enough without playing the "I know I'm right because my sources said so, but I can't tell you who they are" game. We went through the same thing with vitz a week or so back about the USCRTF legislation (sorry vitz, I swear that's the last time I'll mention it!). Both times it's happened it's caused problems. I don't like problems- I have enough stress! :)
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Mary,

Kalk makes people think. He doesn't convince anyone that cyanide is acceptable. Any discussion that presents both sides of an issue is more interesting than a bunch of people preaching to the choir. Censorship is for the Nazi.

The ironic part is that kalk is not necessarily totally wrong on this stuff. I remember reading years ago that it took repeated exposure to kill corals, and that one dose of cyanide did not usually kill corals. It seems the divers keep working the same area until it is dead. I don't have personal experience and I don't have a link, but I do remember reading this, and it was not published to defend cyanide use either.

This is a forum where people often state their opinions and very little is backed up with absolute facts. Even if someone else had written something in another media it wouldn't necessarily mean it was true. Free speech is a gift from God, let kalk enjoy it too. Just give him hell when he is wrong.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Good try, but I'm sticking to it. I never said someone can't present another side of an argument. Obviously they can and it is welcomed here (even the arguments that personally attack me have been allowed). But I will not allow someone to have "secret sources" as the main contributor of facts for their argument. That's just ridiculous and it needlessly pisses people off.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
MaryHM":1c2x8owu said:
But I will not allow someone to have "secret sources" as the main contributor of facts for their argument. That's just ridiculous and it needlessly pisses people off.

Mary,

The press is allowed to do it all the time. It called protecting their sources. Did you ever here the true story about the "Deep Throat" character that vitz alluded too. Nixon ended up being forced to resign as president when Woodward and Bernstein wrote articles based on a source they refused to reveal. The true identify of Deep Throat is not know to this day. If this were taken to a court of law you would lose. At least I hope you would. How do the other moderators feel on this issue?
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Honestly dizzy, is there anything that I can say or do lately that you aren't going to argue about?? :roll:

Look, this forum has the potential to get extremely nasty. I am surprised and pleased that it's been running for a year now (I think) without any major incident. People have expressed varying degrees of opposite opinions and it works fine. Until someone says "I know something the rest of you don't, I have sources in the know, but I can't reveal them". Both times that has happened it has caused problems. I'm not going to put up with it. People can have differing opinions all day long and say the most outrageous things they can come up with. But to try to convince someone they are right based on some secret source is not fair to the people who read this board occasionally. Vitz, I apologize in advance, but I'm using you as an example again (that'll teach you to step out of line!). When Vitz posted his "There is a LAW to shut down the hobby" post and said that it came from a very knowledgable source, it would lead a general person who just happened upon the post to think "Hey, he's got a source it must be true". Unfortunately that's the way the general public thinks. Heck, he made me think twice! Of course it was completely inaccurate and it caused a stink. If someone wants to support an argument with sources, then reveal them. Otherwise don't mention them. This is not a major media publication and I don't have to run it like one. I have to conduct this forum in a manner that causes the least amount of friction and directs us toward constructive discussions. As soon as this forum disentegrates into a free for all "i have the best secret source" pissing match then it will have to end. I think it's too important of a forum to end that way and I'm going to do everything possible to prevent it.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
John_Brandt":3flxyvae said:
As my very first post on Reefs.org, I am going to aim this one directly at Vitz's head.

I have been watching this forum for over a year, and I just cannot contain myself any longer. Vitz, for someone who has posted over 2500 times, you owe it to yourself, and this forum, to say something truthful and helpful every once in a while.

Let me correct a few terrible errors you have made here, and passed on to the general readership. The Marine Aquarium Council (MAC) does not pay its Board of Directors. None of them receive salaries, or any form of payment for serving on the Board. They were picked primarily for their expertise in their respected fields. It was also necessary, for legal purposes, that the Board be partially composed of representatives from conservation organizations. You, and a few others who post here, are of the mistaken belief, that the MAC BOD, are a bunch of paid buffoons. These are fraudulent claims against an organization that you, and others, have accused of fraud.

That is rather ironic, but then again, the Internet brings out a kind of insanity in people. You sit in front of a keyboard, typing out whatever comes to mind. There is nobody there, sitting in front of you, to stop you from sending out worthless trash. Vitz, when you hit the "Submit" button, it is almost as if you've flushed feces down the toilet.

Your recent post of the Draft Legislation from the United States Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) was both a good thing, and another terrible mistake. Good, in that now the forum can read the proposed law that the USCRTF has crafted. Terrible, in that you have falsely given the impression that this really exists as a law. I guess your "Deep Throat" informant turned out to be a "Shallow Navel".

I spent a good number of hours in Samoa in 2000, with the USCRTF, discussing just what this proposed legislation would be about. Contrary to popular belief, it is not a ban on importation, or an "end to the hobby". Many here have adopted a sort of paranoia, that the Government is just one step away from pressing the button. The button that will end the hobby. This is not true. The USCRTF wishes to bring necessary changes to the marine aquarium industry, not eliminate it.

The MAC is not breaking any laws Vitz. But you, are breaking an unwritten law, that most mothers pass on to their children...don't lie to people you care about.

The USCRTF supports, and is looking to, the MAC, to bring about changes in the marine aquarium industry. It is an enormously difficult task to reform an already-corrupted network of supply and demand. The effort is only multiplied, when false statements are cast out to the teeming millions, right here on the World Wide Web.

You have mentioned that you "will wait a year or two before I start to make a very big stink.." I hope, for the sake of sanity, that you wait a century.

I am watching you Vitz.


John Brandt

Marine Aquarium Societies of North America (MASNA) - Representative to the United States Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) and the Marine Aquarium Council (MAC)

Marine Aquarium Council (MAC) - Board of Directors, Best Standards Advisory Committee, Unsuitable Species Advisory Committee

Chicagoland Marine Aquarium Society (CMAS) - Vice President, Programs Committee Director

I'm not so good with the cut and paste so I just wanted to reopen this so James could have look see. John takes strong stands. Always has and I admire that. I doubt that is what you look for in the ideal moderator though.
 

jamesw

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I can see you've been using the search feature Dizzy. :)

You gotta laugh when someone is so abrasive that others sign up just to tell him he's full of it. (joke).

I got a real kick out of reading Mary's post too. The one where she says that she won't allow "undisclosed sources." That was back when Mary was Moderator and John was just a "regular poster."

It looks like BOTH of their points of view have changed quite a bit since then.

Cheers
James
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
jamesw":1y1sf86m said:
I can see you've been using the search feature Dizzy. :)

You gotta laugh when someone is so abrasive that others sign up just to tell him he's full of it. (joke).

I got a real kick out of reading Mary's post too. The one where she says that she won't allow "undisclosed sources." That was back when Mary was Moderator and John was just a "regular poster."

It looks like BOTH of their points of view have changed quite a bit since then.

Cheers
James


something tells me you're not really laughing :wink: :P


wow, so i'm resposible for brandt gettin into the fray?

i won't be able to live w/ myself now 8O :P

(joke)
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James, I think that someone saying "So and So told me about extremely controversial topic xyz, but I'm not saying who" is a lot different than someone saying "I choose MYSELF to remain anonymous". I assume you have the mental capability of understanding why, but if not just let me know and I'll be glad to explain it. Of course, you'll take anything I say and twist it to your perceived benefit, so I'm not surprised. The reason why this thread was revived after a year was to prove that Mr. Brandt's first post out of the box was quite rude. Not exactly good "moderator" material....
 

Expos Forever

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The three letters referenced in this thread are no longer available. (Josef Steiger, Paul Holthus, Tim Tessier) Would it be possible for someone to post them here?

Thank you.
 

Ad van Tage

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Save_the_Expos":3u7nr3xl said:
The three letters referenced in this thread are no longer available. (Josef Steiger, Paul Holthus, Tim Tessier) Would it be possible for someone to post them here?

Thank you.

The JOSEF STEIGER letter written one year ago [ January 07. 2003 ] is at:
http://www.reefsource.com/Industry%20Is ... teiger.htm

The other letters follow there ...

Posting them here will likely involve a request
to the authors seeking their permission to do so.
 

Sponsor Reefs

We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.

Click here to sponsor $10:


Top