Tang Police - Info needed

[SPC]

Posted by dizzy:

To suggest that either of these well-respected authors would intentionally mislead the readers, for any reason, just doesn't hold water. I hope they both see this thread. If they aren't then I think they will be

- Dizzy, did you completely skip over this part of my post:

-Oh come now dizzy, I gave a couple of possibilities for why they might have recommended such rediculous tank sizes IMO. If you will notice I also pointed out this possibility:
Quote:
I think that this fear of loosing credibility could also make these authors take a more conservative stance for example, its better to keep them in a 50 than a 29.

What I was saying here was that their recommendations might be based on the fact that if they go to overboard with tank size, people might not listen to anything they say, and both men have alot of valuable information to share with the aquarium world. They might figure that it is better to keep a tang in a 50 as opposed to a 29 and thus are trying to reach a happy median. It is the same thing many of us do on these boards, we settle for what we consider to be less than optimal tank size in our recommendations figuring, well its better than the smaller tank.

-Now I have given two possibilities for their recommendations, there are most likely others, do you have any reasons? Why would they go against what the majority of old time reef hobbiest (but the minority of aquarium owners) would recommend on these reef boards?
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Steve

I think Reading Comprehension 101 should be offered on this board .

Brian

 

[Contender]

Quote:
From Contender

Furthermore, perhaps you meant to say "act naturally" in your post...but I assure you those words were never mentioned. They weren't even implicated

Quote:
From my original post

Shouldn't we STRIVE to provide a home that the fish acts naturally?

(emphasis added)

Obviously reading comprehension isn't one of your strong points, as is evidenced by your ability to misinterpret other people and argue points that you created in your mind.

You are right...I deserved this. I managed to overlook those words. However, I still don't feel like anything other than behavior was implicated by it, especially in the context it was used in. I am sorry if you meant it, but I do not feel like my post was manipulating your opinion, especially since it wasn't only your opinion I was representing. I should know better, however, than to use sarcasm when such a touchy subject is involved.

Bottom line, I never offered anything I said as other than my opinion. If you don't like it, that doesn't matter to me, but please refrain from restating my opinions as if I am demanding a course of action by others.

Again, you are right...you never did state anything as being something other than your opinion. I guess I stupidly threw you in with the majority of "tang police", who try to pass their opinions off as something more than, well, opinions.

Were they healthy in the small tank? I think so. But, in my mind, it isn't right to put a large fish in a small tank.

I have not offered my opinion, but with this quote, you have hit the nail right on the head. This is completely my sentiment. This is why I haven't give my opinion on the subject....it is not very convincing to anyone but me. I wish more people were able to seperate opinion from fact.

I promise to practice my reading comprehension on future quotes, and read more carefully. However, In the future, I would appreciate if you write something in your post that you mean to say, and don't be so quick to accuse others of "manipulating" your post.

Steve

I think Reading Comprehension 101 should be offered on this board .

Brian

Who would have thought that a mighty mod. of RC could take part in "flame war" tactics? It's easy to get caught up in these posts, is it not?

 

[Anonymous]

Contender

I don't appreciate "mighty mod of RC". My more appropriate title is "High and Mighty Moderator". I earned that title from previous service at AL.

All kidding aside, I apologize for getting snippy with you. Your preceding post showed great tact and a sense of fair play. You may have misjudged my intentions, and I certainly see that I misjudged you.

Kudos and thanks,

Brian
High and Mighty Moderator

 

[dizzy]

Posted by Dizzy:

The Conscientious Marine Aquarist by Robert Fenner

I next got out Baensch Marine Atlas by Debelius and Baensch.

-Dizzy, I can tell you the first thing that jumps out at me, all these guys livings are dependent on the aquarium industry. If they were to say for instance " all tangs should be kept in a 300 gallon aquarium" they would be cutting their own throats, less hobbiest = less book sales. Their credibility would also drop amongst most fish keepers due to the "I'm going to do it anyway" or "my cousins friend has kept a yellow tang in a 29 for years" mentality. I think that this fear of loosing credibility could also make these authors take a more conservative stance for example, its better to keep them in a 50 than a 29.
Steve

Steve you gain credibility by writing articles or books with factual basis. . You lose it by printing stuff just to sell book. Read everything you wrote again. I don't think either of these guys has to fear losing credibility.