Caution! Extremely Opinionated Posting!

[Rbishop]

sigh...another fish keeper that seems to ignore compatibility and only computes volume.... as misleading as the beginning post I guess.

 

[DeeDeeK]

sigh...another fish keeper that seems to ignore compatibility and only computes volume.... as misleading as the beginning post I guess.

Hey, what's all this about? I assume this relates to my garbled Endler Equivalent post?

Beginning post? The first post of this thread?

Taking into account the volume of fish does not mean ignoring fish behavior, compatibility, etc. Are you going to accuse me of ignoring total dissolved solids, pH, and temperature because I did not mention them either?

Look, rather than taking vaguely worded potshots, why don't you offer alternatives, suggest a correction or two, present your own ideas, or at least word your postings so we can be clear about what you're referring to.

Have you got something interesting and/or useful to share? Please do share it.

At any rate, if you want to take a potshot then make it a good potshot, hit your target and blow it to pieces. If it's about something I posted and you can show me I'm wrong or that I've overlooked something then I'll admit it, maybe even adopt your point of view. I've already done so a few times in this thread with other posting contributors. If you want to open people's eyes up to something misleading that's been posted then explain it clearly, say what's missing or what's wrong and make it crystal clear which post you are referring to.

Hey, I know; let's all return to the topic of this thread or maybe even abandon it for greener pastures. I'm personally getting tired of it. The ****pot has been stirred up pretty well by now. The combination of insult and angry or dismissive replies to material which has obviously been incompletely read or read carelessly or with limited comprehension by people who clearly haven't read the thread through and seen a progression and change in the ideas expressed in it is very irritating to me.

 

[WinstonCourt]

In the 'natural world' things like forest fires happen; they introduce things like potassium hydroxide and carbon into the streams, lakes, and dams. Torrential rains stir up mud and debris into these waterways. There are beaches in Africa which are black sand, they would look rather 'unnatural' to anyone from the states. There are beaches in Australia of totally white sand, they would look unnatural to me, i was taken back when first viewing them.

When I first started, I had all plastic plants. I managed to kill any real plants which I purchased.

I have visited pristine waterfalls in our national parks where the roar of the water from waterfalls was deafening to my hearing. Those highly oxygenated ponds were teaming with fish and plants.

Natural, holistic habitats kind of lay in a gray area, in my opinion.

 

[Fishfriend1]

As bogus as watts per gallon and on the same order of usefulness and accuracy and still just as much used and touted about.

I estimate the volume of each fish in terms of how many male Endler's livebearers they are the equivalent to in size. Then I divide by three because I'm comfortable with keeping three Endler males per gallon and that tells me how many gallons I want. Alternately, I can multiply gallons by three and arrive at an allowance of total fish volume for that particular tank, in units of male Endler's Livebearer volume equivalents.

I just go with the 1-2 inch per gallon method. Easier to do.

Yep, the ol' "Endler Equivalents" method. Hasn't failed me yet; failed to make me sound like a lunatic when I try to explain it in writing, apropos of nothing:crazy:

What can I say? I use the volume of a male Endler's Livebearer as a unit of measurement when figuring out how many fish I can keep in a tank.:huh:

If it works, do it.

(and to those who say it doesn't work, good for you, get over it, people can do anything they want)

 

[Slappy*McFish]

I've enjoyed this thread for what it's worth.

 

[jpappy789]

opcorn:

 

[Juice]

I haven't made much of a contribution here but I have enjoyed observing the unravelings as well. =]

 

[Slappy*McFish]

I think this calls for a contest on the most garish tank, complete with build threads and scathing commentary by DeeDee as things progress to egregious heights of bad taste.
Seriously, I think it would be a blast.:headbang2:

We could do a TTOTM contest. :clap:
Heh, heh...don't tempt me. I've got some old fake corals and a box full of plastic plants to help me get started. I'm serious about the RC submarine, as well.

 

[Fishfriend1]

and so a thread dies...

 

[Rbishop]

As bogus as watts per gallon and on the same order of usefulness and accuracy and still just as much used and touted about.

I estimate the volume of each fish in terms of how many male Endler's livebearers they are the equivalent to in size. Then I divide by three because I'm comfortable with keeping three Endler males per gallon and that tells me how many gallons I want. Alternately, I can multiply gallons by three and arrive at an allowance of total fish volume for that particular tank, in units of male Endler's Livebearer volume equivalents. For example, I have three fish the size of three Endlers each - for a total of nine Endler's volume. I also have a fish nine times the volume of a male Endler so I ad those nine to the other nine units, getting 18 units of male Endler volume total. Divide by three and I arrive at 6 gallons minimum tank size to house my four fish. I set up the circulation within the tank to ensure a rapid and complete turnover of the water at the surface so the tank is well oxygenated so I worry very little about surface area to fish volume guidelines.

Yep, the ol' "Endler Equivalents" method. Hasn't failed me yet; failed to make me sound like a lunatic when I try to explain it in writing, apropos of nothing:crazy:

What can I say? I use the volume of a male Endler's Livebearer as a unit of measurement when figuring out how many fish I can keep in a tank.:huh:

Hey, what's all this about? I assume this relates to my garbled Endler Equivalent post?

Beginning post? The first post of this thread?

Taking into account the volume of fish does not mean ignoring fish behavior, compatibility, etc. Are you going to accuse me of ignoring total dissolved solids, pH, and temperature because I did not mention them either?

Look, rather than taking vaguely worded potshots, why don't you offer alternatives, suggest a correction or two, present your own ideas, or at least word your postings so we can be clear about what you're referring to.

Have you got something interesting and/or useful to share? Please do share it.

At any rate, if you want to take a potshot then make it a good potshot, hit your target and blow it to pieces. If it's about something I posted and you can show me I'm wrong or that I've overlooked something then I'll admit it, maybe even adopt your point of view. I've already done so a few times in this thread with other posting contributors. If you want to open people's eyes up to something misleading that's been posted then explain it clearly, say what's missing or what's wrong and make it crystal clear which post you are referring to.

Hey, I know; let's all return to the topic of this thread or maybe even abandon it for greener pastures. I'm personally getting tired of it. The ****pot has been stirred up pretty well by now. The combination of insult and angry or dismissive replies to material which has obviously been incompletely read or read carelessly or with limited comprehension by people who clearly haven't read the thread through and seen a progression and change in the ideas expressed in it is very irritating to me.

Let me say/post this first...


You are the one that stated you use volume as the measure to stock a tank and never mentioned all the other factors.

You earlier gave some complicated and, IMO, such a ridiculous formula to do so. As much as your originating post basically slammed all new fishkeepers and offended many folks personal likes of their aquaria, just because it didn't agree with your style of what tanks should be.

While you do seem to be taking some comments to heart since you are considering re-writing the article, you come along and state stocking parameters that are incomplete. As verbose as your opening statement is to insult new fish keepers, you over simplify things in later posts.

Whats the new fish keeeper to do? Run and hide since they used decor different than yours or unacceptable geometric shaped tanks? Or follow partial guidelines on how to stock a tank?

I wasn't taking any pot shots at you. You do seem to have a problem though with accepting disagreement over your postings..and your own admitted garbled postings.

As someone else admitted....I really believe you do not comprehend what you are saying in your postings.

No offense intended at all.