Caution! Extremely Opinionated Posting!

[Ozymandias]

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.

dude that would be awesome and i love the RC submarine idea hope it has a camera on it lol.

 

[Juice]

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:

I'm totally submitting my DIY volcano :grinyes:

 

[dundadundun]

i have some garish tricks up my sleeve. i don't post my pics for totm or potm because i know better. but if the point is not to know better i really think i'd have a chance, lol.

 

[DeeDeeK]

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. The powerful draw of pointlessly arguing for no better reason than wanting to be "right" and to no useful or constructive end is too powerful. I keep promising myself "just one more."

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.

True, it was irrelevant and off topic and rather unclear. I shouldn't have posted it at all. However, I did not say that what I was describing was a complete method and guide to stocking tanks but was stating that I put in use a different system than the 1 inch per gallon rule, which I had mentioned and you then posted the following not very useful tidbit:

1" of fish rule...??? That was proven bogus yrs ago....

I got defensive and then I wanted to justify, explain, etc. I should never have responded to that 'tidbit.'

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.

The formula: its intention is to consider the load of CO2, nitrogenous waste, and oxygen consumption given fish of an estimated volume within a certain volume of water. So I eyeball the fishes' volumes and think of them in terms of the volume of an Endler's Livebearer, add 'em all up and divide by three to arrive a a figure for gallons. Is that really so difficult or am I detecting some hyperbole and rhetoric in your writing? Making a person who is the object of your public critique seem ridiculous can be effective rhetoric and I've certainly given you some material - but then again any highly expressive and creative individual is vulnerable to that kind of hollow approach to dissent.

I ask, since my "style of what tanks should be" doesn't agree with "all new fishkeepers," could you clarify what "all new fishkeepers'" tanks are like, what my "style of what tanks should be" is like and point out the clear differences? I re-read my initial posting and couldn't find those things anywhere in it. Would you please help out with a quote from that post because I won't be able to retract or apologize for writing attributed to me but that I can't find and read for myself.

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.

What shocking parameters? How are they shocking and what do they leave out? While I did insult monster fish keepers out of ignorance and the many bad impressions I've gotten via YouTube and at Chinese restaurants which have medium sized tanks holding monster sized arrowana - and I truly am sorry I said those things - I can't figure out what the direct insult was to beginning fish keepers (and by the way, this thread is NOT in the newbies forum). I did say I objected to and even found abominable certain tank setups but not just on grounds of artificial and dayglow elements but really for the frequently unhealthy, overcrowed and unbalanced environments thast come from low awareness and ignorance. For the most part my taste and opinions still stand. Nowhere did I describe my opinions as fact or direct them at a particular person or people that I can find other than the misguided jab at monster fish keepers. Please clarify, perhaps quote a smidgen of my writing that illustrates your inditement of me.

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?

Oh, again with the partial guidelines! That wasn't a good point when you made it the first time and here you've made it again. And how about the whole "Whats[sic] the new fish keeper to do" schtick? What does that mean? What are you trying to suggest with those questions? Since I haven't stated what geometric shapes are acceptable or not, are you referring to some other standards of form for what is and isn't acceptable. As for decor, I can only find my personal opinions but can't find where I slam beginners

Now, did I give specific directions of what decor and how to use it? Did I say any geometric shape is unacceptable? I can only find this about geometric shapes:

"One fairly safe bet is the rectangular solid - a cube or more rectangularly proportioned transparent box. There are a limited number of facets through which to see the contents of the tank, therefore an easier time composing the aquarium for viewing from all angles. Another, slightly riskier choice is the cylinder; too tall and narrow in proportions and it looks absurd and the optical distortion. More complex or extremely shaped tanks provide awkward spaces to compose within, create kaleidoscopic optical effects, and distract the eye from the pleasures of what lies within even if a satisfying composition has been achieved. A fine wine is a fine wine regardless of the bottle but there is a certain aesthetic and functional aspect of good wine bottles which contributes to the storage, pouring, and ritual of wine drinking which a plethora of naïvely a gaudy bottles only detracts from. As with aquaria, fine wine comes within a fairly limited number of bottle shapes for a reason."

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.

I recall one posting which I reexamined and called garbled, not several postings. And I've definitely got a problem with nonsensical disagreement with my postings when they claim I wrote things that I didn't write or when the dissenter's understanding of what I wrote falls short - this indicates either knee-jerk reactions, failure to follow my reasoning (you must follow it to disagree with it effectively, you know) or possibly they just didn't read the material carefully enough.

potshot |ˈpätˌ sh ät|
noun
a shot aimed unexpectedly or at random at someone or something with no chance of self-defense : a sniper took a potshot at him.

And here's a pot shot, loosely defined -

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

What with the "sigh... ...as misleading as the beginning post I guess" that sure does seems to paint me a foolish color while not explaining what compatibility is and broadly labeling what I can only infer to be the initial posting of this thread as misleading. Saying that things are wrong without offering actual reasons they might be wrong and without even specifying which exact thing it is that is wrong or showing where it is wrong is a tad sloppy. The "I guess" at the end of the above quoted post confuses me. The "sigh..." at least makes sense as showing some sort of frustration or resignation or other emotion although it is a vague and passive aggressive means of expressing it.

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

As who else admitted? What? Huh? I accept your belief that I don't comprehend what I am saying in my posting if you REALLY believe that. I'd also accept it if you believed the sky is maroon and that snow is hot. Now why anyone should be concerned with such beliefs is beyond me; unless it's possibly a bit of an attempt to discredit what I've written with a slur against my competency.

No offense intended at all.

Well, gosh! What would there have been to take offense at?

 

[DeeDeeK]

Oh my, oh my. I feel like this post is the island in "Lord of the Flies."

All I really meant to do was write something about the effect aquariums can have on people around them and the personal development and growth it can spur in the aquarist when the practice is approached mindfully. I try to state that aquaria are an actual art that we all can practice, each in our own way and to our individual benefit. I believe nurturing life of all sorts is essential to what makes us human and thus aquarium keeping by being a highly individualized practice offers access to that important, core aspect of ourselves that we can benefit from emotionally and even spiritually (if you go in for the whole spirituality thing - I do)

A framework providing structure to work within as you're getting to know a craft or art is helpful. I tried to suggest some basic ideas like using aquariums which offer the plainest, least distorted viewing, throwing in a few ideas about composition, balance, and some of the artistic traditions/practices to look to for guidance but never meant to sound like the final judge. I even said a decent aquarium can be made with all the elements I dislike if proper care is taken and oversized fish aren't used.

Honestly, I never meant to tick people off or scare away the newcomer and I never meant this material for newcomers. Nor, for that matter, did I mean it for all non-newcomers. I meant for it to attract the attention of people open to the suggestion that what we say and do and create effects our insides as much as what we say, do and create is a reflection OF our insides as well as people more interested in how our environment effects us. As I've said, the act of nurturing life in turn nurtures the nurturer.

I'd be pleased if some of my suggestions would be helpful, if they could serve as seeds of ideas, as a single step at the start of a long journey - not as the be-all and end-all of taste, aesthetics, or anything.

Clearly the writing I posted at the start of this thread is a failure by itself. It needed a good proofreading and it got one. I learned that flamboyant bandying about of personal opinions, complex grammar and diction, and failure to carefully delineate main ideas does not make for useful or popular writing. However, I have gained a better idea of how to make myself understood, clarified for myself just WHAT my main points are, and realized that I'm not the only sensitive person who's feelings get easily hurt and takes things too personally.

Following are a few excerpts that I hope express a little of what I really want to say. To quote my initial post:
"Aesthetics and the aquarium.

An important part of, and oft unrecognized part of keeping an aquarium is the aesthetics of it. Ironically, a great number of aquaria are kept as decorative pieces. The example I cite is the classic aquarium, undersized for the large goldfish kept within. The gravel of this tank is artificially colored and treated with a covering of epoxy. Often there is a box filter stuffed with charcoal and filter floss, powered by an air pump; sometimes the air pump drives an airstone as well. There is a sparsity of artificial plants, usually with scratchy-edged, plastic leaves. Sometimes the water is cloudy, sometimes not. Sometimes the box filter is replaced with an under gravel filter, also powered by the stream of air bubbles provided by a humming, vibrating air pump. The example with an under gravel filter smells less, if at all, than the box filter variety. There may be fake coral or even an old-fashioned diver and a treasure-chest which opens and closes as it fills and empties of bubbles from the air pump.

To me, this is abomination. That poor fish![here I refer to the OVERSIZED fish - that's why it's a 'poor fish'] That (usually) garish and ugly gravel, unfit for biological filtration. Those ugly and pointless plants! The hum of the air pump and sound of nonstop bubbling! That homely and none-to-effective box filter! It all adds up to kitsch-art and unethical fish-keeping.

Not that is impossible to create an attractive and healthy tank with such materials, with smaller and happier fish."

--------------
"... we may choose to feast our eyes and minds upon something delightful to see, interesting to think about, humane in nature, and nurturing to those creatures and plants living within, thus nurturing the aquarist, who lives without. By nurturing life, we nurture ourselves with its growth, health, and the spirit with which we imbue it

This writing is for me a further expression of nurturing the mind and spirit. I hope you will be affected by the wonderment and love I both find and express in keeping aquaria such that your awareness, pleasure, and benefit, as well as (of course) your aquarium keeping are all enhanced. It is my humble wish that you find this of interest and use to yourself and the aquatic wards of which you are the steward."

-------------------------------

"The emphasis of an aquarium ... can emphasize the grace of fish and certain plants, color and design, idealized “nature” scenes, formal aquatic gardens, anything. Nonetheless, it is the aquarist’s mindfulness which sits at the apex of all other elements comprising the aquarium. While an aquarium may or may not have a style, mindfulness is that “personal style” which we all have, in a sense setting the style with which we express formal styles (or lack thereof). For example, we can have a careless and clumsy style or an overly uptight style of keeping the same formal style of, say, a nature scene aquarium. Some people imbue all they touch with grace seemingly while others grandeur, slovenliness, love, or total disregard, to name a few. These are styles affected by our mindfulness and our emotional makeup.

Formal styles can be learned but only the mindful and the heartfelt artist can transmute approach, technique, and manner into art. By growing in mind, heart, and spirit, things everyone is born with, we all have a path to higher ground, accessed in art: in the present case, expressed via aquaria.
---------------------------
So what sort of aquarium can we expect to find in a visually distracting tank? It will depend on the mindfulness of the aquarist responsible, to which we already have a clue in his or her choice of a gaudy, distracting container, sometimes compromised for functional uses or bizarre decorative purposes (such as a picture-like wall hanging). This is not to say it is impossible to develop a fine, sensitively expressive aquarium in these sorts of tanks, just that it would take a remarkable sensibility and mindfulness to accomplish this. The effort and unlikeliness of success make this a poor choice for most aquarists as well as holding no advantage over simpler shapes.
---------------------------

 

[WinstonCourt]

Remarkable, dumb, but remarkable!

 

[jm1212]

If you are willing to make an extremely opinionated post, be ready for those that do not agree with your line of thinking.

There is no formula for stocking. You simply cannot have an objective formula try to find the solution for a subjective topic. It is even worse if you base the entire formula off of one species. That will NEVER work

 

[Rbishop]

I have a bare bottm tank with a short bodied flowerhorn in it....I like it.

 

[excuzzzeme]

Originally Posted by Rbishop
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.

What shocking parameters? How are they shocking and what do they leave out? While I did insult monster fish keepers out of ignorance

Your replies make more sense when you read correctly.
RB wrote "STocking parameters" that you misread and responded to as SHocking parameters". Such a mistake changes the entire context of what was said or meant.

We all make mistakes. Before you think you have been insulted, make sure you have read correctly and in the context meant.

 

[platytudes]

Ok, here's my take on this...in 500 words or less.

You made an opinionated post - mind you, you did post the "disclaimer" right on the subject line. It was more like a rough draft of an article (I think you even said it was such) and less like a casual collection of observations. It strongly resembled a persuasive piece, whether you meant it to or not. You never said these were only your opinions, and obviously many people think/thought you were trying to convince your audience to see things your way...that you meant to prove a point. However, your post is composed mostly of feelings, not facts. There are some generalization made - quite a few of them - and a considerable part of the post delves into some "touchy feely" concepts that not everyone is comfortable with. The rebuttal is, science. The science of aquariums is that fish don't get sick in ugly aquariums, in fact they can be quite healthy. So a lot of people have told you "it doesn't matter to the fish if the aquarium is what you call ugly" - point taken. Another thing about your article is that it is lengthy - what I called it in an earlier post was indulgent. Many people cannot understand and/or do not care to bother with reading it all (you even said you were not expecting a close read). What they glean from it is your contempt for tacky aquariums and "monster fish" aquariums (remember that Aquaria Central is part of the Monster Fish Network, so is closely tied to MFK). While you mention that this is an opinionated post, you don't say "these are only my opinions"...this article is more of a "don't do this, do this" which is why so many of the responses are negative and heated. Many people simply object to your tone, which they might find arrogant or haughty. People in the "art scene" as you seem to be from, are often perceived as such outside of their own circles.

I bet lots of people who have replied did not even read the subsequent posts. TLDR (too long, didn't read)

The bright side is, this is just the internet. This is just me but...what people write on here barely fazes me. I've got a thick skin when it comes to forums.

Not in person so much, I don't like being threatened or despised. I personally had a lot to learn as an atheist and liberal Miami girl who moved to "Horse Capital of the World" Ocala...where a majority of the population is Baptist and Republican.