Xref: utzoo alt.aquaria:4144 news.groups:13114 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ark1!dsill From: dsill@ark1.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill) Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,news.groups Subject: Re: **** Call for Discussion -- Creation of Sci.Aquaria **** Message-ID: <156@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> Date: 11 Oct 89 05:20:03 GMT References: <2213@cbnewsd.ATT.COM > <3182@quanta.eng.ohio-state.edu > <152@ark1.nswc.navy.mil > <2287@cbnewsd.ATT.COM> Reply-To: dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill) Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren VA Lines: 88 I really can't understand why the sci.aquaria proponents are being so pig-headed. First they say they want to move alt.aquaria under a mainstream domain. Okay, I'll buy that. Tropical fish are a widely popular hobby. Then they say the right name for the new group is sci.aquaria because what they're really about is the science of maintaining artificial microbiospheres, not keeping tropical fish. Huh? That sounds suspiciously like photographers calling for sci.cameras because they're not into photographs, they're into the science of the 3D->2D photoconversion process. I say that's a bunch of crap. I've paid my fishkeeping dues. I've spent many a dollar and many an hour on the hobby. I'm sure some of the sci.aquaria proponents are more dedicated than I ever was, but I do feel qualified to have insider's opinion. What we need is a newsgroup dedicated to the hobby of tropical fish, not aquarium science. This newsgroup should have the most obvious, logical name we can find. Think of the newsgroup name as a kind of textual icon. The mental images conjured by the name should point the majority toward the newsgroup's topic. Alt.aquaria, sci.aquaria, and even rec.aquaria mislead a good number of not-so-naive newreaders into thinking the group is devoted to astrology. Some just don't instantly make the association between aquaria and aquariums. Many have argued that the level of discussion in the `aquaria' group will depend greatly on whether it's under rec or sci. I say that's another bunch of crap. The major factor effecting the content, quality, level-of-technicality, and signal-to-noise ratio will be the articles posted to the group. If there are as many aquarium scientists out there as there claim to be, they should have no trouble directing the newsgroup towards their topics. If it later turns out that there's a need for a technical subgroup, we'll create it. But let's not create it before the mainstream, general purpose group. In article <2287@cbnewsd.ATT.COM> popeye@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (ken.a.irwin) writes: >Even IF you view the animals in an aquarium as pets (which I don't) it seems to >me that when more attention in the hobby is focused on creating the environment >than on the inhabitants of that environment, it's hard for me to understand why >you would name the group after the lesser aspect. When I kept fish, my interest was in keeping fish. If could have done that without an aquarium, I would have. I enjoyed watching the fish, observing their different behaviors. I didn't study them, though. I didn't dissect then when they died. I didn't spend hours at the library researching water chemistry literature. I followed the advice of the how-to book I had and the person who sold me the fish. I never had any desire to be a professional aquarium keeper, biologist, or breeder. It was a *hobby* dammit. >I don't get this reasoning, almost all sporting goods stores carry fishing >tackle, so if alt.fishing petitions for a mainstream group will you argue that >it should be grouped with basketball and football under rec.sport? I don't know, but if you ask me it *should* go under rec.sport. That's why we have a hierarchy, for Pete's sake. >And since most woodworking tools come from places that cater to the >home building trade (harware stores, contractor tool distributors, >home improvement) should rec.woodworking really be >misc.consumers.house.woodworking? No, because most people don't consider woodworking to be a part of home improvement or maintenance. Woodworking is a hobby, craft, or trade depending upon how seriously one pursues it and whether one is an amateur or a professional. >The primary focus of the hobby is the tank and its environment, the fish are >a major element, but this is like changing misc.consumers.house to a soc. >group. This is obviously where we differ. To you the fish are a major element. To others, such as myself, they're all that counts. All the rest is peripheral: tanks, plants, filtration, etc. I will vote NO on sci.aquaria if it comes to a vote. I'll vote for rec.aquariums, rec.pets.fish, rec.pets.aquatic, rec.pets.aquarium... I'm not sure what I'd do with rec.aquaria. Right now I'm leaning toward a NO because it's not as obvious as it could be. -- Dave Sill (dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil)