Monster Fish Keepers Book

[Oompa Loompa]

This is great. Each of these “search “sections could have a disclaimer stating that this is a general rule, this does not factor in each fishes personalities. Some can be meaner or nicer than typical. Also stating that therecan be an exception to each of these general match ups according to which fish can be housed with others. To avoid (some) of the boneheads who try to match up incompatible species, or even compatible at lethal sizes.

And for the typical tank sizes, include growth rates, saying x fish should typically be at this size after a year or 2 if kept in good conditions. This would give a baseline to work with so people at very least have a guideline on what to base it on. Then when people come start those threads we can just post a link to the database.

This is exactly how I imagined this working. Would eliminate a LOT of threads that aren't needed.
And, this would make it easier for members to post the actual information, instead of just "use the search function". It's a win-win, and would be MUCH simpler than making a full book.

 

[thebiggerthebetter]

I really, REALLY like this idea Viktor. Inbox me, let's hash it out and see if we come up with something workable.

I think this should be quite doable.

I think we shouldn't quite rush. I for one would like to know what say 20 of the most experienced MFKers think about it. If I will be one of a dozen of people ever posting n that section, it won't work. I think we need the support of 75% at least.

RD has already started. Much appreciated input on my end. No time to react much now. Later. A knee jerk reaction is that I don't see a replacement but an augmentation. Imagine all would proceed as usual just the most relevant, 1st hand experience and summarized knowledge and learnings are distilled out and presented separately, call it blog, book, database, etc. The report doesn't have to end with the fish death, but with the sales, rehoming, etc. But yes, I for one seem to usually report deaths, most premature. I know I suck as a fish keeper (don't try to console me, I am inconsolable but at least I am open and honest for the benefit, I hope, of others too. I report final size, age, photos, manner of death, possible explanations, etc. which alone gives guidance. Perhaps I am wrong but who else is doing it except sporadically in times and space? We need systematic knowledge presentation.

But I would like to know more opinions of old timers, long time mods, MFKers actively keeping and reporting on their fish right now right here.

 

[Chicxulub]

Here's where my head is at, thanks in part to Matteus ' insightful PMs.

Facts
1- MFK has the quality content needed for the online aquarium hobby

2- That content can be hard to find, even with search. This is a big damn forum.

3- We have members who are extremely knowledgeable, both of the hobby and the community

4- We should do everything in our power to facilitate the finding of relevant information

The Problems
1- New members finding this information. Stickies can be muddled and confusing to even find the right one

2- Let's be honest: we eat our own. We complain about noobs doing the wrong thing, and we complain when they ask questions.

3- The search function leaves a lot to be desired, and there's a certain level of familiarity that a member needs to be able to use this site well.

My Proposal
1- Empower a handful of trusted, experienced members ( thebiggerthebetter , RD. , Etc) to curate the forum to take advantage of something akin to the old Articles forum (or I could simply appropriate that outright).

2- Give Curators a special status with a colored name to identify them as someone of quality repute in the community, but separate from the staff. The process by which this would take place can be ironed out later. Volunteer position that can be set down.

3- In the section mentioned in paragraph 1 of this, have the sortable stuff similar to the Marketplace.

4- Charge the Curators with identifying the best quality threads- separating the wheat from the chaff- and creating a summary of the thread, identifying the key things required about the thread that needs to be searchable, and making said summaries. Only Curators would be able to post in this area.

This would serve as MFK's table of contents to allow newer members to find the most useful stuff. Think Planet Catfish's Cat-E-Log, but for threads, instead of species profiles.

What do you all think?

 

[pops]

lot of work for them but a table of contents with an index with the hyperlinks would certainly make finding what you are looking for and getting the right answer with out sorting through the bad would make searching info needed allot easier.

 

[pops]

Oscar breading a test to see how the link works.

 

[thebiggerthebetter]

TBH, I am not fond of this, unless the picture in my head is wrong. This sounds like a lot of work for the chosen ones plus passing judgment on others and writing up abstracts on the (old and new?) threads. I believe we all must chip in proportion to our means, our current position in the hobby - if you keep one fish, that's one level of responsibility, if a hundred, it's another, but still all are responsible, all must row the boat. In the Curator way, it's a small part of MFKers that is responsible and the work is of a Hercules feat caliber and to me, of questionable practical utility.

I think we need to make up formal, written up proposals, such as Miguel's, mine, Chicx's, etc., let there be 3 of them or 13, and think, critique, and compare. I don't see solving this in this one thread where I have seen only a dozen participants. Where are the other 100 hardcore MFKers? We need to cast votes and the votes must be transparent - everyone must see who voted for what, if they care to explain they can state why, because votes carry varying value.

The only one who objected to my proposal has been RD. And he's got a huge weight, much exceeding mine, I grant it. How do we decide if it's enough to discard my proposal and move on to Chixc's?

I have just criticized Chicx's proposal. Does it make it obsolete? Anyone wants to put up the next target? We appear to spin wheels in the mud.

 

[Chicxulub]

We appear to spin wheels in the mud.

Not at all! We're having a pretty solid conversation. I'd say this is the heart of what our community was intended to be.

After all, there's no good reason we can't modernize ourselves if that's what we feel is best.

Should I possibly do one of my big mass blast notifications in a new thread to discuss this? I suspect that the core of our community is in agreement that we need our focus to be the scholarly aspects of the hobby with fun community activity on the side.

The only real issue is how to get there, and frankly the talk is half the fun. There's a lot of bright minds here, it's cool to see the ideas bounce around

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Not at all! We're having a pretty solid conversation. I'd say this is the heart of what our community was intended to be.

After all, there's no good reason we can't modernize ourselves if that's what we feel is best.

Should I possibly do one of my big mass blast notifications in a new thread to discuss this? I suspect that the core of our community is in agreement that we need our focus to be the scholarly aspects of the hobby with fun community activity on the side.

The only real issue is how to get there, and frankly the talk is half the fun. There's a lot of bright minds here, it's cool to see the ideas bounce around

I like the mass blast idea to get the conversation going. Maybe in a new thread though, with the ideas presented here already summed up.

 

[Matteus]

TBH, I am not fond of this, unless the picture in my head is wrong. This sounds like a lot of work for the chosen ones plus passing judgment on others and writing up abstracts on the (old and new?) threads. I believe we all must chip in proportion to our means, our current position in the hobby - if you keep one fish, that's one level of responsibility, if a hundred, it's another, but still all are responsible, all must row the boat. In the Curator way, it's a small part of MFKers that is responsible and the work is of a Hercules feat caliber and to me, of questionable practical utility.

I think we need to make up formal, written up proposals, such as Miguel's, mine, Chicx's, etc., let there be 3 of them or 13, and think, critique, and compare. I don't see solving this in this one thread where I have seen only a dozen participants. Where are the other 100 hardcore MFKers? We need to cast votes and the votes must be transparent - everyone must see who voted for what, if they care to explain they can state why, because votes carry varying value.

The only one who objected to my proposal has been RD. And he's got a huge weight, much exceeding mine, I grant it. How do we decide if it's enough to discard my proposal and move on to Chixc's?

I have just criticized Chicx's proposal. Does it make it obsolete? Anyone wants to put up the next target? We appear to spin wheels in the mud.

Part of what I was suggesting, is that we have a team of willing participants who could scan through threads to sort the wheat from chaff, before it even gets sent to the curators. Have a plan and a timeline so people can share the weight rather than it all being left on one or 2 people to do everything.

For example- I may not know the exact intricacies of the numbers of barbels on a certain catfish, but I understand that a red tail cat requires a certain footprint and height in order to keep a good lifestyle in a tank. So someone like myself could be someone who sorts out what is needed for the requested info.

Imo it doesn’t need to be robs idea or viktors idea. It could be an amalgamation of a few ideas to bring change that adapts to today’s or even tomorrow’s fish keeping communities. Non of the ideas that come will be entirely bulletproof. So maybe we can compile the good the bad and the ugly.

 

[fishhead0103666]

A video seems to hold the attention span longer than simply reading text.

I’m a young person and I believe that I’m around the age of most people that watch youtube. I get bored a lot with life so I turn to youtube to cure my boredom. Time goes by faster on there, I can watch for an hour and it will feel like 5 minutes.
To make it short, yes, videos do hold attention spans for longer.

How would you MFKers feel about having a dedicated journals section that's sortable by tank info and species, has an active curator to ensure quality, and is intended to be treated as informative?

Ahem, I tried to have a journal section made but you shot it down.

https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/threads/journal-forum.710633/