Observation: Get off your high horses
- Thread starter Mourinho18
- Start date
wizzin;636547; said:
Well, it would never happen if that person actually did research on their new fish and already had a proper tank. Sadly, most fish are brought as impulse buys.
I agree.Killerhap;636563; said:
We should seriously consider the welfare of the fish. Most of the fish died or suffered due to improper tank maintenance and even improper tank size or cramping for space due to impulse buying or lack of research.
zennzzo;635781; said:Dizaaaam...that's a hunered-n-half gallons of RTC
no, it's 60 if you follow the 1 inch per gallon rule
Killerhap;636563; said:
I'm not debating any of that. What bothers me is the guys who go "hunting" for noobs to rake for putting a RTC in a 20 gal. It happens, face it. They are just fish. Yes it sucks. Yes I hate it.
But I hate those who go looking to be the first person to post in a new thread that the owner has overstocked their tank, and therefore, the person to point out said noobs error, feels the power of being the "all knowing" fish keeping god.
90% of the people on this forum know the mistakes being made. How it's being pointed out is the problem. Some people tactfully point out that the tank is too small. Others go about it in a very "I know more than you" manor, which isn't right.
I don't think this thread is about whether people put fish in tanks too small to house them, we all know that's true. It's about those that get off on pointing out others mistakes in an attempt to make themselves seem more knowledgeable.
How about giving said noobs some good advice, or ideas about how to deal with their perhaps misinformed purchase, but purchase none the less, and giving encouragement to get a larger home for the fish, even if it's a big stock tank or kiddy pool or something.
Hey Oddball,
that rule actually works for fairly small fish, what people forget is that it refers to cubic inches of fish, not just the length. Looking at that 61" cat I would guess a rough averaging would be 61"x 10"x15" so 9,150 gallons, seems a bit more reasonable (that would be about 5 1/2' deep x 12' wide x 18' long), seems about right to me.
Wizzen, nicely put.
that rule actually works for fairly small fish, what people forget is that it refers to cubic inches of fish, not just the length. Looking at that 61" cat I would guess a rough averaging would be 61"x 10"x15" so 9,150 gallons, seems a bit more reasonable (that would be about 5 1/2' deep x 12' wide x 18' long), seems about right to me.
Wizzen, nicely put.
you know I was only joking Wizzin: I get exactly the point you're making. I think the "pound them into pulp" measures have gone a bit far in some of these threads.
guppy: I realized that.
RadleyMiller: See above comment.
Me: I mostly wanted to dust off and use that pic again.
guppy: I realized that.
RadleyMiller: See above comment.
Me: I mostly wanted to dust off and use that pic again.
wizzin;636705; said:
I don't know who gets off doing that. I can only hope that the ones who are doing it, do it because they are trying to help people become better fish keepers, not because they need to get their egos stroked, or because they are just plain old pretentious and annoying.
Of course no one likes people like that
That said, if someone keeps crying that it keeps happening to them, then perhaps it is safe to say they might be doing something wrong.
