jfh@netcom.UUCP (Jack Hamilton) (01/22/91)
I received a number of replies to my posting about Senegal parrots and
lories. Thank you. I also got some mail, of varying degrees of
politeness, telling me that this is not the group to discuss such things.
Like most people, I find new groups by scanning for words in my .newsrc. I
found rec.birds. I scanned through it and saw several articles about pet
birds. I also looked through rec.pets. There were hardly any bird
articles there at all.
If you're serious about keeping indoor bird discussions out of this
newsgroup, you'll have to do one of two things: rename it to
rec.birdwatching, or set up another group called rec.pet.birds (similar to
rec.pet.dogs). I know that's giving in to barbarism and all that, but it
might be effective.
--
Jack Hamilton Personal mail: jfh@netcom.uucp
US Mail: Box 281107, SFIA, CA 94128susans@cfi.COM (susans) (01/23/91)
In article <21586@netcom.UUCP> jfh@netcom.UUCP (Jack Hamilton) writes: >I received a number of replies to my posting about Senegal parrots and >lories. Thank you. I also got some mail, of varying degrees of >politeness, telling me that this is not the group to discuss such things. > Ignore those putzes! Most pet bird owners remember to put "Indoor" in their subject line, but the vast majority of "birders" NEVER put "outdoor" in their headers! It's a free net, and this is an old and tired argument. I say if the birdwatchers are that intolerant, they make up a new group and stop picking on indoor bird lovers. -- Susan S. (susans@cfi.com) Another Friend of Bill's
john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (01/23/91)
Jack Hamilton (jfh@netcom.UUCP) writes: +-- | If you're serious about keeping indoor bird discussions out of this | newsgroup, you'll have to do one of two things: rename it to | rec.birdwatching, or set up another group called rec.pet.birds | (similar to rec.pet.dogs).... +-- How ironic: rec.pets.dogs is a recent development, and owes its existence to this controversy in rec.birds! Last fall, a number of people here had come to the conclusion that this plan---rename this group as rec.birding and split rec.pets into rec.pets.dogs, rec.pets.cats, and rec.pets.birds, leaving rec.pets for miscellany---deserved at least to be put to a vote. Mike Mahler, a regular contributor here, volunteered to coordinate the voting. The net.gods informed him that he could not ask for a combined vote on all these changes; they would have to be done one at a time. He started with rec.pets.dogs, which passed---but that's as far as it got. Who would like to coordinate the next round? Seems to me that the logical progression is: first vote on splitting rec.pets.birds out of rec.pets, and if that passes, vote on renaming rec.birds as rec.birding (or whatever name you prefer). Being a vote coordinator takes some time, some effort, and a solid account; unfortunately I am using a guest account with insufficient disc space for the mail traffic. Any volunteers? A complete list of the procedures to be followed is posted in news.announce.newusers under the heading `How to start a New Newsgroup.' Regardless of what you think should be done about the group structure, a vote would help keep the complaining down, whether it passes or not. -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
s30986u@kaira.hut.fi (Martin Helin) (01/23/91)
In article <1001@cfiprod.UUCP> susans@cfiprod.UUCP (Susan Scheide -CFI-) writes: > Ignore those putzes! Most pet bird owners remember to put "Indoor" > in their subject line, but the vast majority of "birders" > NEVER put "outdoor" in their headers! I believe that's because it's quite natural that talking of "birds" refers to "outdoor" birds - it's their natural habitat anyway. When you wanna talk about stuffed, indoor etc. birds it's most welcome that you let others know in your subject line what the article is all about (e.g. indoor birds). Go ahead with your discussion of indoor birds (we might learn something from one another) but please, do remember that some people have a lot news reading to do (including me) and they do not wish to browse articles that do not interest them. With regards from a (outdoor) bird lover, Martin Martin Helin Helsinki University of Technology, Finland Internet : mhe@otax.tky.hut.fi s30986u@kaira.hut.fi UUCP : uunet!kaira.hut.fi!s30986u
awesley@egrunix.UUCP (Tony Wesley) (01/23/91)
In article <1001@cfiprod.UUCP> susans@cfiprod.UUCP (Susan Scheide -CFI-) writes: > It's a free net, and this is an old and tired argument. I > say if the birdwatchers are that intolerant, they make up > a new group and stop picking on indoor bird lovers. Ahem. They did that once. This is the newsgroup that they made. It's really quite simple. People who own pet birds and wish to post about them can do one of three things 1) post in rec.pets 2) post in rec.birds and put "INDOOR" in the subject line, keeping the truce that exists in rec.birds 3) post in rec.birds without the subject line and restart the inevitable flame wars -- And little Sir John with his nut brown bowl Tony Wesley/RPT Software And his brandy in the glass voice: (313) 274-2080 And little Sir John with his nut brown bowl awesley@unix.secs.oakland.edu Proved the strongest man at last... Compu$pend: 72770,2053
awesley@egrunix.UUCP (Tony Wesley) (01/23/91)
In article <1001@cfiprod.UUCP> susans@cfiprod.UUCP (Susan Scheide -CFI-) writes: >In article <21586@netcom.UUCP> jfh@netcom.UUCP (Jack Hamilton) writes: >>........... I also got some mail, of varying degrees of >>politeness, telling me that this is not the group to discuss such things. > Ignore those putzes! Most pet bird owners remember to put "Indoor" > in their subject line, but the vast majority of "birders" > NEVER put "outdoor" in their headers! And why should bird watchers put outdoor in their headers when it is a bird-watcher's newsgroup? Thought this might be of some interest. ----------------------------------------------------------------- From: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) Newsgroups: news.lists,news.groups,news.announce.newusers Subject: List of Active Newsgroups The following is a list of currently active USENET newsgroups as of 21 January 1991. The groups distributed worldwide are divided into seven broad classifications: "news", "soc", "talk", "misc", "sci", "comp" and "rec". Each of these classifications is organized into groups and subgroups according to topic. . . . rec.birds Hobbyists interested in bird watching. -- And little Sir John with his nut brown bowl Tony Wesley/RPT Software And his brandy in the glass voice: (313) 274-2080 And little Sir John with his nut brown bowl awesley@unix.secs.oakland.edu Proved the strongest man at last... Compu$pend: 72770,2053
duane@cbnewsj.att.com (duane.galensky) (01/24/91)
In article <819@egrunix.UUCP> awesley@egrunix.UUCP (Tony Wesley) writes: >In article <1001@cfiprod.UUCP> susans@cfiprod.UUCP (Susan Scheide -CFI-) writes: >>In article <21586@netcom.UUCP> jfh@netcom.UUCP (Jack Hamilton) writes: >>>........... I also got some mail, of varying degrees of >>>politeness, telling me that this is not the group to discuss such things. > >> Ignore those putzes! Most pet bird owners remember to put "Indoor" >> in their subject line, but the vast majority of "birders" >> NEVER put "outdoor" in their headers! > >And why should bird watchers put outdoor in their headers when it is >a bird-watcher's newsgroup? > . . . >rec.birds Hobbyists interested in bird watching. >-- i think the point is that a newcomer probably doesn't get the gist of the topic from the newsgroup name. renaming or splitting the groups would be the best solution. i don't think that relying on INDOOR or OUTDOOR will stop this controversy...for some reason, there's a tendency to insult rather than understand. personally, i read 'em both. duane
rfarris@rfengr.com (Rick Farris) (01/24/91)
In article <1991Jan23.151802.29031@santra.uucp> s30986u@kaira.hut.fi (Martin Helin) writes: > Go ahead with your discussion of indoor birds (we might > learn something from one another) but please, do remember > that some people have a lot news reading to do (including > me) and they do not wish to browse articles that do not > interest them. Well then Martin, doesn't it make most sense that you put "OUTDOOR" at the top of your postings? After all, thoughtless (and uneducated) people will always make mistakes with the subject line -- you will never be assured that an article that doesn't say "INDOOR" is specifically outdoor. But you will *never* accidently read an INDOOR article if you only read those that say OUTDOOR. Oh. You say it has nothing to do with logic, but rather who will be the master? -- Rick Farris RF Engineering POB M Del Mar, CA 92014 voice (619) 259-6793 rfarris@rfengr.com ...!ucsd!serene!rfarris serenity bbs 259-7757
mm@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Mike Mahler) (01/25/91)
It's been going very well in this file so, unless someone wants to take a formal vote and rename the group or create rec.pets.birds, can we please not get into petty discussions about "indoor vs. outdoor". There's such little traffic in this file that it can't possible be that mentally stressful to hit "n" when you see "cockatoo" or "binoculars" in the header. Besides, considering what's going on with the war, isn't this just a bit minor in comparison? 8-} -- This is your brain VOLVO This is your brain on drugs TOYOTA
tfisher@NPIRS.Purdue.EDU (Tom Fisher) (01/25/91)
From article <3908@lectroid.sw.stratus.com>, by mm@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Mike Mahler): > > can we please not get into petty discussions > about "indoor vs. outdoor". > > Besides, considering what's going on with the war, isn't > this just a bit minor in comparison? 8-} Amen, Mike!! Well said. Tom Fisher --
helen@argosy.UUCP (Helen Kastner) (01/25/91)
In article <3908@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> mm@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Mike Mahler) writes: > > wants to take a formal vote and rename the group or create > rec.pets.birds, can we please not get into petty discussions > about "indoor vs. outdoor". There's such little traffic in I enjoy reading about both indoor and outdoor birds, and I have learned from both sides. It doesn't take that long to skim a subject line and decide if I really want to read the post. I like the diversity on what is a relatively large topic. rec.pets just doesn't do it; it's mostly cat stories. hk helen@maspar.com right-brain person in MasPar Computer Corporation a left-brain job Sunnyvale, CA
bob@delphi.uchicago.edu (Robert S. Lewis, Jr.) (01/26/91)
In article <1001@cfiprod.UUCP> susans@cfiprod.UUCP (Susan Scheide -CFI-) writes: >In article <21586@netcom.UUCP> jfh@netcom.UUCP (Jack Hamilton) writes: >>I received a number of replies to my posting about Senegal parrots and >>lories. Thank you. I also got some mail, of varying degrees of >>politeness, telling me that this is not the group to discuss such things. >> > Ignore those putzes! Most pet bird owners remember to put "Indoor" > in their subject line, but the vast majority of "birders" > NEVER put "outdoor" in their headers! > > It's a free net, and this is an old and tired argument. I > say if the birdwatchers are that intolerant, they make up > a new group and stop picking on indoor bird lovers. Rumour has it that the birdwatchers started this newsgroup, and the birdkeepers invaded. Then, when some birdwatchers began to object to the postings of the birdkeepers, the birdkeepers kindly volunteered to include the word INDOOR in their subject headings. This did not please all the birdwatchers, and periodically the same, rather tired dispute erupts, usually in response to the posting of some innocent newcomer who is unaware of the INDOOR convention. I am a birdwatcher, and I have mixed feelings about the practice of keeping birds as pets, since it may, in some cases, encourage the capture of wild birds, and therefore may pose a threat to some wild bird populations. However, I realize that there are differing opinions on the matter and that sometimes one can discover very interesting things about bird behavior by observing birds in captivity. Therefore, I, like some (many?) other birdwatchers in this group, prefer to keep the group open to birdkeepers (and falconers and rehabilitators and, what the hell, duck hunters if they have something interesting to contribute) as well as to birdwatchers. I think the INDOOR convention is convenient, but really rather unnecessary since there are rarely more than a half-dozen articles posted per day, and it is not very difficult or time consuming to type "n" whenever an article's subject heading indicates that the article's contents are not interesting to the reader. So please, why can't we just be civil and forget this little dispute? It's so much easier only to have one newsgroup to look through--and, even though the INDOOR postings are usually completely uninteresting to me, every once in a while one of these postings contains something I find worthwhile to know. The value of these occasional interesting postings surely outweighs the very minor inconvenience of typing "n" three or four times a day. And were the groups separated, I would never take the time to read the pet group, and therefore might miss out on something valuable. I vote for keeping the group as it is.
richman@reepicheep.sws.uiuc.edu (Mike Richman) (01/26/91)
>From article <3908@lectroid.sw.stratus.com>, by mm@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Mike Mahler): >> >> can we please not get into petty discussions >> about "indoor vs. outdoor". >> >> Besides, considering what's going on with the war, isn't >> this just a bit minor in comparison? 8-} > Yes. The news that the US bombed 2 Iraqi oil ships and the Iraqi's opened up a pump letting Kuwaiti oil pour into the Gulf is an ecological nightmare for any wildlife in that area. Supposedly ten times worse that the Exxon spill and growing with little chance of stopping the damage to birds, waterfowl, etc. Sobering thought. /mbr
dkletter@adobe.COM (SUGAR in their vitamins?) (01/26/91)
In article <1991Jan23.151802.29031@santra.uucp> s30986u@kaira.hut.fi (Martin Helin) writes: >I believe that's because it's quite natural that talking of >"birds" refers to "outdoor" birds - it's their natural habitat >anyway. When you wanna talk about stuffed, indoor etc. birds >it's most welcome that you let others know in your subject line >what the article is all about (e.g. indoor birds). you miss the whole point... the purpose of writing either OUTDOOR or INDOOR was because SOME of us have kill files that look for those titles. i would personally appreciate it if some of the birders at least make the effort that us INDOOR people have been! Barbara Bowen, are you still reading things around here? send me a note if so... -- Yes. Beautiful, wonderful nature. Hear it sing to us: *snap* Yes. natURE.
mary@dinorah.wustl.edu (Mary E. Leibach) (01/31/91)
In article <1991Jan23.151802.29031@santra.uucp> s30986u@kaira.hut.fi (Martin Helin) writes: >I believe that's because it's quite natural that talking of >"birds" refers to "outdoor" birds - it's their natural habitat >anyway. When you wanna talk about stuffed, indoor etc. birds ^^^^^^^ >it's most welcome that you let others know in your subject line >what the article is all about (e.g. indoor birds). I presume you are not refering to well-fed, are you? Thought not. I don't remember much talk about stuffed birds in the history of this group. So why you should bring that up along with indoor only gives the impression that you are prejudiced against indoor birds and those who love them. Having nine fully flighted birds in a large townhouse apartment, many of whom I consider to be my friends, I take offense at that remark. Way back when, when the labeling thing was first proposed, the words INDOOR and OUTDOOR were both suggested for use. The "outdoor" people rarely use their word. And its not about which is most natural, if that were the case, OUTDOOR would be it. After all, OUTDOOR birds do not read (or have it read to them) this group. ;-) Cally, the Precocious Cockatiel (tm), President of Blake's Birds, suggests a third label. She wants the word "JUNKPOST" on all of these arguments which have been going off and on for ages, so she can skip them. ;-) -Mary Vila Vila struts on his perch, Rings his bell and starts to yell. Green feathers cascade down his back, Shimmering like the water he loves so well. His beak is black as ebony, He bites, and it clamps strong as a vise. His eyes flare, he screams his rage. Mary eats, that is not wise. The tantrum is over, He clicks with endearing intent. He snuggles against my cheek, Time to love, rage is spent. I think of the antics of this bird. Of Vila hanging from the curtain rod by his toe. Of the time he climbed up the inside of my pants, To make up after a row. I've never seen a bird so full of contradictions, As happy to fight as to love. But that's my Vila: Warrior Eagle, and Gentle Dove. "Pretty!" Copyright 1991 by Mary Leibach. All rights reserved. For Vila on his hatchday. (Which was last Thursday. He's in his terrible two's now. Look out!)
s30986u@kaira.hut.fi (Martin Helin) (02/12/91)
mary@dinorah.wustl.edu (Mary E. Leibach) writes:
*I presume you are not refering to well-fed, are you? Thought not. I
*don't remember much talk about stuffed birds in the history of this group. So
*why you should bring that up along with indoor only gives the
*impression that you are prejudiced against indoor birds and those who
*love them.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend any indoor bird lovers
(although I am a little bit prejudiced against them - why should
I be prejudiced against indoor birds !? I doubt that it's their
fault that they're 'indoor' !). I was merely giving two examples
of birds which are hardly in their natural state/habitat. No
connection between the two was implied (although I prefer stuffing
birds to keeping them indoors if they're not killed for stuffing
purposes - but it's not a strong preference. I guess keeping birds
in cages or otherwise indoors is OK but I wouldn't do it myself)
*And its not about which is most natural, if
*that were the case, OUTDOOR would be it. After all, OUTDOOR birds do
*not read (or have it read to them) this group. ;-)
I'm glad you had that ;-) there - I don't need to start this all
over again. (I'm glad to discuss this privately but let's stop
wasting 'bandwidth' here after this. OK ?)
Martin
PS. Sorry about this late reply but I was unable to post
to the news for a while.
Martin Helin Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Internet : mhe@otax.tky.hut.fi s30986u@kaira.hut.fi
UUCP : uunet!kaira.hut.fi!s30986u