[rec.birds] Skippy, what's wrong with you?

susans@cfi.COM (susans) (12/15/87)

 
Original poster writes:

>>Also, I'm not going to
>>waste my time digging through the dog, cat, and goldfish articles to
>>find the one or two articles a day about birds (NOTE:  I do like all
>>three of the aforementioned pets--I just don't like to read about them).
>
In article <9086@utzoo.UUCP> sciurid@utzoo.UUCP (skippy) writes:

>Ah.  Here is the real truth.  There is a weeny group of parrot
>owners who rightly ought to post their articles in rec.pets.  But
>they cann't be bothered to read through all the non-parrot postings.
>They are even too lazy to press their `n' key or set up a kill file.
>So, surprise, here is a group called `rec.birds' which isn't even
>used that much.  And who cares if dumping drivel about domestic parrots
>is not what the group was set up for.  There is the word `birds' in the 
>name, after all (maybe the `chick' and `bird' watchers in soc.singles 
>should post here too).  
>And why be bothered to set up a new special interest group--it is 
>too easy not to.
>
>Name:   Skippy
>Mail:   Dept. Zoology, Univ. Toronto
>        Toronto, Ontario, Canada    M5S 1A1
>UUCP:   {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!sciurid

	Oh Skippy, Skippy, Skippy.  I didn't even have to LOOK at the sender
	of the message 9086 to know it was
	from the Univ. of Toronto.
	
	Has anyone else in netland noticed the pompous, condescending tone
	these "gentlemen" seem to be honor-bound to adopt when posting.
	I honestly believe I have discovered
	some new phobia running rampant in Toronto.  These alleged zoologists
	all seem to hate pet birds.

	Why?  Is it because they are against parrots or against keeping birds
	as pets?  Did they all have terrible childhoods without pets of
	their own to love?  

	I would be sincerely interested in hearing what exactly it is you
	seem to have against pet birds -- speaking "Skippy" only for yourself.
	Perhaps there are some people up there who don't fit my generalization -
	you can say "generalization" can't you?  Sure, you did already!

>Besides, only a fool bothers to follow guidelines.  

	As it has been noted many times, the file containing descriptions
	of groups doesn't say "pet birds excluded."  I believe it says
	"Discussion of birds and birdwatching."  Tool.
-- 
Susan Scheide (susans)

"Another friend of Bill's"

joet@mmintl.UUCP (Joe Thornton) (12/17/87)

I doubt that there is anything wrong with the "bird-pet-haters"
of the University of Toronto.  I expect that they feel, like me,
that life is too short to be bothered with long accounts of 
constipated budgies and such matters.

On the other hand, I am amused by some of the articles related to
this, especially the baiting of haranguing harridans like Tracy
Larrabee and Susan Scheide... :-)

If somebody can organize the renaming of this group, that would 
be fine with me (I tried to email someone about my preferences
but failed to get through).  Otherwise I guess we'll all survive
with a modicum of tolerance and a sense of humor.

As for the real business, birdwatching, I wish I could make useful
contributions but I'm pretty incompetent.  I will report though that
I spent last Sunday in the El Yunque tropical rain forest in Puerto
Rico (wonderful place) and, inevitably, did not see any of the 
endangered Puerto Rican parrots.  How ecstatic I would have been
to see one... [You see, I really do love parrots. :-)]

	Joe