Really - good luck guys, and I really hope that you haven't made use of any of Eric B's contribution to this hobby. One of the most popular books written on this hobby - Aquarium Corals - is probably owned by and referred to by each of you quite frequently... and yet you dare to make assumptions slighting the authors character based on so little and incomplete information. Despicable. Don't bother dissecting my post, it won't be read.
David,
I'm well aware of Eric's contributions to the hobby. I've posted links to his articles hundreds of times. I have recommended that book in the past and I will continue doing that in the future. (In fact, I helped sell one book this weekend). Why? Because it's an excellent book and frankly every new reefkeeper should purchase it (personal opinion). Eric is a good writer and I wish I had that talent.
This is not about that though. Eric did some things that have upset some of us who may or may not own his book. There are facts that are from government documents that paint him badly. Some of us want some answers.
I'm still at a loss as to perspective here and this is how I see it. In order of revelance.
- [Personal attack moderated out]
- While all of the documents posted may be "real", they do not tell the entire story, even though in my opinion, this is still a non-story.
- I consider it a non-story simply because those corals taken were destined for destruction regardless. With vast numbers of such frags killed in the dredging operations, once the largest pieces were relocated, they should have just allowed everyone and anyone to gather the multitudes of doomed fragments for their own use, regardless of what that use is. I mean, they are dead now anyways (those left behind). Those fragments that were collected and saved from destruction by Eric, while maybe not able to be relocated (they were never intended to be from the start anyways) they may yet prove to be of use to someone. At least they are not dead as they would have been if left to the dredgers.
- Perspective - Once again, I just can not get past the touting of being concerned for a bunch of corals that in reality, were doomed regardless of who did the "dooming". I would give Eric credit for at least trying to do something constructive with them. If that did not work out as planned, so what. They were toast anyways. Did Eric take larger pieces than expected, again, that depends on assumptions, which since we are not privy to possible verbal agreements, it is left to the realm of assumption. I for one, by not knowing ALL of the facts am willing to give the benefit of any doubts. Again, such "benefits" are a matter of ones perspective on Eric. If you do not like him, you will not be quick to offer that benefit and are much more likely to condemn.
I've heard over and over this great concern for AMERICA's reefs, when in fact, the truman annex is not a reef. It is a man made canal that had "fouling" life forms found growing in it. Yeah, its nice that an attempt was made to relocate some of them, but thats about it. A non-issue.
And then there is that ever present hypocrisy. Save a few "fouling" corals in a man made structure because they are American corals, but never mind the destruction wrought on indo-pacific NATURAL reefs for our hobby. Wheres the outrage and call for action there? Ahh, but wait, if all coral collection for export was illegal, then there would not be a hobby in the states or europe. So lets save some American fragments out of a man made structure and beat the crap out of Eric, while we shop for and buy Indo-pacific corals that were ripped out of a naturaly occuring reef. hmmm, something wrong with that picture.
And as such, At this time, Would the Admin. of this forum please remove/delete my username / account. Its obvious, which should have been about 100 posts ago, that there is no reasoning or fair play to be had. To any reasonable and fair adult, This topic and its "author" should be blantantly obvious anyways. I quit!
Thank you, but when I lose my temper in frustration, its time to go.
What defies reason is why Mr. Borneman cannot provide even the most basic and rudimentary account of his side of events, to be frank.
Perhaps it is valid to question sihaya's motivation. But it is also certainly valid to question Mr. Borneman's silence on the issue. It's quite easy to protect the identities of individuals that Mr. Borneman wishes to remain out of the discussion; if journalists can do it so can he. Unless there's a judicial gag order on the topic, that excuse sounds disingenuous.
As a neutral, don't give a damn one way or the other reader, I think your posts have been written very well. Even if you no longer wish to post in this particular thread, I hope you will show your presence elsewhere on this site. Reef discussion that lacks drama can be interesting as well. Give it a shot.
__________________
Republicans - \ri-ˈpə-bli-kənz\ noun: America's other left wing.
What defies reason is why Mr. Borneman cannot provide even the most basic and rudimentary account of his side of events, to be frank.
Perhaps it is valid to question sihaya's motivation. But it is also certainly valid to question Mr. Borneman's silence on the issue. It's quite easy to protect the identities of individuals that Mr. Borneman wishes to remain out of the discussion; if journalists can do it so can he. Unless there's a judicial gag order on the topic, that excuse sounds disingenuous.
You know, it's one thing to challenge someone regarding their professional conduct, and it's quite another to assault someone's character like this.
My sentiments exactly. Thank you
Quote:
The one side has government-provided documentation and a solid line of reasoning. The other has silence and character assassination (and this: "admit nothing, deny everything, make counteraccusations" ). It's the typical treatment that whistleblowers get, is it not?
... makes me thank God I never worked for the tobacco companies. lol
Quote:
Why is this type of nastiness permitted?? Can't we just stick to a substantive discussion of the topic on the merits of documentation and real events?
Like I said... I'm starting to miss Steven.
Quote:
Just my opinion: the more Mr. Borneman's defenders say, the more suspicious the situation seems.
Change the word "say" to "attack" and I might agree with you.
I mean, I just don't get it. His emails betray agitation about what people are saying, but then publicly he tries to act like it's all of no consequence and he can't be bothered with "the little stuff" like discussing it?
Is it me, or is there a contradiction there?
Does he care or not? If he does, he'd better pipe up again, because his defenders haven't done him anything but a disservice by simply making counteraccusations and attacking sihaya.
And as such, At this time, Would the Admin. of this forum please remove/delete my username / account. Its obvious, which should have been about 100 posts ago, that there is no reasoning or fair play to be had. To any reasonable and fair adult, This topic and its "author" should be blantantly obvious anyways. I quit!
Thank you, but when I lose my temper in frustration, its time to go.
Chuck
I have granted charlesr1958's wish, and baned him.
Linear Mode
