• Looking to buy a cephalopod? Check out Tomh's Cephs Forum, and this post in particular shares important info about our policies as it relates to responsible ceph-keeping.

[Announcement]: Ceph Care Ethics

I've been concerned from the very beginning about posting all the stuff about wunderpus on the open side of the forum because of the very reasons stated above. We all have vivid memories of trying to convince cocky wanabe ceph owners that no, it isn't ok to keep a vulgaris in a 10 gallon tank and feed it goldfish, and having them argue belligerently that everything will be fine, even though they just got the tank, have no live rock and are getting the octo next week. Do we really think that any statement about not buying wunderpus or mimics will have any effect, and do we really believe that the average lfs will refrain from ordering them if they get requests? Thales is an experienced ceph keeper who may have saved his octo from an untimely death by rescuing it before it was picked up by an lfs, but we don't want to encourage casual readers of Tonmo to attempt the same thing.
Thales, I'm sorry you feel like you have to remove all pictures , etc from Tonmo, but you are really an exceptional ceph keeper, and you should be aware that very few people can match your skills. We really don't need to be encouraging the collection of animals who's viability in their natural habitat is possibly already compromised.
Sharon :twocents:
 
As a longtime enthusiast (though from a distance) but a new member here; let me add my :twocents: ...

It only takes a new member here a few moments reading any of the information listed on this site to realize the staff here (and most of the members) are intelligent, honorable, dedicated people who care first and formost for the species described here, and secondly for the hobby. It only takes a few days to begin to see who the major contributors are, and what the overall stance in on specific species (flamboyant, blue ring, wunderpus, etc).

There has to be a way to convey care information and media of these animals while also informing the public of your stance on collecting and husbandry. So far I believe this site has done an admirable job of that, and I have NO doubt you will find a way to continue that.

One thing to consider since it appears you're considering allocating information on non-advised species to the "paid" area (where I will soon also be a member)...There isn't a single species here that can't be viewed as beautiful, exotic and highly desirable to collectors and hobbyists; whether it be S. bandensis, which is readily available here in captive-bred form, or the wunderpus, which is ill-advised for collecting. If you're going to restric information regarding certain species "to protect them" from over-eager and ill-informed collectors; the entire site may as well be made "paid only".

I'm not saying I know what the answer is, but I am saying I believe you'll find a way to include all information provided by members here in the non-paid site while also converying that certain species kept by certain responsible, highly experienced members are not recommended for others, and in fact are highly discouraged.

I hope that says what I mean to say, and that I haven't overstepped any boudaries. Just the thoughts of a relative outsider new to the site.

KEEP UP THE AMAZING WORK!!!

:notworth:
 
Michael, I think you will find that all of us agree with you in point...but the evidence that posting articles glorifying the keeping of some species, even though the wild poplulation numbers are not known, has indeed resulted in a huge upsurge in interest in these species of cephalopods. Last year, the keeping of wonderpus and mimics was unheard of...now, how many new threads do we have?

As I have stated before, personally, I don't agree with keeping captive cephs, but that is indeed my choice. I used to, and it would be throwing rocks at glass houses to say that I am right, and other's are wrong.
 
cthulhu77;91693 said:
Michael, I think you will find that all of us agree with you in point...but the evidence that posting articles glorifying the keeping of some species, even though the wild poplulation numbers are not known, has indeed resulted in a huge upsurge in interest in these species of cephalopods. Last year, the keeping of wonderpus and mimics was unheard of...now, how many new threads do we have?

What evidence and what articles?

A search of 'wunderpus' and 'mimic' turns up very few threads about their husbandry, and most of those are from people new to TONMO who bought the animals at aquarium stores, asking for help in how to keep them alive.
 
Really? Look at the one nursing eggs...how many have we seen in the last 16 months about "where can I get one?".
They do not belong in captivity. Period.
When you can tell me that they are totally unthreatened in the wild, and there is a large population, then, I will keep my mouth shut.

But I will still think that keeping cephs in captivity is wrong.
 
Greg,

What 'articles glorifying the keeping of some species' were you referring to in your previous post?

cthulhu77;91710 said:
Really? Look at the one nursing eggs...

What article prompted that one to be bought? What evidence do you have that shows that to be the case?

how many have we seen in the last 16 months about "where can I get one?".

I think that is what I am asking you. How many and what articles prompted them?
 
TONMO staff,

I am glad, for consistency's sake, that you closed jhemdal's threads. One of my biggest worries with decisions to censor content is that it often gets done inconsistently, and seeing that the new policy is partially getting followed up on makes me feel much better. :biggrin2:
At the same time, I have to ask why weren't those threads moved to the supporters area like mine was? If my thread had been locked in place with an explanation of why, I would have had MUCH less of a negative reaction than I did when it was moved out of the public view and into the pay area of the site.

Thanks!

RR
 
I swore I wasn't going to post on this subject since I expressed my opinion early on but Jay's (jhemdal) questions are exactly my point. Greg, do you REALLY think it was wrong for the fish curator of a city zoo to ask about a ceph in his care? Or that he has to belong to a special group to get a one time answer? Or that perhaps you are generalizing without really looking to see what kind of people are using the information that was available?
 
Hi everyone,

I'm sorry I'm not as quick-draw on the keyboard as I'd like to be! This thread has gotten away from me a bit...

Thales, rest assured that your thread was not targeted in any way. Our "code" transcends any one thread or member -- I think it stands on face value.

I will say, though, that your thread shone a spotlight on the issue that I felt we needed to address.

Now, with regard to the enforcement of that code -- a couple of things. One, the code was published well after the Fontenelle thread became very rich in content. You'll notice that several past threads have also been moved to the Supporter's forum.

For going forward, I am suggesting that we should "lock" any new thread dealing with poorly understood species, with link which points to our code.

I have other things to catch up on in this thread, but that's all for now... as far as people proactively asking on here, "where can I get one?", please keep in mind that TONMO.com is heavily trafficked. Most people don't post notes like all of us are doing here. Most visitors are only reading. I feel it is our responsibility to put certain aspects of this trade into context. There are some "edge" practices that I'm not comfortable with, in line with the latter part of my mission as displayed in my sig.
 
dwhatley;91719 said:
I swore I wasn't going to post on this subject since I expressed my opinion early on but Jay's (jhemdal) questions are exactly my point. Greg, do you REALLY think it was wrong for the fish curator of a city zoo to ask about a ceph in his care? Or that he has to belong to a special group to get a one time answer? Or that perhaps you are generalizing without really looking to see what kind of people are using the information that was available?


Yes, I do think it is wrong to post such questions on a public forum.

Yes, I do think that if the information is so necessary, he should have to join a select group. I have had to on many occasions in pursuit of specialized fields of knowledge, and it didn't bother me at all.

No, I am not generalizing, other than the fact that we are bombarded often by questions regarding rare cephalopods that perhaps are edited before you see them. I also recieve pm's and emails begging the questions on a daily basis.

Thales, you were never singled out...it is just that your thread had the biggest impact when it was removed at your request, and then moved to Supporter's.

In example: I have to pay dues every year to have access to the Illustrator's Library...for information. I have to pay dues to various institutions to be able to view their collections for illustrational use, and I have to pay for every previous image or data gathered by other illustrator's and scientists. I fail to see why this is such a big deal...that is, unless we want the information to be free to everyone who wants to go out and buy a wonderpus, etc., which says to me "people who don't want to spend the money to properly do it"...the very sort we are trying to weed out.

Or is this an ego boosting thing? I am confused by the upset caused here...it appears to be catering to the lowest common denominator.
 
tonmo;91734 said:
Hi everyone,
Thales, rest assured that your thread was not targeted in any way. Our "code" transcends any one thread or member -- I think it stands on face value.

I understand that is the idea, at the same time my thread was moved out of the public eye without so much as an explanation in the forum it was in. Non TONMO heads that were reading the thread find it vanished.

I will say, though, that your thread shone a spotlight on the issue that I felt we needed to address.

But my thread wasn't targeted?

Now, with regard to the enforcement of that code -- a couple of things. One, the code was published well after the Fontenelle thread became very rich in content. You'll notice that several past threads have also been moved to the Supporter's forum.

I am not seeing any of them there, perhaps I am missing something.

For going forward, I am suggesting that we should "lock" any new thread dealing with poorly understood species, with link which points to our code.

Just so I understand, it wasn't that my thread showed a wunderpus in an aquarium, its that it showed too many good pics of a wunderpus in an aquarium?

I have other things to catch up on in this thread, but that's all for now... as far as people proactively asking on here, "where can I get one?", please keep in mind that TONMO.com is heavily trafficked. Most people don't post notes like all of us are doing here. Most visitors are only reading. I feel it is our responsibility to put certain aspects of this trade into context. There are some "edge" practices that I'm not comfortable with, in line with the latter part of my mission as displayed in my sig.

So the evidence that Greg was talking about doesn't really exist? It isn't that we know that people are asking 'where can I get one' but we are assuming that is happening because the site is so heavily trafficked? How do we know they aren't reading and going away the idea of keeping such animals in context from the content of the threads?


EDIT:
Tony, I just reread this post and see there is a danger of it seeming argumentative or confrontational. I didn't not mean it that way, I was just trying to be straightforward. I hope you understand. RR
 
(Preface) I've found myself to be increasingly less tolerant of individuals and groups that tell me what is or is not appropriate. I inherited a large stripe of independence from my mother's side of the family, and it seems to get stronger with age.

That being said, I think that it is flat wrong to censor good information. Many have stated that they don't believe that keeping wonderpus and mimics in captivity. Stating opinions is a national treasure to be sure, but when they are policed and censored, it is no longer an open forum but a dictatorship, regardless of the good will intended by those that are doing the censoring.

Is the public at large crass, uneducated, illiterate, and feeble? Maybe so, but that does not give anyone the right to decide what information they are capable of understanding. Robbing people of information and opportunity only creates more misuderstanding and hatred, you need only a quick review of history to know that. If you are going to change the world, you have to teach it properly first. You cannot sit behind closed doors, make decisions for them, and expect them to respect you for it.

Thales shared everything involved with his decision, very publicly, and has accepted the fact that it would not be liked by everyone. But he did it openly, without reservation. I am not saying that that exempts him from wrong doing (which I don't believe he has done in any great sense). He has not kept a dozen of these animals and tortured them, nor has he stated that he is completely right. He is admittedly wishy washy about the whole enterprise, but the fact that he admits all of that and is willing to discuss it makes him top notch in my opinion.

Hiding the information and the fantastic nature of the creatures is a great injustice to them, and to the intellect of the public. If you treat them like children, they will act so, but if you treat them like responsible people, you will at least have the uppper hand even if they do not respond appropriately.

I too have a great interest in saving what little there is left of the ocean, but we have thousands of years of history behind us coming to a head. One man, keeping one octopus, should not be so villified for his actions.

We have a responsible and intelligent community here, and ostrasizing one of our most accomplished members is disgraceful to me.
 
I disagree strongly and completely.

This information does NOT have to be available to everyone, and should be available to those WHO CARE ENOUGH to research the field.

This is absolutely ridiculous, to be questioning the facts, and somehow wanting to get public attention drawn to this wonderful animal...is this some sort of a crank?
 
cthulhu said:
Thales, you were never singled out...it is just that your thread had the biggest impact when it was removed at your request, and then moved to Supporter's.

The thread was moved to Supporters before my request to move it from the Supporters forum.

In example: I have to pay dues every year to have access to the Illustrator's Library...for information. I have to pay dues to various institutions to be able to view their collections for illustrational use, and I have to pay for every previous image or data gathered by other illustrator's and scientists. I fail to see why this is such a big deal...that is, unless we want the information to be free to everyone who wants to go out and buy a wonderpus, etc., which says to me "people who don't want to spend the money to properly do it"...the very sort we are trying to weed out.

That idea that one had to pay to see that content on TONMO was/is applied retroactively. If I had initially been posting to a pay site, I would have no issue at all as it would have been my choice to contribute to a for profit site. Information that was given for free on TONMO to try to inform everyone is suddenly being charged for without the consent of the author(s). If you had written a lengthily thread, for the free benefit of everyone, documenting a illustration project you were involved in on public Illustration forum, and then had it moved to the revenue generating, pay only portion of the site without warning and without consent, I would think you would at least initially feel weird about it.

I did want the information to be fee to everyone who wants to go out and buy a wunderpus because it showed how difficult it really was and was filled with disclaimers about generally why its a bad idea, and when the wunderpus dies, the thread would be filled with pictures of that as well. When I was posting the information, the policy of TONMO was that such information should be free.

Perhaps the entire ceph care section should become pay only, to make people prove they are willing to properly care for the animals before anyone helps them. If the idea is to protect cephs from people who might not really care about them, it seems we should protect all cephs, not just the pretty ones.



You earlier posted about articles and evidence. Though I have asked twice already about both, you have yet to produce either.
 

Shop Amazon

Shop Amazon
Shop Amazon; support TONMO!
Shop Amazon
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Back
Top