[AlexC]

Originally Posted by fugl

Wow, a fascinating thread but it needs a snappier title--how about "Night of the Anal-Retentives"?

I have a better idea. You should start your own forum, be your own moderator, and make up your own policies.

Until then, this is what the mods say, and its with good reason. So chill, broseph - or in the words of the smileys, smoke-beer-hippy.

[fugl]

Originally Posted by AlexC

I have a better idea. You should start your own forum, be your own moderator, and make up your own policies.

Until then, this is what the mods say, and its with good reason. So chill, broseph - or in the words of the smileys, smoke-beer-hippy.

Start my own forum? That's a little harsh, isn't it? Since when is it verboten to poke fun at BF "policies"? I think you need to acquire some perspective on all this.

Who (or what) is "broseph"?

[AlexC]

Originally Posted by fugl

Start my own forum? That's a little harsh, isn't it? Since when is it verboten to poke fun at BF "policies"? I think you need to acquire some perspective on all this.

Who (or what) is "broseph"?

If the tongue smiley didn't give it away, I was just kidding around. "Broseph" is joke-slang for "bro" (intended to rhyme with the name "Joseph"), short for "brother", synonym with "buddy" or "friend".

[fugl]

Originally Posted by AlexC

If the tongue smiley didn't give it away, I was just kidding around. "Broseph" is joke-slang for "bro" (intended to rhyme with the name "Joseph"), short for "brother", synonym with "buddy" or "friend".

Fair enough. I'm not particularly "smiley literate", I'm afraid, and sometimes find it difficult to tell whether or not they're being used passive-aggressively. All the best.

[mccpack]

Good call from Nevada!

[danehower]

Not sure why it is such a big deal to put the location down ? Personally I don't like the "box of chocolates " theory of posting ID's.

[J. Moore]

Originally Posted by danehower

Not sure why it is such a big deal to put the location down ? Personally I don't like the "box of chocolates " theory of posting ID's.

I agree. It is a simple, easy to comply with request. Seeking to suppress the request is arguably more "anal-retentive" than making it.

Best,
Jim

[KCFoggin]

I agree, location helps in determining a bird's identity but you've got to understand that a newbie looking for an i d is daunted enough when they come upon BF. It's a huge forum. Come on. Think back to when you first joined. Most regulars now seem to adhere to the request of location but you really have to cut some slack on the newbies.

[danehower]

Originally Posted by KCFoggin

I agree, location helps in determining a bird's identity but you've got to understand that a newbie looking for an i d is daunted enough when they come upon BF. It's a huge forum. Come on. Think back to when you first joined. Most regulars now seem to adhere to the request of location but you really have to cut some slack on the newbies.

yeah - I hear that. But I doubt it is just a newbie thing.
LOL - deja vu ..? All over again...?

[J. Moore]

Originally Posted by KCFoggin

I agree, location helps in determining a bird's identity but you've got to understand that a newbie looking for an i d is daunted enough when they come upon BF. It's a huge forum. Come on. Think back to when you first joined. Most regulars now seem to adhere to the request of location but you really have to cut some slack on the newbies.

I am not sure where this statement is coming from. Nobody is suggesting newbies be chastised or scolded or singled out or hung by their thumbs for not putting the location in the thread title. There is simply a desire to inform them of the policy -- just as you gently inform people of the law when they ask what to do with baby or injured birds.

Moreover, the point of putting the location in the thread title is not to assist in identifying the bird. That would be accomplished just as well by putting the location in the body of the text. The point is to make it easier for people to better navigate to thread topics they might want to contribute to.

Best,
Jim

[fugl]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moore

Seeking to suppress the request is arguably more "anal-retentive" than making it.

Best,
Jim

Possibly so (though I'd be curious to hear this argument), but no one here wants to "suppress the request". As far as I can see the furthest that anyone's gone on this & the other thread is to laugh at all the solemn fuss some people have been making over this trifling matter.

[KCFoggin]

Ah, but seldom does someone who is inquiring what to do with a baby bird seldom comes back after there question has been answered so we know to try and give them the best possible answer for the short term and hopefully instill in them to leave nature well enough alone in most cases.

All I'm trying to get across here is that we cater to nature lovers of all levels so sometimes patience is a virtue here and much appreciated by a new comer.

[danehower]

Originally Posted by fugl

Possibly so (though I'd be curious to hear this argument), but no one here wants to "suppress the request". As far as I can see the furthest that anyone's gone on this & the other thread is to laugh at all the solemn fuss some people have been making over this trifling matter.

Just a simple request I thought ! And a good one at that. I like laughing about it too though!

[dantheman]

Originally Posted by KCFoggin

All I'm trying to get across here is that we cater to nature lovers of all levels so sometimes patience is a virtue here and much appreciated by a new comer.

And hope that if they've come this far in and are reading these threads discussing the minutae of how a****** retentive or not it is to talk about whether newbies should . . oops I'm doing it as well . . .

Anyway, agree, also hope that those who might be inclined to stick around do so and don't get put off too much.