Birds from Peru (1 Viewer)

[cheerful]

I've been watching this debate for a few days. I have to say that MacNara's post (#36) makes a lot of sense to me.

While my initial thoughts were that Cheerful should have done more homework before posting his pictures, we have historically allowed people to post things without homework - within reason.

The thing that bothered me more was the sheer number of posts - one picture per thread and 70 threads. There really wasn't an easy way to avoid his threads and many of the other posters' threads got lost. I hate to say it, but it really struck me as selfish.

I'm glad that Cheerful is going to stick around, but I'm also quite happy that he'll take the advice of some of the posters and limit the threads he starts. IMO, it's a good compromise.

Hi, Jeff,

I'm not sure if you even opened my past posts. Each of them has multiple photos. If you did read the post above, then you should see that I was advised to post one picture a thread and posted 5 active threads. I followed the advice yesterday and now you came to judge me as selfish.

I really don't know what to say.

 

[Andy Adcock]

Hi, Jeff,

I'm not sure if you even opened my past posts. Each of them has multiple photos. If you did read the post above, then you should see that I was advised to post one picture a thread and posted 5 active threads. I followed the advice yesterday and now you came to judge me as selfish.

I really don't know what to say.

I didn't see that but I'd advise that you use the max allowance of photos per thread which is 5, this will help keep the post count down, if you posted one shot in each post, it would unneccessarily multiply the post number if you intend to be as prolific again.

Most people will post ID queries from one trip, what you have done is post from half a dozen trips at once and gave the impression of not having tried to ID them yourself. Add to that the inclusion of the same species across mutiple posts.

There is no limit to the number of daily posts permitted as far as I know but there is etiquette and I would suggest that you limit the scope of your posts to one destination at a time if there are going to be so many again, you said you were half way through I believe?

 

[Andy Adcock]

I've been watching this debate for a few days. I have to say that MacNara's post (#36) makes a lot of sense to me.

While my initial thoughts were that Cheerful should have done more homework before posting his pictures, we have historically allowed people to post things without homework - within reason.

The thing that bothered me more was the sheer number of posts - one picture per thread and 70 threads. There really wasn't an easy way to avoid his threads and many of the other posters' threads got lost. I hate to say it, but it really struck me as selfish.
.

The odd non birder comes on with a few shots from a holiday which is perfectly OK, they don't post hundreds of shots from a jaunt across an entire continent!

This looks like someone who has just stumbled across the site and dug out their entire back catalogue.

 

[Jeff Hopkins]

Sorry, Cheerful, but when I saw this it really set me off:

For the elites, it’s never a debate. It’s a lecture about their way, which is the only way and you must follow, even if they are not the rule maker. However, most elites know that calling others’ words nonsense is disrespectful and they can’t pretend it’s a debate after that. @andyadcock, you either forgot that or no longer wanted to pretend. So please buy your own baloney as I have nothing to say to you. Not a single word below is for you.

But, where did it say any of the following?
- This is the forum for serious birder only, not those with casual interest
- Bird watching is an expensive hobby so the elites will run the forum here
- If you don’t want to be serious birder, you can only ask X number of questions
- If you don’t want to buy a field guide, don’t ask many questions

It struck me as really snippy and self-entitled. You seemed to be saying your "wants" took precedence over the guidance of the regulars on the board. And you insulted them by calling them "elites."

If that wasn't your intent, then I apologize for "selfish."

 

[njlarsen]

Cheerful,
My advice probably was less clearly written. I hoped to convey that 5 pictures per thread is better than 15, 20 or even 25, but I was not trying to argue in favor of a single image. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[cheerful]

@njlarsen, please, it's not because of you at all. Unless my thread count goes down to zero, there are people unhappy about it. Thank you for your advice.