Poll - Do you agree or disagree with the AOS's recent decision to abandon the use of eponymous bird names? (3 Viewers)

[Trinovid]

I'm actually quite surprised that, whilst a majority, only around 60% of birders disagree. I thought it would be a lot higher than that.

It may very well be higher, since the numbers in this poll simply indicates 60% of respondents, and with concurrent threads running on the subject it's likely that there's also being reflected a bit of exhaustion over the topic at present here. No way to go back, but if this poll had been at the head of the very first thread it might have possibly generated far more response, or not.

Even from this small sampling the bigger point apparent, at least in this poll, is that there are more than double the number opposed as there are in favor of.

One thing also seems quite apparent, that AOS sees themselves fit to determine for all others, willing or not, that this is highly important and they'll not be resting until everything in life becomes 'woke' to the point that we won't even recognize the world anymore except as we're instructed to do by our 'betters'.

 

[Andy Adcock]

I think the majority of birders are some variation of ignorant the changes are even happening, ambivalent, or okay with the idea of name changes but would rather see a more moderated approach. I had a bird club meeting this weekend and no one brought it up, and when I did mention it, it was new to them.

Social Media can give a very distorted view of reality since it tends to amplify extreme views on either side, And of course people live in there own media bubbles. Some of the bird facebook groups I am on are mostly positive about the changes, even if their is a fair share of humor involved.

So it's happened, pretty much by stealth.

Afaik, there are no new field guides due any time soon so this may not start manifesting in the 'real World' for quite some time unless you're an ebird user, I'm not.

 

[Andy Adcock]

I think the majority of birders are some variation of ignorant the changes are even happening, ambivalent, or okay with the idea of name changes but would rather see a more moderated approach. I had a bird club meeting this weekend and no one brought it up, and when I did mention it, it was new to them.

Social Media can give a very distorted view of reality since it tends to amplify extreme views on either side, And of course people live in there own media bubbles. Some of the bird facebook groups I am on are mostly positive about the changes, even if their is a fair share of humor involved.

Yes it can, if anything, this poll shows that there is a silent majority that on the whole, disagree with the woke stuff. I'm not the lone dissenter that they would have you believe, it's just that there are a lot of people here who, for their own reasons, won't get in to the online spats as I do.

 

[Andy Adcock]

It may very well be higher, since the numbers in this poll simply indicates 60% of respondents, and with concurrent threads running on the subject it's likely that there's also being reflected a bit of exhaustion over the topic at present here. No way to go back, but if this poll had been at the head of the very first thread it might have possibly generated far more response, or not.

Even from this small sampling the bigger point apparent, at least in this poll, is that there are more than double the number opposed as there are in favor of.

One thing also seems quite apparent, that AOS sees themselves fit to determine for all others, willing or not, that this is highly important and they'll not be resting until everything in life becomes 'woke' to the point that we won't even recognize the world anymore except as we're instructed to do by our 'betters'.

I also think that it was wrong to add the two, extra categories that were not there before the poll got moved. There are 13.5% of the votes there which, were they planted on top of either category, would make a difference to the overall image of the vote.

 

[Paul Chapman]

I suspect the silent majority have no desire to use the word "woke" or respond to such comments with "I do not know or care about historical ornithologists" but they actually think that this is a silly idea that will cause practical chaos, detract from historic data, cause challenges on data collection, cause additional costs of production on field guides, etc.

Wiping stuff away has cost and expense and causes damage. It therefore becomes more than a decision of whether you prefer A or B as an approach. Most would back descriptive names. (No strong feelings either way here is a vote for no action.)

However, there is a higher threshold required for a change. To the question whether you would actively make the changes potentially causing damage for an unquantified benefit, when time and effort should be directed on other issues, the majority (currently) say no by about 5:2... (That is 3:1 including the no action group.)

The idea that more people will care that Bachman's Warbler is extinct because it is called something else, I find insulting. Even if more people did, it will make no difference...

All the best

Paul

 

[Jos Stratford]

I also think that it was wrong to add the two, extra categories that were not there before the poll got moved. There are 13.5% of the votes there which, were they planted on top of either category, would make a difference to the overall image of the vote.

You need the category of 'no strong feeling either way ' - that 13.5% can't be added to either category as you suggest as it would be false. It is fully valid that a number of people don't mind if the names are changed or not.

Imagine if you had 100 people and the 'no strong feeling either way' actually accounted for 90 % for them. If these were excluded from the vote, you would then have a poll of just the remaining 10 people. If 6 of them them supported the idea and 4 were against, the poll would have the illusion of 60% in favour, 40% against.

But in reality, it would not reflect public opinion - adding those in the neutral category, the result would be 6% in favour, 4% against, 90% no strong feeling either way. A very different result.

 

[Andy Adcock]

You need the category of 'no strong feeling either way ' - that 13.5% can't be added to either category as you suggest as it would be false. It is fully valid that a number of people don't mind if the names are changed or not.

Imagine if you had 100 people and the 'no strong feeling either way' actually accounted for 90 % for them. If these were excluded from the vote, you would then have a poll of just the remaining 10 people. If 6 of them them supported the idea and 4 were against, the poll would have the illusion of 60% in favour, 40% against.

But in reality, it would not reflect public opinion - adding those in the neutral category, the result would be 6% in favour, 4% against, 90% no strong feeling either way. A very different result.

If those categories had not been there, those people would have either chosen yes or no or, if they were not inclined either way, not voted at all.

 

[Jos Stratford]

If those categories had not been there, those people would have either chosen yes or no or, not voted at all.

Well they wouldn't have voted yes or no because that's not their opinion. And if they didn't vote because we excluded the category, that is exactly what I explained above.

 

[Andy Adcock]

Well they wouldn't have voted yes or no because that's not their opinion. And if they didn't vote because we excluded the category, that is exactly what I explained above.

I don't agree, had the option not been there, they would possibly have voted yes or no.

 

[dantheman]

I don't agree, had the option not been there, they would possibly have voted yes or no.

They might have. It might have been more one way, or one the other - who knows?? Of those who did vote in that circumstance, it may have even turned out the result ended up exactly the same (but who would know?)


Like a lot of things in life, being clear and getting the best and most information the best way forward. Clear questions in polls, and an appropriate range of answers means you will end up with more/better information out the end - like here.

 

[Maffong]

I'm not sure how to respond to the poll. I don't like eponyms very much (don't hate them though) and if the new names are chosen carefully I'll be very much in favour of the changes. However, I very much dislike the rationale behind the changes. I don't think eponyms hurt anyone and the way that things are being superimposed on anyone has been very divisive and instead of helping the supposed cause of better inclusiveness it has created an unnecessary division among people with the shared interests of birding and conservation.
Thus, I (possibly) like the result but I strongly dislike the process.

 

[Lerxst]

I'm not sure how to respond to the poll. I don't like eponyms very much (don't hate them though) and if the new names are chosen carefully I'll be very much in favour of the changes. However, I very much dislike the rationale behind the changes. I don't think eponyms hurt anyone and the way that things are being superimposed on anyone has been very divisive instead of the supposed better inclusiveness has caused more harm than good.
Thus, I (possibly) like the result but I strongly dislike the way.

Well said.

 

[qwerty5]

I think the majority of birders are some variation of ignorant the changes are even happening, ambivalent, or okay with the idea of name changes but would rather see a more moderated approach. I had a bird club meeting this weekend and no one brought it up, and when I did mention it, it was new to them.

If most birders are unaware, it's going to cause even more issues. All at once, they'll open eBird and have no idea what all those new bird names are.

 

[dantheman]

For the record (as of 7pm UK, 10th November 2023) results of poll -

Agree Votes: 38 22.6%
Disagree Votes: 104 61.9%
No strong feelings either way. Votes: 24 14.3%
Don't know, need more information Votes: 2 1.2%

Total voters 168


(Don't know if history of poll can be looked into at later dates)

 

[Mysticete]

Even from this small sampling the bigger point apparent, at least in this poll, is that there are more than double the number opposed as there are in favor of.

All this poll tells you is that people on Birdforum that care enough to comment disagree with the decision. You can not extrapolate ANYTHING about the wider birding public in the US/Canada, given that active posters from that region are a minority here and the sample size is insignificant.

I could post the same poll on the birding memes facebook group and I would probably get 60% pro and 30% against (not that a poll there would also be significant!)

If most birders are unaware, it's going to cause even more issues. All at once, they'll open eBird and have no idea what all those new bird names are.

I would argue that those birders are the birders also confused every time there is a taxonomic change. Although a chunk of those probably don't use ebird much anyway. But yes, I expect a greater amount of confusion especially amongst petrels and sparrows. But while we know the patronyms are changing we don't yet know the process. Hopefully it will be in small batches so people get use to names. Dropping 70 at once, especially if there is a public commentary/voting period, would obviously be a bad idea.

 

[Paul Chapman]

I could post the same poll on the birding memes facebook group and I would probably get 60% pro and 30% against (not that a poll there would also be significant!)

Please do so then. In general terms, the existence of a majority view in one forum would trump an opinion that a majority view may exist elsewhere.....

Is there any evidence anywhere of general support? Surely that must exist for this to have reached this stage.

😮

It is bizarre that the Merlin bird packs do not use the scientific names in addition to the vernacular ones. If they did, that would help. I think that you seriously underestimate the negative effect of disparate groups using different names especially where one set of names is contained in the published literature. This happens in entomology and the result is that a minority interest and voice is further damaged by splintering the resulting messages.

All the best

Paul

 

[la_ravachol]

Please do so then. In general terms, the existence of a majority view in one forum would trump an opinion that a majority view may exist elsewhere.....

Is there any evidence anywhere of general support? Surely that must exist for this to have reached this stage.

😮

It is bizarre that the Merlin bird packs do not use the scientific names in addition to the vernacular ones. If they did, that would help. I think that you seriously underestimate the negative effect of disparate groups using different names especially where one set of names is contained in the published literature. This happens in entomology and the result is that a minority interest and voice is further damaged by splintering the resulting messages.

All the best

Paul

I'm not sure if you mean as default, but Merlin bird packs do use scientific names alongside vernacular names if you switch it on in settings.

 

[Trinovid]

All this poll tells you is that…

All your consistency in trying to shut down resistance to the actions in question is that you’re in favor and would like to shut down any dissent.

The poll speaks for itself, no differently from any other.

 

[Paul Chapman]

I'm not sure if you mean as default, but Merlin bird packs do use scientific names alongside vernacular names if you switch it on in settings.

Brilliant. Thank you. Heading to settings... 😀

Edit - now done. How do I change my vote... 😅

 

[Mysticete]

All your consistency in trying to shut down resistance to the actions in question is that you’re in favor and would like to shut down any dissent.

The poll speaks for itself, no differently from any other.

No I am providing a reality check, that the results of this poll here are statistically irrelevant for multiple reasons, most of which should be obvious.

I am not trying to "shut down resistance", as I clearly have no ability to do.