Breaking the "Rules" - Non-standard and innovative practices...

[robert]

Over time I've tried many ways of doing stuff which defies conventional wisdom. Sometimes they have worked so well, that I really can't see following the accepted norm anymore...when others ask for advice that touches on these areas, I generally would like to speak up and share what I know...but...

More often than not, I can craft my response so that its well received - I don't mind defending and answering questions for my sometimes radical approaches - but a few times I have caught confiderable flack for suggesting methods that I have found to be true - only to be swarmmed by those who espouse the dogama of the "one and only way". You know - they way they learned and their minions - the one line posters who think lol is a vaild argument...

So I would love to see a new section in these forums - A "Breaking the "Rules" - Non-standard and innovative practices" thread where alternative and non-conventional approaches can be discussed and stickied - free from the "Tang Police" mentality.

How about it - would this be possible? Would anyone else like such a place?

 

[Duke4Life]

I thought that was what Reef 2 Reef is all about?

 

[robert]

Is it? I must be further out of step than I imagined...

 

[cu455]

My condi hosts several clowns. I was not a condi will never host a clown. Their sting is to powerful and if a clownfish comes close to it the anenome will eat it. A few years later and everyone is doing well.

 

[Duke4Life]

This site I feel is better than most at giving a topic a chance and people are more inclined of responding.

 

[rayn]

Is it? I must be further out of step than I imagined...

Your so far out, you're back in!

 

[rayn]

Over time I have learned there is never ONE way to do things. If that was the case we would still be using under gravel and all DSB. Any time someone thinks out the box and comes up with a cool way to do something it's good for us all.

 

[brandon429]

Rules and paradigms broken, good idea thread. Better if supporting documentation can be had in any way for X strange claim, threads count.

Whoever uses bug spray as dip for sps frags should post first


for sure people can be banned for simply advocating / defending nonstandard practices in some places, just not R2R~We relish good hearty supported debate.
following the rules is a great holdup to evolution within the tank




My take:

Number one above all ten times above all controversy, using peroxide to do anything in a reef tank. Claimed by some to be the snake oil of reefing. Claimed by some to save the tank. Dichotomy

Hands on sandbeds, forcing detritus out roughly, controlling all aspects of any possible recycle (everything opposite of all former DSB practices) and having a dsb that can be flipped bottom to top in an aquarium at any time it's so clean, with no recycle. Not caring if worms or pods are in the bed, adapt or get out. Not needed
rough rinsing and forced sandbed compliance, debated.


Using tap water at any stage of rinsing filter materials, even sandbeds if needed. Short duration tap work is not lethal to established and insulated filtration bacteria old school tankers know


Skip cycling, zero interval reef tank cycle upon 1st day setup. Claimed impossible still.
Any form of repeated control over bringing home rocks, and sourcing them correctly, such that you can start all your new frags on same day. Claimed illegal and risky, but every tank at a MACNA convention is winking in the background

Using bug spray anywhere near corals much less on them heh


Approaching algae issues from an initial perspective that nutrients are not the cause of the majority of today's algae problems. Claiming that algae and nutrients can work independently is claimed farce, which is good. Accept no unfounded claims
The best way to challenge anyone's claim on algae is to produce a fifty page thread using the claimed counter method. Only threads speak on algae proofs, formal references usually don't but claims are never short. Active poster threads are what keep formal claims in check. What active posters reveal typically comes before what books reveal nowadays imo

Keeping any sealed aquarium that cannot evaporate, and micro pico tanks in general are hard rule breakers as well. Many more exist. In 1999 apparently only the uber in crowd knew you could dump vodka in a reef to attain an ends...I found out about 2006 lol

 

[JerSaint]

I just finished off my Bayer Plus (need to get some more on my next HD run) today dipping the frags I picked up. I have been using it for a few years now and I have had no issues.

 

[brandon429]

A bug sprayer !!

Get in docs time machine head back in time and post that you did that in 1998
Drummed out of reef town but accepted today.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

There are lots of different way to solve issues, and certainly many that have not been widely appreciated, or perhaps not been invented yet.

However, the problem with every new "nonstandard" idea is the question of whether the tank thrives because of them, or in spite of them. There's no way to tell without a lot of testing (unless it has a clearly believable basis of why it works, or a clearly explainable basis why it cannot work as described).

 

[brandon429]

Another sub thread off this one

Things from Home Depot you can put in your reef

Can someone build a reef using parts only from Home Depot aside from rocks and corals and fish

 

[robert]

There are lots of different way to solve issues, and certainly many that have not been widely appreciated, or perhaps not been invented yet.

However, the problem with every new "nonstandard" idea is the question of whether the tank thrives because of them, or in spite of them. There's no way to tell without a lot of testing (unless it has a clearly believable basis of why it works, or a clearly explainable basis why it cannot work as described).

"However, the problem with every new "nonstandard" idea is the question of whether the tank thrives because of them, or in spite of them."

The same can be said of many, if not most, accepted standard practices and products...Very little of what we accept as correct is well validated or quantified. Anectdotal evidence seems to be more the rule than the exception...As a hobby we suffer more than most from the problem of demarcation.

"unless it has a clearly believable basis of why it works, or a clearly explainable basis why it cannot work as described"

A beleivable basis is a start, as would be a statement of assumptions...but even when introduced correctly, there will always be those who based on "personal experience", "years in the hobby", "the concensus of the community", or "subject matter zealotry" who will eagerly derail any "out of the mainstream" discussions. Even when their positions cannot withstand the same scrutiny.

I actually expect at least as much if not more support for the conventional approach than the novel...at least in the discussion phase.

But there are some good discussions listed above which I would love to see stickied - and not derailed - with too much noise.
Maybe that can't be done in a forum - but I think it could.

Ok- I'm off now...got to go dose some new Reef Ninja's Midichlorian booster for SPS.

 

[brandon429]

Nonstandard freshwater

PJReef's tank of the month 2.5 gallon tank from nr.com yrs ago that produced tubastrea via gamete reproduction/castings all over the tiny tank was fully nano nonstandard. Fed custom phyto mix and proved heterotrophic feeding ideals can be had in under three gallons.

 

[robert]

Here's one. Not mine but a great example of going stright to SPS on the first day. Why isn't it better to use corals for denitrification...seems so obvious.

Maybe we all can't drop in a fully stocked reef on the first day...but is there any real logic to not stock denitrifying livestock from the very start? Against the rules you know.

Breaking the Rules - definately unconventional.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

"However, the problem with every new "nonstandard" idea is the question of whether the tank thrives because of them, or in spite of them."

The same can be said of many, if not most, accepted standard practices and products...Very little of what we accept as correct is well validated or quantified. Anectdotal evidence seems to be more the rule than the exception...As a hobby we suffer more than most from the problem of demarcation.
.

I disagree for most cases. They've been tried out by lots and lots of people, and almost always have a sound scientific basis (or have already been trashed if they have an unsound basis).

I guess I'm focusing more on chemistry (which is usually quite clear once the basis is understood) than biology, where I agree that many biological complexities may make it take a very long time to sort trash from gems, but for most standard practices that have been in the hobby for decades, the evidence is quite good that they do provide a benefit in at least some scenarios.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

"unless it has a clearly believable basis of why it works, or a clearly explainable basis why it cannot work as described"

A beleivable basis is a start, as would be a statement of assumptions...but even when introduced correctly, there will always be those who based on "personal experience", "years in the hobby", "the concensus of the community", or "subject matter zealotry" who will eagerly derail any "out of the mainstream" discussions. Even when their positions cannot withstand the same scrutiny.

.

No doubt the hobby is filled with people who have misunderstandings of what takes place in reef aquaria. That's the great benefit of places such as Reef2Reef: you are not getting one on one advice from a person who may have incorrect or limited information. When such information is claimed (and it very frequently is) others can chime in with alternative hypotheses and explanations.

 

[brandon429]

The most important beneficial feature of R2R is just that in my opinion. Hearty science debates, calls for backup, self regulation and at times staunch written disagreement. That's how it should be, a written record of hobby evolution. I have yet to see a thread get locked or deleted that wasn't ads or something. Even one asking to be deleted is now up to hundreds of responses pretty funny. the freedom we have to evolve and combined yrs of reefing experience w starkly contrasting views we post is just right.



Robert
I'm on a mini quest to remove the concept of the unpredictable mini cycle in reef keeping, a plague we've read about online for almost two decs now while API rubs it's belly on the unending .25 cycles of many

a few thousand false mini cycle readings .25=zero is a strong reason for the idea of a mc

Scaled in reverse, if mini cycles are unpredictable then we can't move tanks without a cycle, set up display reefs with fish and corals at MACNA reliably, or even do deep cleanings in our own tanks. To break the rules I plan on a neat upcoming video w full risk on my tank. I'll take my old mini reef, drain it empty, then drive it around town bone drained maybe even to the pet store and back as a continual vid. Will then bring back and simply refill with approx matched param water....extended drain + 100% wchange test


The thought process is, if my whole empty reef and corals can go to and come home from the pet store as a direct transfer in the air, why can't ten pounds of your live rock come one way in a bucket of water? Visual IDs are possible in live rock bins that tell you the origin of the rock before you ask anyway...putting an end to mini cycle claims means exports will rise and tank lifespans will follow. The oldest tanks on this site have the most thorough dealings with detritus, imo

 

[Naiad]

The first fish in my newly cycled 220 were my pair of mandarin gobies [emoji33]. They have never been happier. It was set up and stocked with them in mind from day one though.

 

[redfishbluefish]

I have no problems with unconventional use of equipment, like @Paul B 's use of reverse flow undergravel filters....OR for unconventional use of "chemicals," such as Driveway Melt for Calcium Chloride (two part), or Bayer Insecticide for a coral dip. But where I draw the line are those folks who put a big fish in a small pond, and say the fish is happy....such as a Hippo in a 30 gallon tank. That to me in unacceptable.