OP
OP
That's an ideal scenario for sure
But where is the thread of someone adding detritus, skimmate and sb worms to an invaded system for a few pages and getting equal after pics (the inverse of our procedure to test its validity)
hard to attain tank cure threads by adding waste to systems...all we do is remove it and insert a kill step along the way and provide the pics. I think that successful hands off systems didn't import upon setup the invaders that would take over a tank, easy invaders were all that rode in, so it makes the method seem reliable. Dino tank owners feel literally lied to by hands off reefing as a universal tank assembly method
I'm hoping to show that techniques must change in order to get ten tanks in line vs what works for one, appreciate the input as well, all ideas need counter challenges so that whatever filters through is gold
Your system reminds me a lot of Paul's aged and balanced system, truly they are ideal balances but this is hard to replicate, that's why it's the domain of masters.
I'm wanting to show you can make reefs attain better lifespans and not lose tons and tons of rocks and animals in starting tanks as do overs if you arrive at what the masters do, not start like they do.
The masters are prescribing an approach that when replicated, works really well for 5% and really problematic for the other portion. By starting off using the method we use to correct invaded tanks, any new keeper protects their investment and animals.
Clean reefing works for everyone, then in time once mastered in excluding unwanteds, anyone can revert to storage mode and buy pods to add, become classic reefing as a delayed and not initial approach. An earned timing for the tank, not a requisite start.
Res publica, even if given an ordered step by step ops for hands off reefing, can't reproduce it successfully like we can produce compliant tanks with hands on reefing, we will outpace them after year 2 by 80% uninvasion or better. This is no judgement, I'm res publica, and had to reef hands on to be able to earn hands off years down the line, and I lost my first reefbowl to a preventable red algae invasion only because I didn't know about kill options...information and hesitation psychology took my first reef, not chemistry or tank params, I only needed one of those events to be shocked into action.
Merely the beneficial debate of hands off vs hands on reefing affects how a new reader now will approach reefing, a psychological component at the core of their entire budding reef procedure, not a chemistry one. They're either going to purposefully farm invaders a while and then incrementally work back to hopefully regain ground, or they won't, and they'll be proactive not reactive and they'll use work threads to see how the masses have done with any debatable technique.
My reefing paradigm is shaped 98% by what I can effect in others tanks and link for proof
But where is the thread of someone adding detritus, skimmate and sb worms to an invaded system for a few pages and getting equal after pics (the inverse of our procedure to test its validity)
hard to attain tank cure threads by adding waste to systems...all we do is remove it and insert a kill step along the way and provide the pics. I think that successful hands off systems didn't import upon setup the invaders that would take over a tank, easy invaders were all that rode in, so it makes the method seem reliable. Dino tank owners feel literally lied to by hands off reefing as a universal tank assembly method
I'm hoping to show that techniques must change in order to get ten tanks in line vs what works for one, appreciate the input as well, all ideas need counter challenges so that whatever filters through is gold
Your system reminds me a lot of Paul's aged and balanced system, truly they are ideal balances but this is hard to replicate, that's why it's the domain of masters.
I'm wanting to show you can make reefs attain better lifespans and not lose tons and tons of rocks and animals in starting tanks as do overs if you arrive at what the masters do, not start like they do.
The masters are prescribing an approach that when replicated, works really well for 5% and really problematic for the other portion. By starting off using the method we use to correct invaded tanks, any new keeper protects their investment and animals.
Clean reefing works for everyone, then in time once mastered in excluding unwanteds, anyone can revert to storage mode and buy pods to add, become classic reefing as a delayed and not initial approach. An earned timing for the tank, not a requisite start.
Res publica, even if given an ordered step by step ops for hands off reefing, can't reproduce it successfully like we can produce compliant tanks with hands on reefing, we will outpace them after year 2 by 80% uninvasion or better. This is no judgement, I'm res publica, and had to reef hands on to be able to earn hands off years down the line, and I lost my first reefbowl to a preventable red algae invasion only because I didn't know about kill options...information and hesitation psychology took my first reef, not chemistry or tank params, I only needed one of those events to be shocked into action.
Merely the beneficial debate of hands off vs hands on reefing affects how a new reader now will approach reefing, a psychological component at the core of their entire budding reef procedure, not a chemistry one. They're either going to purposefully farm invaders a while and then incrementally work back to hopefully regain ground, or they won't, and they'll be proactive not reactive and they'll use work threads to see how the masses have done with any debatable technique.
My reefing paradigm is shaped 98% by what I can effect in others tanks and link for proof
Last edited:
