The Start of Misinformation, Misunderstandings, and Acknowledging Lack of Knowledge

[gbru316]

I'm not ordained to determine if that makes it mininformation, conjecture, or indicate a lack of knowledge but you saying where your info originated from if you're giving direct information/advice to someone can't hurt but might be helpful...I do have an opinion on what you said but really don't want to go down the rabbit hole it would require because the answer to that would lead away from the main points in my post.

I just want to be clear that I'm not trying to trip you up with questions or prove you wrong or needlessly argue. Just trying to further conversation. I'm not even sure there are any right or wrong answers to the post you replied to.


For what it's worth, I can't tell you where I got most of my information on reefkeeping other than to say a combination of online, books, and experience. My knowledge is a patchwork quilt with patches by everyone from Sprung to Calfo to Joshi to RHF to Paletta to innumerable internet strangers that I've long since forgotten about that I remember more by the success of their tanks than I do their usernames. Paul's harem of models probably contributed a bit, too, at some point. I can't even remember where I put my keys half the time, how am I supposed to remember who said what on Bob Fenner's boards 20 years ago?

Eh, it doesn't matter. I know nothing. My kids remind me of that fact just about every day. Now, where'd I put those keys?

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I just want to be clear that I'm not trying to trip you up with questions or prove you wrong or needlessly argue. Just trying to further conversation. I'm not even sure there are any right or wrong answers to the post you replied to.


For what it's worth, I can't tell you where I got most of my information on reefkeeping other than to say a combination of online and experience. I can't even remember where I put my keys half the time, how am I supposed to remember who said what on Bob Fenner's boards 20 years ago?

I didn't mean you specifically...and if you can't remember where the info came from it's ok to admit that or imply it or simply not state it as fact...I'm just trying to do something positive by helping people know to what degree they should trust comments. I'm not trying to force anyone to do things my way either, just suggesting it may be beneficial to do this.

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

I'd like to give more specific examples of some of the blanket statements I've heard recently but these days the people who said them might get offended even if I didnt say who they were or say anything insulting. I've heard that in the past people had a little tougher skin and weren't so easily offended but I'm in my mid 20s and from my experience people get personally offended by simple things such as using a statement they made as an example.

You don’t know me. It offends me that you over generalize how simple statements might offend someone

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

You don’t know me. It offends me that you over generalize how simple statements might offend someone

I bet it would offend someone out there

 

[gbru316]

or simply not state it as fact...

See, this is where some confusion can arise.

You and I almost certainly have a shared set of facts we operate on. While there are other facts that you and I both know that the other doesn't simply because we have yet to encounter or discover them. In order to avoid this, do we cite everything we suggest out of an abundance of caution? I don't think anyone believes that's the best path forward. This is a community message board, not a thesis.

But if not, then how does one decide where to place the line between making unqualified (factually correct) statements and including citations/qualifications? Further, how do we place that line such that it captures a common set of knowledge and yet isn't skewed by discrepancies in number/nature of known facts between users?


With very few exceptions, I take most things I read on message boards with a large grain of salt. Even things by hobby experts, simply because there is not a single formula (or even set of formulas) for a successful reef tank. PaulB uses ozone. He has a noteworthy tank. Plenty of other noteworthy tanks don't use ozone. Same for UV, same for 2 part vs balling vs Ca Rx. Same for bio/chemical/mechanical filtration. There are way too many variables to consider, many of which we have little understanding of how they all tie into keeping a successful tank. For example, is Paul's lighting only adequate because he runs ozone? Should we evaluate that hypothesis in order to better develop the hobby? Or is it sufficient to say "this combination of things has been successful in this scenario."

To illustrate another part of the problem -- Maybe one of Paul's models wears Chanel No 5 and it contains esters of bat guano that are washed off her wrists into Paul's tank when she's helping him with maintenance, and that puts his mandarins "in the mood" and triggers spawning. What if she accidentally puts on 2 applications of perfume one day instead of 1, and it kills the mandarins? Will he ever know why they spawned or why they died? Doubtful. Obviously, this is an absurd premise but I mention it just because I wanted to show that the exact minutiae and complexity with which our tanks operate and maintain balance are almost impossible for most of us to explain and understand -- to the point where I'm not even sure the experts can fully explain everything that goes on within those 5 pieces of glass/acrylic. We understand bits and pieces of it, sure. Maybe even all of the larger concepts. But we (as a community) simply don't know what we don't know and there are far too many uncontrolled variables. Which leads me back to the grain of salt thing I previously mentioned.


If enough grains of salt are collected from the community to support a specific idea/topic/suggestion, that's my cue that it's probably more correct than not -- at least given what the community knows today. Bonus if a handful of those grains were cultivated by successful rice farmers. If I want to know the underlying details/science, I'll log into JSTOR and see what I can find. But even then, many academic works are so narrow in scope that it can be hard to apply them in a more general sense.

Again, this is a community message board -- not a thesis. And for better or worse, "the community" is really what drives the knowledge of our hobby forward. Because there's no research lab or institution out there that says "hey, I wonder if we can spawn mandarins by adding a bit of ester of bat guano to a reef tank?" and then goes on to perform the experiment. Though, BRS is getting close and I applaud them for using their resources in a way that benefits the hobby.

(to be clear, I'm not against citations or qualifications or any other attempt to increase credibility. Just reflecting on my perception of the hobby over the past 20 years or so and how some things I've noticed make sourcing/citing/qualifying a bit challenging).

I'm rambling. WIfe's been out of town the past few days, kids are in bed, I'm mentally drained and sleep deprived and I haven't really spoken to an adult about anything other than work since Wednesday. I imagine at least a few of you are thinking:

(should I have included a trigger warning before this gif?)

 

[jabberwock]

I bet it would offend someone out there

Who cares? I learned a long time ago that I am not in charge of someone else's emotional reactions... I try not to be a jerk, that is all I have control of.

 

[firechild]

See, this is where some confusion can arise.

You and I almost certainly have a shared set of facts we operate on. While there are other facts that you and I both know that the other doesn't simply because we have yet to encounter or discover them. In order to avoid this, do we cite everything we suggest out of an abundance of caution? I don't think anyone believes that's the best path forward. This is a community message board, not a thesis.

But if not, then how does one decide where to place the line between making unqualified (factually correct) statements and including citations/qualifications? Further, how do we place that line such that it captures a common set of knowledge and yet isn't skewed by discrepancies in number/nature of known facts between users?


With very few exceptions, I take most things I read on message boards with a large grain of salt. Even things by hobby experts, simply because there is not a single formula (or even set of formulas) for a successful reef tank. PaulB uses ozone. He has a noteworthy tank. Plenty of other noteworthy tanks don't use ozone. Same for UV, same for 2 part vs balling vs Ca Rx. Same for bio/chemical/mechanical filtration. There are way too many variables to consider, many of which we have little understanding of how they all tie into keeping a successful tank. For example, is Paul's lighting only adequate because he runs ozone? Should we evaluate that hypothesis in order to better develop the hobby? Or is it sufficient to say "this combination of things has been successful in this scenario."

To illustrate another part of the problem -- Maybe one of Paul's models wears Chanel No 5 and it contains esters of bat guano that are washed off her wrists into Paul's tank when she's helping him with maintenance, and that puts his mandarins "in the mood" and triggers spawning. What if she accidentally puts on 2 applications of perfume one day instead of 1, and it kills the mandarins? Will he ever know why they spawned or why they died? Doubtful. Obviously, this is an absurd premise but I mention it just because I wanted to show that the exact minutiae and complexity with which our tanks operate and maintain balance are almost impossible for most of us to explain and understand -- to the point where I'm not even sure the experts can fully explain everything that goes on within those 5 pieces of glass/acrylic. We understand bits and pieces of it, sure. Maybe even all of the larger concepts. But we (as a community) simply don't know what we don't know and there are far too many uncontrolled variables. Which leads me back to the grain of salt thing I previously mentioned.


If enough grains of salt are collected from the community to support a specific idea/topic/suggestion, that's my cue that it's probably more correct than not -- at least given what the community knows today. Bonus if a handful of those grains were cultivated by successful rice farmers. If I want to know the underlying details/science, I'll log into JSTOR and see what I can find. But even then, many academic works are so narrow in scope that it can be hard to apply them in a more general sense.

Again, this is a community message board -- not a thesis. And for better or worse, "the community" is really what drives the knowledge of our hobby forward. Because there's no research lab or institution out there that says "hey, I wonder if we can spawn mandarins by adding a bit of ester of bat guano to a reef tank?" and then goes on to perform the experiment. Though, BRS is getting close and I applaud them for using their resources in a way that benefits the hobby.

(to be clear, I'm not against citations or qualifications or any other attempt to increase credibility. Just reflecting on my perception of the hobby over the past 20 years or so and how some things I've noticed make sourcing/citing/qualifying a bit challenging).

I'm rambling. WIfe's been out of town the past few days, kids are in bed, I'm mentally drained and sleep deprived and I haven't really spoken to an adult about anything other than work since Wednesday. I imagine at least a few of you are thinking:

(should I have included a trigger warning before this gif?)

You may be rambling but I love this post. We don't know how experienced someone is hen they are responding to our question so even if it is someone noteworthy, they do not always have all the answers. There are tens of thousands of people here with not just different levels of experience but different experiences that have shaped their view on many things. I have a marine biology degree, I've had articles published in Advanced Aquarist, Reefkeeping and a bunch of other publications, I've spent time with fish and coral collectors, I worked for a number of years in product development in this industry, I worked in the retail part of the industry and I've been reefing for over 20 years. I still learn new things every day from the wealth of knowledge here and across the hobby and I take anecdotes for what they are in the context of other information. Peer review is effectively what an internet forum is, people can post whatever they want but there are thousands of people who have the opportunity to call them out on it. It's up to you as the ultimate decision maker for your tank to work out which answers you take heed of.

 

[CoralB]

I bet it would offend someone out there

I find your opening statements to be somewhat offensive to the point of how you logged on trying to control the narrative of how everyone in this group should or shouldn’t exchange information and or their experiences. If you want to start your own group where any one with a opinion or experience should say or express themselves by quoting or stating a paper or a reference to their findings go at it . Their are always going to be people that give misinformation either because they read something somewhere or for some reason they believe what their saying but the mass majority of people chiming in are trying to help people with their personal experiences or what they remember to be true . The hobby itself has grown from trial and error and the sharing of information . If you don’t agree with something then question it and start a debate , give your opinion with those people . Everything written in any group is automatically considered a opinion whether it’s based on fact or fiction and you are free to agree or disagree but what you can’t do is tell some one they can’t give their opinion without documentation or references.

 

[Malcontent]

I bet it would offend someone out there

 

[CrunchyBananas]

I agreed with how I initially read this thread but also agree with some people opposing it. I don’t believe anyone is saying only peer reviewed information is allowed and must be cited. I read this whole thing as give advice only on what you’ve actually done, and at least say when or where you’ve heard something (I.e. buddy in my reef club had good/bad time with that supplement). No need for peer review or hard citations, but just qualify the advice.

since everyone is asking for an example, one I saw not long ago on here was regarding the care of Achilles tang. A new hobbyist had a thread stating of course they can give advice on them without ever owning one, or even a tang at all. Turns out the advice they gave was not very good, but they felt confident as the authority on it anyways, despite it being a very fragile fish with specific needs. The author pretty much lumped it in with the same care as a yellow tang and said something like a 90 gallon was debated but fine for tangs.

That’s the sort of stuff I often see online that drives me nuts. I feel the access of information online(namely YouTube) has lead a lot of new hobbyists to feel they know far more than they do, or to quote my favorite movie “kung pow,” their confidence far out weighs their ability. This leads to uneducated advice seemingly given with the confidence of an expert. That’s the stuff I wish we could stop/reduce/ whatever on advice threads.

That said, I don’t think anyone is going stop bad advice because of a this thread. When I was the saltwater manager of a store and teaching people how to start up in the hobby, the number one thing I taught them is to triple check everything they heard or read before even thinking about putting it into practice, even what I said. In the end, we’re responsible for our own understandings and what actions we take with our glass boxes, best we can do is fully vet information, especially opinions, even coming from someone who seems to be an expert.

 

[i cant think]

I agreed with how I initially read this thread but also agree with some people opposing it. I don’t believe anyone is saying only peer reviewed information is allowed and must be cited. I read this whole thing as give advice only on what you’ve actually done, and at least say when or where you’ve heard something (I.e. buddy in my reef club had good/bad time with that supplement). No need for peer review or hard citations, but just qualify the advice.

since everyone is asking for an example, one I saw not long ago on here was regarding the care of Achilles tang. A new hobbyist had a thread stating of course they can give advice on them without ever owning one, or even a tang at all. Turns out the advice they gave was not very good, but they felt confident as the authority on it anyways, despite it being a very fragile fish with specific needs. The author pretty much pumped it in with the same care as a yellow tang and said something like a 90 gallon was debated but fine for tangs.

That’s the sort of stuff I often see online that drives me nuts. I feel the access of information online(namely YouTube) has lead a lot of new hobbyists to feel they know far more than they do, or to quote my favorite movie “kung pow,” their confidence far out weighs their ability. This leads to uneducated advice seemingly given with the confidence of an expert. That’s the stuff I wish we could stop/reduce/ whatever on advice threads.

That said, I don’t think anyone is going stop bad advice because of a this thread. When I was the saltwater manager of a store and teaching people how to start up in the hobby, the number one thing I taught them is to triple check everything they heard or read before even thinking about putting it into practice, even what I said. In the end, we’re responsible for our own understandings and what actions we take with our glass boxes, best we can do is fully vet information, especially opinions, even coming from someone who seems to be an expert.

This is extremely well put and I agree with you. In the end false/incorrect information can hide too well in with the true/correct information.

 

[HBtank]

Why do us genXers always get ignored and left out of these generational debates? Is anyone aware we exist?

I think it’s just cathartic for some people to shake their canes at “millennials”.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I find your opening statements to be somewhat offensive to the point of how you logged on trying to control the narrative of how everyone in this group should or shouldn’t exchange information and or their experiences. If you want to start your own group where any one with a opinion or experience should say or express themselves by quoting or stating a paper or a reference to their findings go at it . Their are always going to be people that give misinformation either because they read something somewhere or for some reason they believe what their saying but the mass majority of people chiming in are trying to help people with their personal experiences or what they remember to be true . The hobby itself has grown from trial and error and the sharing of information . If you don’t agree with something then question it and start a debate , give your opinion with those people . Everything written in any group is automatically considered a opinion whether it’s based on fact or fiction and you are free to agree or disagree but what you can’t do is tell some one they can’t give their opinion without documentation or references.

#1- I don't know how you can possibly be offended by my opening statements. I am trying to control nobody. I offered a way I think my be effective at reducing misinformation. Frankly i don't care of your offended by my opinion which was even put more gently than it needed to be. Maybe you misinterpreted it?
#2 I NEVER said someone can't give their opinion without documentation or references!!! I said it would help if they in some way said or implied it's their opinion.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

If you're personally offended by this post, please just block me and we can move on with our lives. I put everything VERY gently (much more gently than I should need to) and I do not owe you an apology for you being offended no matter how much you may feel entitled to one. Maybe I'm personally offended by you being offended. Yes, this is a blunt message

 

[Reefahholic]

It’s just morning here in the United Kingdom, misinformation it’s all about perspective there is statements that are true alone although in the big picture may not be the same. One that I commonly see is the stripping of nutrients to starve algae. On its own this statement is true, algae can’t survive for a long period of time without nutrients, this statement alone is most likely true. if we apply it to a enclosed system where other organisms also need nutrients that statement could be considered misinformation as only one aspect of the biome was taken in consideration.

Depends on what species of algae we’re talking about. I have several I can give you that do really well in a depleted environment for quite a long time. Hehe

 

[Paul B]

To illustrate another part of the problem -- Maybe one of Paul's models wears Chanel No 5 and it contains esters of bat guano that are washed off her wrists into Paul's tank when she's helping him with maintenance, and that puts his mandarins "in the mood" and triggers spawning. What if she accidentally puts on 2 applications of perfume one day instead of 1, and it kills the mandarins? Will he ever know why they spawned or why they died?

Gbru316, this is my favorite post of the day. No, Make that the year. Not just because you named models, even though most of them are Supermodels, but the rest of it.

What 97% of people in this hobby do not understand is that it is the bacteria, viruses, funguses and yes, parasites that run our tanks. Supermodels have very little to do with most of it and we are here just to give the bacteria something to make fun of.

There are thousands of types of bacteria. (I don't know the exact number just like I don't know a lot of things) but when we start a tank (and I don't know why most of the threads are about new tanks so we don't know what happened to the old tanks) The different types of bacteria we use (by accident) are the main things that will determine if that tank will be successful or not.

If our tanks crash, part of that is our fault and part of it is because of the bacteria/viruses/parasites we add or don't add at the beginning. The vast majority of people, and you know who you are, are convinced that we definitely need to kill parasites and viruses. Killing is not always the best route. I am a soldier so I have some experience with this.

When we look at a tank we see fish, corals, little Chinese villages, treasure chests with bubbles opening and closing the lid etc. But that is a very small part of the flora and fauna in the tank. If we could see really well, and we can't, we would see the constant battle that is going on between the bacteria, viruses and parasites. They are all always fighting and sometimes you can see the smoke from those battles.

The outcome of those ongoing conflicts is what determines if your tank will be healthy or a continuing concoction of medications, frustrations and holy water.

Then if we (God Forbid) add something that will "annoy" or "Kill" either parasites, bacteria or viruses we cheat and no one likes a cheater. Most of the medications we use to kill parasites will also kill bacteria. Good and bad bacteria. When that happens the viruses get together, have a party and do the macarana, which is why in many of the posts we see someone treating with some medication to try to control some perceived threat and the fish come down with cottony growths, fin rot, dropsy, swim bladder disease or the heartbreak of psoriasis.

When fish were in the sea happily living with every disease known to man along with Supermodels and Jimmy Hoffa they were fine. I have spent countless hours under water for over 50 years and have never seen a sick fish unless it was just bitten in half or someone medicated it. (Well almost never)

Then we put that creature in a tank with very few natural microscopic organisms and feed it with pellets from Walmart which doesn't have the same gut bacteria the fish was living with in the sea and the fishes immunity goes from 100% to 3% so we run out and buy Prizapro to try to cure it which rarely helps because it causes something else.

If we concentrated more on allowing the fishes natural immunity to keep the thing healthy and less on trying to destroy what we feel is bad, many more of us would be successful and less stressed.

One more thing for the 3 people who read this rant. It drives me crazy, as a lot of things do, when people do something and they say they had "Great Success". To me, Great Success is if you do something for a creature and it goes on to live out it's life and hopefully dies of old age.

A tang, lionfish, tuna etc can not be called Great Success if we only kept it for 2 years. At 2 years it may be a success but not Great Success. Marilyn Monroe had Great Success as an actress and would have had more success until someone killed her. But thats for another thread.

References:
The Lady who cleans my house.
My Book. OK, thats silly.

 

[Paul B]

#1- I don't know how you can possibly be offended by my opening statements. I am trying to control nobody. I offered a way I think my be effective at reducing misinformation. Frankly i don't care of your offended by my opinion which was even put more gently than it needed to be. Maybe you misinterpreted it?

If you're personally offended by this post, please just block me and we can move on with our lives.

I totally agree with your statements LivinlifeinBKK. Unfortunately someone will always be offended by something and some people by everything. It's just the way the world is.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I totally agree with your statements LivinlifeinBKK. Unfortunately someone will always be offended by something and some people by everything. It's just the way the world is.

And Paul, fwiw, I'm in my mid 20s but as far as the generational argument goes, from my experience (these are my peers who've I've spent a LOT of time interacting with) this young generation seems to feel especially entitled to many things in life and also seems to feel it's everyone's duty to avoid saying anything offensive and they're owed a personal apology if they are offended by anything. I don't know if other generations were like this when they were young or not. I know I have flaws including some I'm probably not even aware of but I'm trying to work on them and I feel at least being able to acknowledge them is a step few people my age could make. I hope this doesn't come off as arrogant or too prideful.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Depends on what species of algae we’re talking about. I have several I can give you that do really well in a depleted environment for quite a long time. Hehe

The problem is that is fairly difficult to deplete a system from nutrients, it is easy to deplete the inorganic that we are fairly familiar with such as phosphates and nitrates as for organic nutrients it’s fiscally almost impossible to deplete them naturally.
There is plenty of supporting studies to my statement, it wouldn’t make any difference for me to post them as if someone has the mind set that algae can’t use organic nutrients. A study won’t change they’re mind though
Would be a good subject to discuss on another thread to

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

And Paul, fwiw, I'm in my mid 20s but as far as the generational argument goes, from my experience (these are my peers who've I've spent a LOT of time interacting with) this young generation seems to feel especially entitled to many things in life and also seems to feel it's everyone's duty to avoid saying anything offensive and they're owed a personal apology if they are offended by anything. I don't know if other generations were like this when they were young or not. I know I have flaws including some I'm probably not even aware of but I'm trying to work on them and I feel at least being able to acknowledge them is a step few people my age could make. I hope this doesn't come off as arrogant or too prideful.

I wish I could say this is generational. I honestly think this personal apology issue always existed. People are just now more empowered to expect it knowing that there is a public name and shame or a legal avenue of redress if they can find the right audience. In the past, if you were offended you could wine and moan to a few people but do not have the amplification of social media which would naturally limit the echo chamber thus making people just ‘deal with it’ and move on. Seriously when people finally accept it now a days, their last resort is to go in Reddit’s ‘am I an *****’ for one last shot at validation before they give up.