Re: NANFA-- blah blah so much for a nap

Todd Crail (
Tue, 16 Mar 2004 19:39:34 -0500

The "normal limits" are very difficult to frame because there's so many
differing opinions with varying degrees of comittment to the organization.
And those differing opinions are sometimes in stark contrast to the goals
and ambitions of the people who've invested a good portion of their time and
resources into what NANFA "is". It's disheartening to watch a resource
you've created or nurtured to promote a _consistent definition_ of what
constitutes conservation and education get whittled away in 40 emails of
rationalization, personal rights, paranoid ramblings about "them" and "us",
etc with the name of NANFA tied to every last piece of it.

I don't condone someone's membership status being pointed out, as that was
no criteria for joining the email list. But I do share the frustration,
especially after someone claims they are "done" with a topic, and then 4
days later the rambling continues, without any investment to our
organization. And the rambling is without benefit to the organization. In
fact... Possibly perceived to it's miscredit.

American Currents is such a strong reflection of what the view of the
organization "is" that the organization doesn't _need_ this list. The
website as well, will be getting an overhaul that will reflect what the
leadership of NANFA think it "is".

The people who make regular aquaria and conservation contributions within
the organization (as reflected in AC) seem to be some of the more quiet
voices on this list, even though I know they're subscribers. That bothers
me. I can't blame them for keeping quiet. It would be an even greater
shame if we had to quiet it all permenantly and some of you would miss their
voices and wisdom at no charge with this list.

It may stand that we need to limit all conversation on the list to captive
care, natural history and _event oriented_ reporting of collection of native
fishes (like I went down to the river today and saw the most peculiar
thing...) News wire forwards would definately be out. The website can
serve that capacity with what the content managers feel is appropriate to
post there. Discussion of those topics could be limited to local and
regional gatherings that will keep the normal rules of communication in line
because people will be face to face, instead of the potential for what I
call "monitor muscle".

That would certainly cut down on the potential inflamations we seem to be
cycling through at break-neck speed these last months. Unfortunately, email
doesn't lend itself well to keeping control of content. Once it's "out
there", it's out there. An Ultimate Bulletin Board would offer that
flexibility... But that costs and quite frankly, is a hassle to install and
configure. And really... Who wants to play police officer?

So... We either adopt a certain code of etiquette where list members agree
on reasonable terms what to discuss (I think my list in the former
paragraphs are a good place to start)... Or... I see no other way but to
make it all go bye bye, and will vote to do so.

/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ For a digest version, send the command to
/ instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,