WWMInput8

To WetWebFotos Input 1, WetWebNews Input, WWM Input 1, WWM Input 2, WWM Input 3, WWM Input 4, WWM Input 5, WWM Input 6, WWM Input 7, WWM Input 9

Wet Web Media Input #8

Re: Dwarf seahorses and Gorgonians 8/29/08
Dear Mr. Fenner,
<Ms. Leber>
Please don't think I'm being facetious here when I say how Thrilled I was to receive a response from you! I took a chance and wrote thinking maybe someone might answer me in time but the very next day I have a reply from you! It's like hearing from God.
<Mmm, no. He's much older. Heeeeeee!>
You know he's there but wayyy to busy to answer the likes of you. Thank you so much for your reply. I'm taking all of your advice. I just hope I'm in time to save the ponies. They seem fine but if the tank crashes.......
<Yes>
I just wish it was easier to gather the correct info at the start. From now on I'm coming to WWM 1st. I researched for 6 months before setting up this tank and it seems that everything I have done was incorrect.
<Best to keep an open mind... with a modicum/dose of suspended belief and a smidgen of cynicism>
Thank you again from the bottom of my heart & the hearts of 7 tiny ponies! You should be dipped in GOLD!
<Yikes! Let's wait a while please. Cheers, BobF>

Re: Site Suggestion - 8/12/08, SaraM 8/22/08
Hello Jackie,
Yes, it would be most excellent to have help with the summaries/bullet points. There are thousands that could be done. I suggest to you (and anyone who wants to help) to simply pick the FAQs pages which interest you the most, read the queries and pull out key points/highlights. If you have the time/desire to do this, you can simply send them to me via email and I will post them on the page indicated for which they were written. It would be most appreciated... whatever you're capable/willing to do. Every little bit helps/adds up...
Thank you,
Sara M.

Praise to you on your WetWebMedia 8/14/08
Bob Fenner. Congratulations on the continuing success of WetWebMedia. It is truly an incredibly extensive and wide ranging site. You are providing a remarkably good service to aquatic animal keeping. And you are obviously continuing to be very very busy.
<High praise indeed coming from you Dr. Bob. And very glad to find you still involved in ornamental aquatics. I am given to understand that you had sold Kordon-Novalek>
I am continuing to pursue R & D for our company (now transferred over to Kordon LLC from Novalek) and am involved among various projects of researching probiotics for fish keeping. Do you have or know about where to go for leads on those pursuing this topic? Experts? Successful providers of products in probiotics? Any ideas you or others might have on directions to pursue?
<Mmm, yes... I would ask George at: Bassleer Biofish, www.bassleer.com and esp. the mother/daughter owners of Preis-Aquaristik www.aquaristik-preis.de I do think the folks at Eco Lift have some work going on in this field as well. There are some great innovations "coming right up" for our industry in this field, but the hurdles of application, testing, certification by gov't agencies... I don't look forward to>
I would be much obliged for any help you can provide. Best regards. /.R3
<Hope to see you about Dr. Rofen, Bob Fenner>

A suggestion from a WWM Viewer... 8/12/08
Good day to you, Crew!
I read through all the input pages, but did not see this/my suggestion among them. I realize that questions are currently submitted via email, but was wondering about the feasibility of creating a form for those submitting questions to fill out regarding tank stats. Too often, the people asking questions do not provide enough information to even begin to answer their questions effectively. Perhaps having the form will:
a) Provide you with information you usually need/ask for
b) Help the person to realize that these stats should be known/tested for, and that this information could be relevant to the discussion
c) Reduce the need for them to write you back just to provide missing information, saving time in email volleys (and precious volunteer hours!)
In my mind's eye, there would be a brief explanation at the top asking for the information, and the last box on the form would be where the question was entered. Then the user would simply click a "Submit" button at the bottom, and the whole thing would be submitted to you, as usual, through the email address. What do you think?
Cheers,
Jackie
<<I actually think this is a superb idea. Its very easy to create this form, and make it available for people to use. We can add all the pre-requisites that we would like people to give us, like tank stats, stock, lighting etc etc...created an example form here. http://www.aztecwebdesign.co.uk/tempcontact.htm ... Just temp test fields, but you get the general idea. The form I created there, can be easily be put into a WWM Submission page. save the user having to use an email client, and all emails that arrive in the WWM crew inbox are formatted the same. Upon submission, a new web page will be presented to the user to inform them that their query has been submitted, and look out in the dailies page in the next 24 - 48 hours, or something similar..
Tis just a though. By the way, if you do fill it out and click send, you'll just be re-directed to one of my sites. so, no need to send anything. he he he
Andrew>>

Sounds like more trouble/complexity than it's worth (imo). You'd have to have a different "form" for each different type of question. For example, I'd rather not everyone emailing in with a fish/coral/critter ID come with a lot of extra info we don't need about their tanks. And I don't even want to imagine the potential trouble with formatting stuff for posting it on the web...
Call me a grouch, but I still think WWM is fine the way it is. I think it could benefit from some of the more trafficked FAQs pages having summaries/bullets written for them (as I've mentioned before)... and maybe a few improvements to general appearances/layout might be good. But aside from that... as the saying goes "if it ain't broke..."
Sara M.
Sorry for the misspelling in this... it's the vog, I swear. :-)

Thanks Neale....he he he....I never spell checked it... :P
A row of radio buttons is not a problem to do.. That drop down list does not specify which email box it goes too, as all enquiries will continue to arrive into the main crew inbox.
I see your point on the water chemistry fields...easy to manipulate these to which ever configuration we desire.
Certain fields appearing, would have to explore, play with..
Andrew On Tue Aug 12 11:38 , Neale Monks sent:
Looks great to me! Personally, I'd like to make "nitrite" and "pH" mandatory, but I understand that's unrealistic...I'd tend not to go with the Tank "type" pull-down menu though -- a bit complicated some of the options (and you spelled paludarium wrong, ;-)). Rather, how about a row of radio buttons at the top, for marine/fresh/brackish/pond and leave it at that. Makes it easier to send messages to the appropriate Incoming mailbox. Maybe simply have a "water chemistry/water quality" field for people to type in their readings, whatever they have. For freshwater people, especially newbies, the calcium, alkalinity, etc fields will be confusing. Conversely, some things like salinity will be particularly relevant, e.g., for brackish stuff. Is there any way to make certain fields appear when either marine or freshwater or whatever options are chosen? Cheers, Neale

The form is a great idea - why did we never think of that? o.O
A water chemistry box would probably work best, though we suggest they include (at minimum) ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, pH, temp, and salinity (if applicable) and preferably at least calcium if it's a reef aquarium.
To reiterate, this is a really good idea.
Mike

<Mmm, do want to mention a bit of pertinent history re this approach... Actually how WWM came about principally... Used to be, in the mid 90's I was paid help to Flying Fish Express (an early etailer in our interest) answering queries for their customers... I'd suggested making... a site/WWM... with graphics/pix, and articles proffering more full answers, examples... They went the route of having folks "fill out a form" much as this here... and having the computer sort through previous responses... Folks hated this sterile, non-personalized method... and I can't say I blamed them. BobF>

A few things which may not be apparent here...The form email would just arrive in exactly the same way as they do already....no different....The difference being, is we are providing a nice clean feature for "askers" to provide logical information, which is of a great help to responders. I would save us a lot of back and forth, extracting info from askers when dealing with their query, as it would all be there....Of course, its simply an option for askers, as the normal email route would still be available....No different forms for different types of questions....all a member does is select their tank type from either the radio or drop down list menu....If they submit info we don't need, then, we would just ignore it, as we would do anyway if the asker types it in the email to us....see no difference there...
I agree with Mike, whilst WWM is stunning resource, little idea's like this do move us, as whole unit, forward with internet life, which effectively, what this is...
Just my thoughts...
Andrew

The form wouldn't have to be the only means of contact, and the form could be submittable with blank sections (wouldn't *require* all of the information) and it wouldn't even need to be submitted to a category (it would still appear in our inbox and we could categorize as we do) by the user. It may be a helpful addition, or maybe not, but I don't think it could hurt. Also, "if it ain't broke" leaves you in the stone age at some point! Where would humanity be if we all thought like that? (/shameless prod)

Mike

Re: A suggestion from a WWM Viewer... DarrelB pops in 8/13/08
Me again.
As a computer professional for the last 25 years I dislike computers in general and computer forms & searches intensely.
<Ahh, we share this>
Not only is it sterile and impersonal but because computers are orders of magnitude less intelligent than most people (national politicians aside) people are usually dissatisfied with the results of the Bot Responses. So what's the problem, since we're not talking about Bot responses (ie EBay's laughable 'contact us' concept)? The problem is that nowadays, people see a computer form and they ANTICIPATE frustration and just leave the site entirely. There are metrics on this, but I don't have them available. People dislike computers that interpose themselves between human communications, period... and your form would APPEAR to be doing that. Here is something -- You've all probably discussed this and I just failed to catch the thread - Why not get rid of the FAQ section as it is now and use the incoming FAQ letters to create seeds for the Forum board?
<Interesting... have envisioned something like "Wiki fish" for some time... this is part>
Just as someone currently places the incoming Q's under email topic mailboxes, instead they'd place each incoming FAQ as a new thread on a Forum under it's top level (fresh/marine/pond/reptile/industry, etc.) where it would be seen real time, could be answered by staff or even other members. This way, people who feel comfortable signing up for bulletin boards could post directly, people who are only email literate could still ask questions the old fashioned way (when did EMAIL become 'old fashioned'???) and ... depending on the details of the forum (the devil really IS in the details, but I've seen all this done) -- the forum produces a 'highlights & headlines' top thread all by itself which is a link to the top of every thread at the time STAFF ONLY has made a response... which is essentially the current daily FAQs. Just a thought. Another thought: This Door To Be Unlocked During Business Hours? "Bob, I gotta say man ... unlocking that front door improved sales significantly! > Let's do that EVERy day!"
<Hotay. And I'm getting IN the plane, not ON the plane. BobF>>

Re: Site Suggestion 8/13/08
I apologize in advance, as I know this is not the BB, but wanted to clarify my earlier suggestion and was not sure where/how to do that other than this way.
<No worries>
As Mike said, not all of the fields would have to be mandatory. There is no reason to include tank stats if you're simply writing in a site suggestion or asking for help with an ID, for example.
I can also see where Bob is coming from about the form appearing more sterile, but the information included allows the crew to customize a response even more because they'll know more about the specifics of that tank when they need to. The key, I believe, is getting readers/users to understand what information is needed in order to provide a more useful
answer. Forms in general do not fit every situation but since everything will still be submitted and replied to via email, you still have the flexibility to "do what ya gotta do," so to speak.
<Am in total agreement with the thrust/purpose of the suggested "form" use, but again, there is historical precedent with this very application against the use of form-filling out demand>
Thank you all for listening to this idea. Whether or not it's implemented,
it is nice to know that the feedback is welcome.
-Jackie
<Thank you for this input. Bob Fenner>
PS: Sara M., if you want help with those bulleted points, please let me know. I'd be happy to help in any way I can.
<Will send along to her>

Re: Navigation (was: WWM... what say you?) 8/11/08
Hello Guys,
If I might chime in here...
I don't think WWM is easy to navigate for visitors starting at a low level of expertise. For example, it depends on you having some idea of fish taxonomy. If you are interested in Glassfish for example, you would need to know that they are an "advanced" fish group so that you can go from the Freshwater start page to the Livestock 2 page where the Glassfish topics are arranged.
Then some stuff is arranged in seemingly random places. Why, for example, is "Functions of Body Slimes of Fishes" on the Behaviour section of Aquatic Science? Why is "Quarantine" on Livestock 1 in the Freshwater section, where most of the other articles cover taxonomic groups. Why not put it in Freshwater Maintenance, or Set-Up for that matter.
Other times things have cryptic titles. My article on Freshwater Chemistry is accessed via a link Freshwater Aquarium Water Quality under the Water Issues topic! Conversely, hardly anything on the Freshwater Set-Up page seems to actually be addressed simply as "water chemistry".
(I confess to not having looked over the Marines section much, and
apologise if the Freshwater domain is somehow less representative.)
Now, I accept that nothing I've said here stops a person from using Google. But if a web site can ONLY be accessed efficiently via Google, then there's something wrong with its layout or design.
So what needs to be done?
For a start, WWM needs ground-upwards navigation plan. If I might give an example close to my heart, on my own web site there's a navigation bar running along the top that leads to pull down menus that go directly to the various sections. Doing the same thing on WWM for the hundreds of pages wouldn't be possible, but you could CERTAINLY have a navigation bar that led to the Daily FAQ page, the Freshwater subsections, the Marine subsections, and so on
http://homepage.mac.com/nmonks/
To avoid being simply a critic rather than a helper, let me make it plain to Bob that I'm more than willing to help develop the site to the next level. I do have Parallels up and running on my MacBook Pro, so installing and using Windows software (if that's what you're using) is certainly an option. Otherwise I'd be happy to go through the site and aggregate articles into more logical subsections prior to devising some more straightforward navigation system such as the one described above.
Cheers, Neale
<Please do Neale. You have access, and I am thereby more in your debt. BobF>

Mandarin and Comment on WWM 8/9/08
Dear Bob and Crew,
<Andy>
Hope you're having a good weekend. <Yes!> I am thinking of adding a Mandarin to my 110g display. It has been setup for 17 months, and has 95-100 lbs of live rock and a 1-2" course aragonite substrate. I also have about 10 lbs of live rock rubble in my sump, and a 30 gallon refugium with a 4-5" DSB, 15-20 lbs of live rock and a huge amount of Chaetomorpha. I feel I have a very healthy population of pods. I have done a lot of research on the needs of these animals and feel that my tank is a pretty good candidate. The other fish in my tank would likely not compete with a Mandarin--a Sailfin Tang (I know . . ), a Kole Tang and a Royal Gramma (my very beloved Black Sailfin Blenny is, I hope, somewhere hiding in my sump, as he was chased by the Kole Tang into my overflow, and when I tried to rescue him, he jumped over the top of my pre-filter sponge and down the overflow log flume--at least I assume, as I've thoroughly scoured the carpet and my cabinet for fish jerky and have found none).
<If he is still around he could be one of many fish, this is quite a general name. One “sailfin blenny” in particular to watch out for is Exallias brevis: http://www.wetwebmedia.com/trublennies.htm.>
My tank is an SPS dominant tank, with a few mushrooms, a Candy Cane and some tree corals.
So, now to my question. I was researching about quarantine protocol for Mandarins on WWM, and, as one might expect, found varying answers. Many of the Crew say an abbreviated QT (2 weeks) is fine given the thick mucous coat, others say the normal QT is appropriate, and BobF says "I wouldn't quarantine Callionymids".

So, who's right and why? Maybe there is no "one" answer, and only I can make the decision based on how it looks, where it came from, and the amount of risk I'm willing to take (I can already see Bob's "<Bingo!> being typed . . . ).
<Bingo, yes, you will have to assess that the fish is healthy, otherwise do not buy it.>
I realize that WWM is a collection of a bunch of people who have different ideas/practices, which is what, in part, makes WWM so great, but these differences sure do make it hard to make choices sometimes. I can't help but think, is an abbreviated QT really all that beneficial other than maybe giving yourself the chance to train the fish on frozen foods--either give it a full 4-6 week QT or don't, because anything "bad" (e.g., ich, some other parasite/disease) may not manifest itself in 2 weeks.
<But if you cannot (and likely won’t) train the fish, this is a period of fasting, starvation and stress for the fish.>
Now for my comment. I know that things are posted over and over again on WWM, but as you guys/gals frequently state there are X thousand of posts/articles to wade through and many differing opinions within. I really believe it would helpful if responders made sure to give reasons for a response.
<The huge majority of responses are based on previously archived queries or articles.>
I will say that most of the time, responders do provide ample justification for posts. And, please don't take this as any slight to BobF, who has helped me tremendously over the past 17 months, but the statement "I wouldn't QT the mandarin" really just offers an opinion without a justification.
<But there is: http://www.wetwebmedia.com/mandarins.htm, particularly the disease portion.>
I'll analogize the need for a justification to your constant reminder to us that you need a poster's tank parameters, because, without those, you often find it very difficult to adequately address/answer a question. Without the justification to an opinion, I find it very hard to make an informed decision. I realize you guys/gals are very busy and do this for free, and I also realize (as stated above) that if I researched long enough I could put opinions and justifications together and come up with why I think so-and-so said "I wouldn't do X".
<Exactly, they are there!>
Just a suggestion to make our research burden a little easier and WWM a little better.
Cheers,
Andy
<Thank you Andy, it is not only a matter of time for us, but for the readers of WWM. If the same thing is archived many times, it is just that much to mull over to find what a person is looking for. Scott V.>

Re: Mandarin and Comment on WWM 8/10/08
Thanks, Scott. I hope you weren't yelling at me through the use of "!" :-).
<Oh no way!!!>
A couple thoughts. If "it's there!", then why so many different opinions by the Crew on QT of Mandarins (or of anything, really)? That was my point--yes, there are MANY answers/opinions on WWM and it is our job to read them, research, learn and make decisions.
<Yes, many opinions, many ways of doing things. It is a reader’s responsibility to apply the knowledge to their own specific situation. People are urged to write in if something is not clear or unanswered pertaining to them after such a search.>
That can really be achieved only if we can assemble (and find) complete viewpoints.. I would argue that it doesn't take much time to write "because these animals have a thick slime coat and generally don't carry disease, and don't do well/starve in QT", and that doing so 1500 times doesn't make WWM less usable (I realize the answer isn't always this simple . . .). In fact, I would argue the opposite--that not providing reasoning makes WWM less useful because doing so makes it very hard for us to consider opinions and/or find the answer.
<I understand/agree, explaining the reason is imperative. My statement was geared towards stating it time after time. This does clutter up and degrade a persons ability in the search engine provided. The first X many pages will be the same response. >
As you can appreciate, all of us have to mull through many posts/articles and many of those aren't exactly on point. Thus, we must all take as much away from a post as possible for use in our situations.
<Readers do learn much more than they first intended in the process, a good thing.>
When we don't hit the jackpot by finding "the" answer (or even when we do), it makes it all the more important for reasons or references (I see Bob F frequently requests that the Crew provide refs).
<He does, we generally try to.>
I have no problem mulling through everything posted--in fact I enjoy it very much.

But, as a user of WWM and someone who considers himself somewhat intelligent/able to synthesize info, I can tell you that searching for info on WWM is sometimes frustrating. <<Heee! Try assembling, building, re-making it. RMF>>
<I must disagree. I personally think WWM is very easy to navigate. It is laid out well with a very effective search engine at the bottom of each page. Using a simple control (or Apple/Command) F on an individual page will take you straight to the keywords you are looking for (with most browsers).>
Again, I wasn't/am not criticizing--just trying to give an outsider's viewpoint on how maybe the site could work better.
<I totally understand. The struggle is making so much information easily findable/accessible. Fact is there are many queries/articles to go through (this is what makes the site so special), but you do have to go through them and 95%+ of the time you will find what you are looking for. Scott V.>
<<Thank you both for your input to this very important issue. I don't know... what avenue we might actually "take" (as in nothing is decided till it's done) here... My current direction is to urge, write more articles... that proffer more "raw" background and the "justification"/rationale for much of at least my or the other writers' positions on "giving advice". Per actual responses though, again, there is just insufficient time to pen all this each time... And an argument can/could be made that the majority of folks writing in (though not us three) simply don't want to be so informed/bothered... Unrelated: Am amazed at how dumbed-downed Americans are in particular re such... being told folks are "terrorists", so they must be murdered, our economy ruined, we're not patriotic if we protest... Sans demands for proof... but back to petfish... My real request to you (all) is to ask for such if interested, provide such if a writer. BobF>>

Re: Mandarin and Comment on WWM 8/11/08
Dear Scott,
<Hi Andy.>
Don't get me wrong--WWM is VERY easy to use and is very well organized, and the search engine is second to none. Finding the subject matter you're looking for is quite easy/simple. When I said that using WWM can sometimes be frustrating, I meant only that sometimes (1) there are many conflicting posts by the Crew and (2) one comes across the issue I mentioned previously of not being able to understand the basis for an answer. For example, the disease portion of the Mandarin link that you sent (I did read this before posting, of course) does not address my initial question as your original response implied--in fact, I would argue that one would come away from that thinking you should QT a Mandarin, as the passage states only that they are not immune to ich and should be treated with environmental manipulation when infected. So, in my particular situation, I must necessarily rely on posts addressing the issue, and that is where I got frustrated because of the differing opinions and sometimes no rationale therefore.

I think we've adequately addressed that subject so I won't harp on it.
<Again, we agree!>
In many/most cases, the answer is staring you in the face (e.g., Bob's piece on Kole Tangs specifically addresses QT).
Anyway, all of you do a great job and provide, in my opinion, an invaluable service. I look so forward to reading the daily postings to see what issues are out there and to learn something new. Have a great weekend, and thanks for taking the time to chat.
Andy
<Thank you Andy, it is always a pleasure, Scott V.>

Question for something useful? WWM project... volunteer 8/8/08
Hi there!
<Ho there! We're as happy as can be... M I C...>
I love reading the website, and got this idea after reading the FAQ about the 3 tangs in a 90-gallon tank...the day after a friend's grandson mentioned doing the same!
<More evidence of quantum convergence, or a bit of undigested potatoe...>
Summer is almost over for my son, so I have dreams of copious amounts of spare time...
<Ah summer, ah dreams... now, where were we?>
and of course they're filling rapidly. Here is one of the things I thought might be a useful ting to fill them with please tell me if it is something useful for this site, or would be better off on the Bulletin Board.
<Will do...>
After reading how often people ask about/show inappropriate tank sizes for their fish, I thought that a page summarizing fish might be good.
I know in today's world, people often want to read as little as possible about their topic, and the three primary bits of information people seem to want/need to know about a fish are: minimum tank size, quarantine procedure (since some fish are better off not being quarantined), and then a link to the article on the site that details the fish.
<Do agree>
Does that sound like something reasonable?
<Yes...>
Or is that something that would negate people searching properly for the information?
<Possibly a concern, issue>
If it is something worthwhile, I would be willing to make a stab at it - I would start with a few fish, see if it works, and then continue working on it (I will base the information on what I read on WetWebMedia).
<Any, all good ref.s will do>
I know there are literally hundreds of fish -
<... tens of thousands>
but some groups can be done by family (for example the Amblygobius gobies),
<Yes>
others need individual links, so I thought the best fish to start with (based on people's apparent desire to stuff them into too-small tanks) would be mandarin gobies and some other sand-sifting gobies, tangs, angels, and some other big fish - I am very open to suggestions of which other fish suffer small tanks too often.
Here is what I was thinking:
Column 1 - Fish name (common & Latin - at least the family, in case of groups that fit the category)
Column 2 -
- Quarantine necessary (or alternate procedure)
- Minimum tank size below which to not even consider it
- If needed for that fish, one hint that would radically help the survival of the fish (e.g. refugium, algae to graze on, etc.)
- WetWeb page link to read more about it.
Feel free to shoot down the idea, or if you have a better organizational idea, I am open to it.
I love the website, and use it lots - and would hope this helps pay back some of the tremendous amounts of knowledge I have gathered over the past 2 years (been in the saltwater hobby 3, but didn't find this page until 1 year in).
Thanks tremendously, Kerstin:-)
<Mmm... I really would like your help here... Want to encourage you to proceed... Will post your input... Bob Fenner>

Favourite (favorite!) books 8/5/08
Hello all,
I'd like to create a page where we can keep a list of essential books for WWM visitors. The idea is that when we want to send someone off to read a book on whatever, we have a fixed page to send them to. I was thinking of arranging by topic: maybe community tropicals, ponds, plants, goldfish, cichlids, basic marines, reef tanks, corals, general invertebrates for starters.> > Inexpensive, introductory titles ideally. We can then link to Amazon, if that's helpful.
<Good idea... I do believe Amazon even has some sort of commission/payment for such referrals that generate sales. BobF, who will get his list tog.>
So, please send in any book titles you'd like me to add, and maybe tell me what category it'd go under.
Cheers, Neale

An excellent suggestion... What WWM is not – 07/16/08
Good morning!
<Nicole>
I don't have a question, merely a suggestion. I know that the WWM crew have put together and revised a few versions of house rules, along
with tips for using your site and (as a last resort) asking a question. I wonder if there is room for one more such page?
<Let's see>
I notice you often have to remind questioners to employ proper grammar and spelling, and then on top of that, you have to explain why! It
seems some of the folks who write in don't understand that you are NOT primarily a question and answer service for individuals! More of a
compendium, a "collected works" of Q&As on all things aquatic.
Perhaps folks need a gentle reminder of "What WetWebMedia is Not" - similar to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not
<Ahh! For "wiki" as usual, well-done>
There are genuine Q&A services for individuals (which WWM is not) on aquariums and ponds out there. In fact, I volunteer for one -
AllExperts.com - which has several aquatic pet categories. There are also bulletin boards out there (which WWM is not) except that now you have your own BB! Which brings me to my other point.
Lots of the questions that seem "txtd" to you, or questions that read like this, "What kind of fish is blue and gets along with yellow
tetras? I really want a colorful fish." could go on the BB instead, streamlining the archived WWM FAQs for "cleaner" questions.
<s' true>
Perhaps also, along with saying, "rewrite your question in proper English, and send it again" you could suggest they post on the WWM bulletin board.
<Thank you>
Okay! Those are my two suggestions:
1) Maybe a page that explains, essentially, that WWM is not just a personal service - your purpose is not to have a closed conversation
with one person, and thusly you cannot just txt WWM your question like you would your BFF! (I was especially inspired by the "What Wikipedia is not" page as an example of what WWM could write up.)

2) Also, to maybe suggest to the errant questioner who cannot seem to speak straight, that they post on the BB...same goes for those kind of casual questions like aquascaping, stocking, etc. The kind of questions that would benefit from multiple feedback.
<Yes>
All right then, thank you for listening to my humble opinions...and of course, thank you for everything else that you do - gratis! Your site
is a treasure.
Nicole
<Thank you for your intelligent, valuable sharing/input. Bob Fenner>

Re: A bit more on what WWM is, is not 8/3/08

I wonder if I might add something useful here.
(But then I'm sure many of you have been wondering if I'd ever do such a
thing, too. Who knows? This may be the day... but I wouldn't hold my breath.)

When I signed on to the crew I read the guidelines with rapt
attention. One thing that stuck out was the suggestion that if I start out
correcting their grammar and spelling before I answer their letters I would
become quite bitter rather quickly. Pshaw, I said! (Actually, being under
118 years old, I didn't use that exact term - I used the more modern term)
and ... knowing more about answering letters than any of you more
experienced people .... set about to correct spelling and grammar. I even
added custom words like Repto-Min to my dictionary and a custom macro to
global search and replace RES with Red Eared Slider for the benefit of
those casual readers that wouldn't otherwise get the drift. Armed with
those tools and a desire to do well, I charged into each letter just
changing and correcting and editing like a madman. Now ... barely 172
letters later, a mere fraction of what many of you have done, I'm still
changing and correcting and editing ... but it's not with a smile anymore,
it's more like a sigh. References like "even if I COULD diagram that
sentence" have sneaked in and more than one response has been put off by a
day or two because I didn't want to deal with the lexicography. "Bitter"
is still a long way off but I no longer think that the person who wrote
that suggestion was "wrong" and I now see that they simply had more
experience than I.

But with that said, I also want to stand up for the people who write
in. Very experienced in Reptile husbandry I'm also a novice salt water
aquarist and having ick on a Blue Tang I once spent TWO HOURS searching the
site for information and still never found a case described like mine, so I
wrote in, Bob responded with a link that was EXACT ... but that article
never turned up in MY search.

Among other techniques, Google "ranks" each page by counting how many OTHER
pages point to that page and that's a cooler way that most others but it's
not always relevant. It's much more attuned to finding out what Britney
wore to her most recent court appearance than it is to finding the most
technically correct element in a diagnosis involving multiple and often
apparently conflicting symptoms.

For example, the overwhelming inquiries that I've answered have been on
shell fungus. (When you think of fungus, think of Darrel! )

Yet when I do a Google search on the site for turtle and fungus I sometimes
get references to my FAQ responses and other times not. Today I got 110
responses to "turtle" and "fungus" and one synopsis caught my eye ...
saying that the legs will grow back if they don't contract fungus! Closer
inspection yields that it's a SALAMANDER'S leg that may grow back ... and
the reference to turtle was a "Dr. Turtle" sulfa block by ZooMed. It was
difficult even for me and I knew what I was looking for!!!!

Sometimes, when it's particularly bad, I send a canned response to the user
via direct email in order to keep it from ending up in the dailies and it
generally apologizes for returning the letter and explains that because the
letters and answers are published, they have to be readable by third
parties and the site policy REQUIRES that spelling, capitalization and
grammar be corrected before I can respond. I also suggest that the Google
Search can give them far more information than I would be ABLE to give them
in a single response. Most people send a corrected letter, a few people
sent me a thank you for the search suggestion and only one person was
insulted. But in his response he misspelled "up yours"

So my point ...... and yes, sometimes even *I* wonder if I have a point
.... I urge you to remember that

A) The less one knows, the harder the research can be -- even in the best
of circumstances
B) Google is our friend, but can be JUST as ornery and arbitrary as my ex wife.
C) The internet has created an entire generation for people with the
attention span of gnats -- when we ourselves dash off to another link if
the page doesn't load in 0.00001 seconds, we should try to be kind to
others for having the same affliction.

Maybe it's just me. My generation sent a man to the moon and I remember
where I was and what I was doing when I heard that President John F Kennedy
had been killed. For some reason, right or wrong, I expect less from a
generation that invented the term "Emoticon" and who's defining moment is
and will always be "where they were when the OJ verdict was announced."
<Thank you for this sharing Darrel. BobF>

Re: A bit more on what WWM is, is not 8/04/08
Aww, c'mon, my generation remembers where we were when the Columbia disaster occurred...
<Heeee! Surely you must be joking Dr. (Richard) Feynman>
Searching WWM for specific things can be time consuming, but definitely not more so than writing and email and waiting for a response. While I do agree with you to a point regarding Google's caveats, most of the time I don't even need the Google search for the (many) times I consult WWM - a bit of link following and then a quick crtl+f in my browser, and I search the appropriate FAQ page for the term by name (I just found the answer to a question I had about Zebra Moray feeding in less than ten seconds for instance, no Googling required). I'll admit, my attention span is about 1/3rd of a gnats online - I'd get pissed at a quantum computer for being too slow. However, even I don't expect a free, volunteer service to spit out an answer to all of my problems in a blink of an eye, and it's unrealistic for our readers to expect this, as well. 
My take on input emails? If a reader made an actual effort and still couldn't find out what they needed, or they're still stuck in a gray area, they should by all means send a (grammatically correct, spell-checked, well structured) email and we will do our best to either point them in the right direction, or answer the question directly. Bob does make an excellent point though - this is a volunteer service read by thousands of readers, and we need not cater to those we don't wish to (for whatever reason). Mike Maddox
<Thanks for sharing. BobF>

Re: CA, August 2008 8/4/08
Bob,> > That was a subtle hint for you to pen something. Fair and square, set > out your stall. Perhaps a bit of history as well. Nothing fancy, maybe > a couple hundred words?> > Cheers, Neale
<Will this work? BobF>
> > On 3 Aug 2008, at 18:08, Robert Fenner wrote:> > > > How about an Op/Ed on what the FAQ Service is and isn't?> > <Mmm, who would pen this?>>

Hello and welcome to WetWebMedia.com. Rest assured we very likely can and will help you… with information, inspiration, concerning your aquatic questions, concerns. We ask that you take a few moments here, in reading re what we offer and what we ask in turn, before simply writing us via email:

What WWM Is and Is Not:

WWM is not a bulletin board (bb), chatforum… We do have one: http://bb.wetwebmedia.com/

To write in, share ones ideas, discuss on a one to one basis with (unqualified) folks of similar mind.

WWM is not a purposeful advocate or detractor for particular products, manufacturers, brands… We are at liberty to state what we have found works, and doesn’t (this is a privately held property), and do, out of necessity, damn/condemn certain lines, individual products and actions, as well as praise (as individuals) those that we find laudable. In turn, we will post queriers’ input re the same. However, we have nothing to sell, no palms to grease, no axes to grind. You may find us prompting a given sponsor, their products, but you will almost always find folks being "plugged" along side them who have no affiliation with WWM. The opinions expressed by all here are just that, individual insights, views. Accept them as such, or if you disagree, write in and we will post your alongside.

WWM is not an all-inclusive resource, guide or text book. Though we try to provide direction, steps to completion for many "action plans", it is not our intent, purpose, nor even a practicality that we can/could function as an "all, everything" site for any given, broad topic, type of system. Instead, it is our desire to "fit between" such good in-print reference works and their users (you), proffering additional information, explanation, ideas re applications.

What WWM IS is a reference work, developed/built and maintained by fellow aquarists of demonstrated background, offered free to the public.

All we ask of you is that you first look/search and read what is posted on our site re your topic/subject ahead of writing us, and that if you do write, that you make an effort to do so in proper English, not in all capitals, proof-reading what you send to assure it expresses what you have in mind clearly. Know that many hundreds of thousands of folks will read/use your effort/s over time.

As of this writing (2008), twenty to thirty some thousand people use WWM daily… we indeed want to supply ready, useful reference to help, inspire others. With your assistance, this becomes real. Do write us if you find that your issue/s are not sufficiently detailed or specific to your situation; otherwise, I assure you, the way that WWM is arranged and inclusive, much direct and ancillary information of use to you is likely to be found.

Bob Fenner, common progenitor

Trouble in paradise, WWM Crew "Arguing" 7/22/08
Hi everybody,
<Allen>
First I would like to say I love the WWM site. You folks put up with a lot, and give a lot. I really appreciate it. I have learned just enough to be dangerous,
<Am still working my way towards this...>
and still learning through others experiences. Lately, however, I have noticed a squabble of sorts developing. I have seen emails between members questioning their sincerity, motives, etc. Even some limited bashing of each other.
<Mmm, yes... as the person who posts most all/everyday, I have opted most times to include such "goings on" here... to show... the human side of WWM... it is a community... as well as seek input, vision/direction for improvement. Not only amongst the current Crew, but from folks as yourself>
I have been reading here for a bit over a year and a half, and asked a few questions. I heave read many many responses to Joe reader questions, and think everyone here has the best interest at heart. But guys, your airing your dirty laundry in public. Take it "into the office" so to speak. I think the forums are a great idea, and I love the question/answer format as it is currently. I don't know the reasons these emails are public,
<Really... my decision... and at times, borderline>
I think they really should be between all of you. It's your web site, but we (the Joe readership) come here to try and get help, not here the "intra office squabbling". No offense intended, I just prefer to read about how to get rid of my algae problems, not about who thinks who is not sincere. That kind of reading can lead to the loss of Joe readerships confidence in the crew. You guys are really great, don't screw it up by arguing and bashing each other in public. Take it behind closed email. Respectfully my own humble opinion.
Thanks,
A loyal "Joe Reader".
<Thank you for your input JR. Bob Fenner>

Re: Trouble in paradise, WWM Crew "Arguing" 7/23/08
Hi everyone, I totally agree with the responder below, I feel that these internal issues would likely be better left out of the public arena (or at least away from the daily Q&A's). I know that I have personally withheld some of my opinions/views from the regular crew-mail for exactly that reason. I think it undermines people's confidence in us as a cohesive unit and does little to contribute to the site. Don't get me wrong, I do understand and support the desire to keep everything out in the open, but perhaps we could file/store these messages directly into a section regarding the crew and subject at hand? They would still be available on site, but wouldn't be posted with daily inquiries from the hobbyists, etc. Although I think this would be better, I can see the potential for big problems in determining what crew-mail should and should not be posted at the dailies. There's the rub. Do you post all crew-mail elsewhere, or do you filter through the content of each and weigh the pro's and con's of posting? That could take a *lot* of time, and I don't think Bob, or anyone helping, needs or has that! The only way to streamline it would be to make it all or none, and I'm not sure that's too great an option either. The bottom line is that I don't have a concrete solution for this problem, but it does make me cringe to know that the public is seeing us work through some differences of opinion. Then again, that's life - it happens. -Lynn

Hmm... maybe I'm just clueless or blind/deft? ...daft? I don't know... but I was completely shocked by this reader's interpretation of that discussion. I didn't see any bashing or "arguing" (more like debating). I certainly wasn't bashing anyone (at least not intentionally or knowingly). I see us all as a family of sorts... with some back and forth to be expected. That said, whether or not our internal discussions should be public or not, I have no strong opinion one way or another...
Best,
Sara M.

<Yeah, I think the term "bashing" was taking it a bit far. We *are* like a family of sorts and that let's face it, we're going to have disagreements from time to time. There's no way you can avoid it! It doesn't mean we don't respect one another, we're just trying to work things out.> Best, Sara M. <You too, -Lynn>

<Yeah, I think the term "bashing" was taking it a bit far. We *are* like a family of sorts ...>
You said it sista' :-P

Well. heard a few responses on this...To be honest, I am not surprised that someone who is not on the crew, or does not fully understand how tight knit we are here on WWM, can see this as arguing, rather than see the crew debating on an issue....
My thoughts....Hmmm.....All site communications should be kept out of the public eye, I.E just placed on separate WWM pages which only the crew know where to find them...As I see it, I don't think the Joe Public need to see us debating on an issue, all they want to see is the end result, whatever it may be.
However, on saying that, there are emails that should be placed on the dailies pages like new crew members joining us, meet ups , visits etc etc as the public would really like to know what the crew (as a team) are doing, who there is on the crew...etc etc....
Hmmmmmm.......Oh dear....brain working now...this sort of public info could also be posted on the forum in a new "Announcements and Meetings" section.....Oh bugger me, I've gone and done it now, there goes another suggestion for a forum section on WWM BB ........Geeez.... ;O)
These are just my thoughts and opinion...
Andrew

"My thoughts....Hmmm.....All site communications should be kept out of the public eye, I.E just placed on separate WWM pages which only the crew know where to find them...As I see it, I don't think the Joe Public need to see us debating on an issue, all they want to see I the end result, whatever it may be."
I TOTALLY agree; what possible benefit is there from placing a discussion such as this in the public light? Doesn't make sense to me...
Jorie

Further input re chatting by the WWM Crew being posted, ScottV 7/25/08
<On another note, probably better for the whole crew. The last day or two there has been much discussion regarding keeping crew correspondence out of the dailies. I for one am all for keeping the conversations in.
<Ahh!>
From my point of view it is just this, conversation. I have never seen anything I would regard as and malicious argument, just those articulating their points of views. Some readers may view it as malicious, there will always be someone, oh well. As a crewmember of less than one year and previously an avid reader of the dailies, I found the most astonishing and refreshing thing joining the crew was/is the openness of what goes on. This is one of the alluring aspects of WWM, and what separates us from the particular forum that has been referred to the last day or two. The particular forum is fine with your post so long as it does not impugn them or their high posters.
People truly know who we are, where we come from, how we interact and why we give the advice we do. To me the interactions are part of our credibility.
The ability to question each other, in public, is priceless. Take this away and you limit the public's view to who we truly are. My 2 PSI, take or leave. Anyway, I cannot wait to meet up in HI, gear ready and waiting,
Scott V.>
<Thank you for this input, sharing. I too am happy to show/express the human sides of WWM... it IS a community of individuals... working in semi-concert to all's benefit... and the public DOES actually benefit from awareness of our being also "just folk". Cheers, BobF>

I don't necessarily disagree with crew correspondence being put into the dailies, however if they are to be put there I think everyone should be made aware (which I assume they now are). It seems a lot of us/them were not aware.
-Adam J.
<Mmm, really... the "choice" of inclusion is just a matter of my briefly saving most all... not excising before posting to/as the Dailies... Oh, anyone want to come fwd and do this for a while? B>

I agree the screening of every email that ends up in our outgoing box would be too much to do.
<Heeeee! We do agree... I try to review while checking for spelling, formatting issues, but often "find" items to comment on while re-posting... or splitting up FAQs files in SubFAQs... or... when folks write in to say summat's amiss. B>

I think ScottV makes some great points... agreed. -Sara M.

I'd like to just publicly thank Lynn for the hours of work she has put into the forum in the last day or two. Each topic forum now has it's own thread "stickied" to the top with the related WWM article and Faq's linked within the thread. This is a first and important move in integrating the forum to the main-site and improving it.
Thanks Lynn!
-Adam J
PS Please post in dailies :D
<Ah, will do... Thank you both. BobF>
<<Bob, Adam, you're very welcome. We're just doing what we can to improve the site for everyone. By the way, I also included the "Ask the WWM Crew a Question"/search engine link as well. Between those options and the associated WWM links, we should be able to effectively help a lot of people. Take care and have a great weekend. -Lynn>

Mac users... can't use WWM? – 07/08/08
Mac users cannot access this site. Hoping this can be addressed as there are many viewers that use Mac computers. The only way for Macs to access the site is if they are running windows on them.
<Really? I am able to access the site/s on my Mac Pro... and we have many thousands of folks who do with Apple products daily... according to our stat.s servers... And some of the Crew use them... Am asking Sabrina re here. BobF>

Re: Mac users, WWM
yeah none of the Mac here at work can access the site. only if they are on parallels and running windows. all the Macs here run on many versions of tiger and leopard
<Umm, do take care... whoever is administering your network is blocking, likely detailing who you can/cannot access... Abdul>

"<Umm, do take care... whoever is administering your network is blocking, likely detailing who you can/cannot access... Abdul>"
Indeed, this would be my assumption as well...
Sara

Re: Mac users, WWM 07/08/08
my Mac here run parallels so on the same computer and same network i can access the site via windows/parallels but not on Mac os (via the same computer and same network). so its not a network block. I've tried safari and Firefox on Mac os, but nothing.
<I can't be sure, but I suspect you have a virus. This once happened to me on my Mac with the CNN.com site. It is odd... and I'm sorry, but I don't know how to fix it. I'd call Mac and ask them. As I'm sure you know, they have excellent customer service.
Good luck,
Sara M.>

Click to pay.. 6/13/08
Love the site and refer to it all the time. always tons to learn. just a few opinions/ideas
<Thank you for these>
2 things - i just noticed the "click to pay" program. what about PayPal? i think a giant chunk of the world has a PayPal account.. i really don't want to go through the hassle of opening an Amazon account. but i will - but i think if you could do "one touch
pay" with PayPal?..might be easier? heck I'd click it every time I’m on the site!
<Dang! I'll have to look... is this an easy upload? We/WWM do have a PayPal acct.>
2nd.. how about a "return to top of page button?" i do read and read.. and i believe my pages per hour rating would substantially increase with a button like that..
<Sorry to be so lame... but will have to look at our web-authoring software/buttons... if it's there, I'll definitely add... Though I've become quite facile at stretching to the page up and Ctrl and Home keys (moved the mouse to the left years back)>
and i lied.. 3rd thing… default the Google Search button to the WWM setting?

but since finding this site the quality of life in my families 2
tanks has been tremendous!
Peter Baron
<Ahh, again, thank you for this input. Bob Fenner>

WWM Site Problems 6/10/08
Hey Bob,
Don't know if anyone else has mentioned this but I am having all sorts of problems with the WWM site, lots of blank pages, the page format is there but no articles/FAQs. If I try again in a couple minutes I may or may not get the page to load, there does not seem to be any pattern. I've gotten the same result from a few different machines with different internet connections and same result, so I do not believe it is on my side. Unfortunately I don't know much more about this stuff than that.
Anyway, hope all is well.
Chris
<Thank you for this Chris. I too am having/seeing the same issues/prob.s... and have ofttimes notified our ISP re... asking if we could pay for an upgraded svc., less folks on our server, whatever... They say no... am hoping that with going with/to the new CSS standards-based Web Expressions program (If/when I ever learn it), that much of this will be solved. Cheers, BobF>

Re: WWM Site Problems 6/10/08
I've noticed these things too... I think it has to do with browser compatibility issues with the CSS code (Bob, that's what the little red and yellow triangle are all about). I've been able to solve the problem with a given page or two, but I can't go through every page this happens with. I figure there must be a more elegant/global solution, but... maybe we need to find someone who has a more in-depth knowledge/understanding of Web Expressions.
Best,
Sara M.
<Thank you for this... Am posting... hoping for help/input re. BobF>

Thanks 06/06/2008
Hello,
<<Good Afternoon, Andrew here>>
I just wanted to write and say THANKS!!
<<WOW....Thank you very much indeed>>
It's been just over 8 months now and I've learned a lot.
<<Great news, we never stop learning, if not in the hobby, in life's experiences>>
WWM has been a GREAT source for information. My system is not the best looking setup.
<>
I don't have a lot of money and this setup is not my ideal setup. But I'm very proud of the health of the system considering this is the first time I've
ever had fish. I've only lost a few fish and only one coral (blue Zoa). My system is 3 tanks all connected with one being the refugium sump. I also
have a 6 gallon bucket with mangroves and a DSB. My favorite fish are still the first ones added; two TR clowns who have grown a lot and are now hosting xenia. I've attached some pictures.
<<The fish and tanks look superb Jesse, well done on successful reef keeping thus far>>
My fish thank you and I thank you.
Jesse
<<Jesse, many thanks for writing in with a message such as this. The whole team really appreciate these emails. Good luck in all your future reef keeping endeavours, and please do ask many more questions in the future. Good day. A Nixon>>

An opinion and sincere thanks!! More re Anglish and WWM. Darrel's go – 09/22/07
Good Morning Guys and Gals of "The Crew"!!
<Well .. a hearty Hiya, Howdy & Hello right back at ya! Every time I hear or read "Guys & Gals" I think of singing "A bushel & a peck" or "Luck be a lady" (that's a slightly twisted trivia reference for anyone who cares)>
At risk of unnecessarily "fanning the flames" I would like to offer my two cents worth about the use proper syntax in emails.
<As a flame fanner myself from way back .. sometimes it just has to be done!>
When an individual requests assistance/information from you (collectively), they are not sending a chatty email to a friend. They are sending an email which will become a permanent part of your site/database and as such will be read over and over again by people worldwide. As one of those "people", I truly appreciate being able to understand the question as well as the reply.
<Kerry, that comment right there falls under the category of a Home Run - that's exactly the point. This site is about education for everyone and in order to educate there has to be common standards>
A few years ago, I was involved on a website which incorporated a "chat" component. The "chat" style of writing/communication is very easy to adapt to and very difficult to "get away" from. It is extremely pervasive and seen everywhere these days. My husband and I welcome the use of proper syntax on this site. To be blunt, the "garbage" that we have to wade through to find information on other sites makes the effort of doing so seem futile. Here on WWM, we are able to comprehend the questions as well as the replies. Without understanding the nature of the issues that others are experiencing, how would we know if they apply to us; how would we benefit? Without that understanding, you (collectively) would have as much effect by sending only a reply to the individual with the query.
<Well, I "LOL" once in a while myself. In fact, just the other day I LMAO'd about something I read, so I'm a bit guilty myself. That being said, language is a complicated thing that many use and yet few understand. Words we speak or type don't communicate a thought or idea as much as they are used by the reader or listener as a blueprint to build a picture in their own mind of THEIR thought or idea. That's why there's such a focus here on scientific names -- it's not to show how cool or smart we are (actually if anything it screams out our nerdiness and probably admits our use of pocket protectors and why many of us had so few friends in High School) it's because we strive to do everything we can to help the reader build EXACTLY the same picture in their mind as we have in ours so that our answer is useful and precise.>
<When you see us going out of our way to point out grammatical errors, it's not intended to insult or offend the writer. We do it to illustrate a point to the larger audience what not to do. As has been pointed out, we're all volunteers, we mostly have day jobs and evening & weekend families -- not to mention the fact that we all have these aquatic hobbies that requires our attention. It's easy to fix the grammar in one letter (I personally copy into Word and do F7 before I even read it) but the site gets hundreds letters a week and that's not even including the offers to increase the size of our anatomy, better places to buy drugs and the constant begging from the lawyers who's clients have died and need our help to get millions of dollars out of their home country. (laughing out loud)!>
Thank you all so much for volunteering to share so much of your time and knowledge. We truly appreciate it!!
<That's always nice to hear, Kerry. I came across this site when I started to help my son establish his first Marine aquarium and like you, found it different from the rest and heads above all of them for the reasons you stated. While I have a lifetime of experience and education in turtles and other reptiles and understand the SCIENCE of the aquarium hobby as well as a scientist ... the 'art' of the hobby often escapes me and I can say for a fact that Bob and the Crew are responsible for the ongoing success of at least several of our marine fish. So now I jump in to answer the turtle questions at the same time that I read with rapt attention about marine stocking and water quality issues.>
While we do not want to contribute to what seems to be something of a controversial point at WWM and by no means will we be offended if this email is not posted in the interest of "world peace", I felt the need to let you know that your efforts are appreciated and welcomed!
<It's never our intention to offend, Kerry and it IS nice to hear that we're appreciated>
Thanks again, Kerry and hubby
<Darrel>

An opinion and sincere thanks!! Neale's turn – 09/22/07
Good Morning Guys and Gals of "The Crew"!!
At risk of unnecessarily "fanning the flames" I would like to offer my two cents worth about the use proper syntax in e-mails.
When an individual requests assistance/information from you (collectively), they are not sending a chatty email to a friend. They are sending an email which will become a permanent part of your site/database and as such will be read over and over again by people worldwide. As one of those "people", I truly appreciate being able to understand the question as well as the reply.
A few years ago, I was involved on a website which incorporated a "chat" component. The "chat" style of writing/communication is very easy to adapt to and very difficult to "get away" from. It is extremely pervasive and seen everywhere these days. My husband and I welcome the use of proper syntax on this site. To be blunt, the "garbage" that we have to wade through to find information on other sites makes the effort of doing so seem futile. Here on WWM, we are able to comprehend the questions as well as the replies. Without understanding the nature of the issues that others are experiencing, how would we know if they apply to us; how would we benefit? Without that understanding, you (collectively) would have as much effect by sending only a reply to the individual with the query.
Thank you all so much for volunteering to share so much of your time and knowledge. We truly appreciate it!!
While we do not want to contribute to what seems to be something of a controversial point at WWM and by no means will we be offended if this e-mail is not posted in the interest of "world peace", I felt the need to let you know that your efforts are appreciated and welcomed!
Thanks again, Kerry and hubby
<Hello Kerry, and thanks for the e-mail. As you correctly observe, most of the messages sent to WWM end up posted on one of the FAQ pages. This site is read by twenty thousand fishkeepers every day, and the FAQs are a major draw, being a quick way for people to research particular problems or issues. Clearly written messages are easier to read and more likely to turn up on search engines, so they provide the best service. Idiomatic English, slang, and abbreviations work in the opposite direction, making it more difficult for people to find what they're looking for. Of course we understand that writing a message to WWM isn't like sitting an English exam, and we don't normally criticise people for casual mistakes. After all, we crewmembers make plenty of them ourselves! But finding a happy balance between tolerating typos and accepting lazily written messages can be tricky. Feedback from other WWM readers helps us to try and get this balance right, so your comments are appreciated. Cheers, Neale>

Just a quick rip on WWM, AndrewB chimes in 7/23/07
I saw the above-captioned FAQ on WWM and felt compelled to comment. I am a huge fan of WWM (read it every day) and, indeed, have posted many questions and received much help from the staff. Although I think this writer has a bug up his bum, and although I realize that all of you are volunteers, do this because you love the hobby and are very busy with other things, I do ask all to keep in mind that not everyone that is in the hobby/has a problem holds a Bachelor's Degree (or even graduated from high school). Generally, I think you guys are really good with balancing keeping people on the straight and narrow vis-a-vis grammar, spelling, following the rules, etc. and helping people, and you do the latter much more than you do the former. Most times, the people you blast are as stated--truly looking for you to do their work for them; no thinking, no searching, not caring about what they're writing. I have seen posts, however, in which the WWM staff was a little too critical where it was clear to me, as a reader, that the person inquiring probably wasn't the most educated person. As a story, and not as an example of the foregoing of course ;-), I have received a serve from RMF because I misspelled "Lemnalia" in a question in which he told me without mincing words to get the name right and use search indices, all without answering my question.
I note that I have received and read many responses from the Crew that contained typos . . .. The point is, while I disagree with most of the points expressed by the poster (and the manner in which he/she did so), I do think he has a point--we're all human.
We all respect that you do this for free, and truly appreciate your help.
Andy
<Thank you for this input Andy. BobF>

Funkiest... Query - 09/24/07
Hi Crew, I do not think that 'funkiest' is a proper description of the 9/23 query.
<Heeee! Got a better descriptor?>
Is it any different than if the question was -I just bought some nice fish and put them in a nice bird cage and they seem to be dying, can you help? And of course it starts with 'Love the website, its a wealth of info'.
And add me to those who appreciate your efforts including insisting on good English.
Thanks
<Thanks Sam. BobF>

No question, just thanks 7/23/07
Thanks to you I have maintained two 12 gallon tanks for over 2 years now without any loss of life. One salt, one fresh water. I was really taken aback by that post from "Richard" and wanted to add my voice to no doubt probably hundreds, that you guys do an amazing job. I have a well worn copy of The Conscientious Marine Aquarist on my bookshelf. I emailed once about a problem I was having and received a fast and informative response. I think it is your obligation to point out when people are doing wrong and I'm glad you do so . So, thanks for all you do, keep it up, and next time any of you are in Austin , email me so I can buy you a beer! Susan
<Thank you! Oh, both for your timely input as well as the libation offer Susan. Bob Fenner>

WWM Apparent stance, attitude toward LFS, personnel – 09/08/07
Dear WetWebMedia Crew,
In the daily FAQs September 8, 2007, the following exchange appeared:
I do have to throw in how disappointing it is how little correct information comes from the places where you get these poor fish.
"<Indeed. But you have to remember the motives. Pet stores want you to keep coming back to buy stuff. They want you to have just enough success to stay interested. But they have no vested interest in your fish staying healthy provided you keep buying more fish from them.
People like us here at WWM don't get paid for what we're doing, we do it because we want you to enjoy your hobby and your fish to stay healthy. Who you gonna trust?>"
I'm writing to dispute both the accuracy and the appropriateness of the fairly common (from the WWM crew generally and the cited respondent specifically) assertion that pet stores care only about profit even in the face of massive loss of livestock that has left the store. To be sure, 'pet stores' -- the businesses proper -- need to be financially solvent. But is providing marginally useful information the best way to do that?
<Of a certainty, no>
The most successful independent pet stores, in my experience, have been those which give the best and most useful advice to hobbyists. Those of us familiar with the shop in Lansing, MI to which Bob and Anthony give thanks for photos in their Reef Invertebrates book know at least this example of such a shop, and there are many more.
<Agreed>
So more business does not follow from fish dying in fishkeeper's tanks -- often, frustration and a search for a new hobby (or at the very least, a new pet shop) does.
<Or worse... leaving our interest>
Nor is the associated assertion (also fairly easy to find examples of on WWM) that pet store employees tend to be ignorant of/unconcerned with livestock care universally applicable -- not even close.
<Again, we are in agreement>
Many of us spend a good deal of time doing things like reading your daily FAQs so that we can pass on the knowledge gained to our customers and fellow hobbyists. Many are heavily involved in propagation of livestock that we certainly don't want to see die after it is sold.
Many work for minimum wage (!!!), so we are certainly not in it for the money.
<Very much in agreement!>
Many of us have other jobs with which we support ourselves, and are thus pretty close to those who "don't get paid for what we are doing." There are, indeed, some (or many, or 62.5%; it makes little difference) ignorant/unconcerned shop employees, but does it follow from the fact that there is a lot of bad fishkeeping information on the web that fishkeeping web sites give bad information? No, it does not.
<"Some of this, some of that">
The categorical claims about ignorant LFS employees are illegitimate, as are comments about their motives -- it certainly would not be appropriate negatively to comment on your motives for giving information. The appropriate discussion is about the information itself.

Please continue to give the valuable information that you offer to us all. Please discontinue disseminating unproductive categorical claims and ungrounded assertions about the psychology/character/ motives of folks who, in great many instances, are or ought to be offended by such claims. Thank you.
-John
<Thank you for coming forward and expressing the points so clearly John... I spent 14 years "on the floor" in retail pet-fish... and with friends, owned several stores over many years more. The broad mix of outlets are owned, managed and staffed with well-meaning folks in my estimation... And once again, being beware of absolutes, I am given to comment that one should "blame the act, not the child" Or the president for that matter... Certainly there are knowledgeable, dedicated, passionate people in our trade at all levels... Lastly a comment re my making comments... as the "grand arbiter" (person who mostly moves things around here). If I see something outright "wrong" or spurious, I will make an insertion... but too often do find myself out of time to review others input... For this vague generalization example above I do apologize... I am in agreement with your/John's P.O.V. Cheers, Bob Fenner>

WWM Crew: The upcoming crush on WWM - 9/3/07
Howdy! Our unique ISP user count is hovering right about 20k per day currently... and am hopeful that with all our great answers and articles archived we won't be deluged as badly as usual this time of year (with summer over in the N. hemisphere, school re-commencing, holidays over... the weather becoming more bunk, folks paying a bit more attn. to their indoor affairs... and the giant gear up for Xmas)... but we will likely see something like a fifty percent gain in questioning... Cheers and biers! BobF.

R2: Water Flow…Four Two-Inch Drains And Still Having Problems – 08/13/07
Hi EricR
<<Hello Ian>>
I think I have enough food for thought. I will try all the various options we discussed (starting with the easiest) and see what will help.
<<Ah yes...and if you have a gate-valve plumbed on the output side of the pump, well then...>>
I have no doubt I will solve this.
<<There “is” a solution...>>
Thank you very much for your input.
<<My pleasure>>
Often one thinks of an idea but is not sure if on the right track until you hear it from the "experts". I tell you I am not sure what most of us would do without this wonderful service from WetWebMedia!
<<Gratifying to hear...and I am happy to be a part of it>>
This hobby is so complex, with so many variables that I think it is a godsend we have access to a body that deals with ALL these problems on a never ending basis thereby getting the experience that a mate down the road or the local stockist could never provide....
<<Indeed...the range of experiences/varied backgrounds of the Crew under Bob’s ever watchful and almost [grin] all-knowing eye...the wealth of written data available for public perusal...and the fact that everyone here is a “volunteer” and truly wants to help, is what I think makes this service unique>>
Cheers,
Ian
<<Good luck my friend...and please do let me know how this turns out. Eric Russell>>

Images, WWM – 08/08/07
Fair enough.
You know those "desktop size pictures" you put at the top of the FAQ page?
We should really try and combine thumbnails of them into a gallery.
<Heeeee! Where were you a decade ago? A couple of friends and inactive WWM Crew generated an omnibus prog. (as I'd had no success finding a "Corbis" type home-hobby type) to do what we currently do, and what you suggest here... and much more... We opted not to use this... and part of "it" became WWF (the BB and pix sites)... and went w/ "Brand X" Frontpage for web-authoring... and thank goodness we did... As predicted, the fellows involved have had life changes, other things on their plate... and the software has had troubles...>
I keep getting messages from magazines wanting photos of fish. At the moment I ask around on forums, and the average hobbyist seems happy to sell some digital snaps for a few dollars and a copy of the magazine. Perhaps if WWM had a "image sourcing" service, where we collated images and made them available for editors, who'd e-mail the site and then be put in touch with the photographer. Perhaps one way to defray operating costs? Not sure how that would work, but an idea anyway.
Cheers, Neale
<IS an excellent idea... and near the top of my "wish list to do" areas...
We're in a sort of "Catch 22" (KV RIP) with funds to have someone/s going through, cataloging, adding different size pix, MUCH background material... and making our catalog of pix (WWM has 22k plus, I have several times this)... available in larger sizes (ala fishbase.org) and for sale... IF there were but time lady (with regards to Ben Jonson, Volpone). Cheers,
BobF>

Thank you... improving WWM's "bottom line". Membership? – 07/18/07
Dear Bob & Crew,
<Mike>
No reply required.
First, a quick thank you note for all the prompt and informative help you have generously provided while I've been cramming at warp speed trying to keep up with all of the things I need to learn.
I'm also confident your other "students" are equally grateful judging from the comments I've read in the FAQ's. That's the other reason I'm writing (explanation below).
One should be almost required to take a course and be licensed prior to beginning an undertaking like this. Who knew? (I sure hope the Government isn't reading this!)
<Heeeee!>
Second, I finally managed to catch your WWM "Become a Member" page on a good day and it worked.
The reason I wanted to join was to be able to make a donation to your site, which I was more than happy to do, as a gesture of my appreciation for your time, patience and advice.
It was well worth it. I'm sure you have saved me enough time and money as to make donating to your site the very least I could do.
<Thank you for your generosity of spirit, and economy>
Last, but not least, I noticed that you don't have to be a member to use your service (admirable), but it was not until I joined that I realized, you don't have to be a member to donate.
<Really? Is this through the "Amazon begging bowl?" I did/do not know re this issue of membership...>
Frankly, I'm just not sure all your visitors would know this and, perhaps, it might help your cause to post this somewhere that all visitors will see.
<Will send this along to MikeK/Miguel for his info.>
(Forgive me for the following, it's part of what I do professionally)
Do you know what percentage of site / service users are members?
<Mmm, no>
Are members automatically ID'd as being such when e-mailing your site.
<Not by us for sure... We do not track folks period, nor ever retain their email addr. or other info...>
They might feel that they are more a part of something bigger (It is human nature to be attracted by this).
<Really?... I feel compelled to respond that I am much more often repulsed by such "requirements"... but I do agree that every person MUST feel important... the value of everyone's' sense of place is critical to me...>
Might they, in turn, feel more inclined to help out in your Q&A forum pages if their answers to posted questions are also ID'd as coming from WWM Members?
<Possibly... Are you aware of our quasi-related BB: WetWebFotos.com? There is a different (less moderated) sort of camaraderie there... and the capacity to post personal info., pix...>
They might feel it lends credibility to their responses, or attracts more attention to their questions from other members. Members helping members? All for the cause and the greater good? What a concept.

I might also suggest, if I may, that the Click to Donate Button / Box be up top as opposed to at the very bottom of the home page where if you don't scroll down (which you would have to, to see it), you may never know it's there. I saw it only accidentally. I would imagine that most visitors click an option (Marine etc.) that does not require any scrolling at all. When will they be provided with the opportunity to give back?
<I see... and would appreciate the chance/opportunity to respond, proffer my input here. It was/is my intent as the common progenitor of these sites to de-emphasize the/our need for remuneration. Indeed, I have never "paid" myself for my help here... but assuredly derive recompense in abundance in many other ways... But have considered that we could do much more good, and rightly "pay" our Crew, all volunteers, if we had more funding... Just really don't know how to accomplish this ends easily... We've added shared border sponsorship/advertising, and this year, the now-declining in popularity rotating banner ads... and have had dreams, glimpses of devising a sort of software that would allow one to "turn pages", design/use dynamic templates ala the look, feel of print magazines... replete with inserted paid advertising... But I will admit to personal laziness... and a lack of ambition... to devote my "scarce resources" toward our ends here for responding to queries, writing, making/manipulating/placing images (static)... content building simply put... and not focusing at least part of the/my time strategically on generating revenue... If I had more general resource myself, I'd much rather look/delve into bringing video to the site for instance, than administering the making/doling out of monies... But... this/these other activity/ies are potentially seductive>
Another thought might be to add an automatic footer to your replies asking if they were happy with the service, and providing an optional link to the "help the cause" page. All of the above can be done without appearing pushy or offensive. The rule is, you never know how generous and appreciative people can be until you ask (subtly and politely, of course). "Voluntary user fees" do not leave that bad taste in your mouth. I, for one, feel better about having used the service now that I have donated (especially when some questions were real rookie ones).
The lightest touch of guilt can, depending on the situation, yield a higher return than high pressure aggressive lobbying.
<Well-stated>
I am certainly not criticizing your site by any means. I read some of it daily and am enjoying it. I just thought I might take this opportunity to offer you some free professional advice in return for all the great advice you have given me.
Now you have my two cents worth along with my donation. Feel free to take it for what it's worth (even if you feel it's only worth the two cents).
My fish thank you.
Mike from Canada
<And I and they you. I will share your well-thought out missal with the WWM Crew. Bob Fenner>

Re: WWM... money... what we might do – 07/18/07
Hmm, I am in agreement with you Bob RE membership. Most websites now seem to require/force you to become "Registered" and this often, IMO and experience puts people off. The connotations of membership also I feel have changed in today's society and whereas before it may have been part of close net group it is now more associated with corporate and retail retention of customer base, through the use of SPAM, mail and "Sponsors Offers".
<Ahh!>
Also a large proportion of the people that use WWM that enter the site as new/unique visitors use the information for resolution of problems, normally that they are experiencing at that time and any furthering of registration may compromise this influx of new visitors.
With regards to site improvement and adding to the sense of person. Possible additions could include simple Tank of The Month and Photo Competitions that would encourage people to "become the site", these could be supplemented with sponsored prizes thus giving added interest to the commercial sector.
An article section could be included with a list of articles to be written and a "Sign-up" registration for multiple users to collaborate their experiences to pen new pages of information for inclusion - like a writing club which will inevitably help the site and alleviate the stretch on the usual authors.
Would it also be possible to include some type of product placement with companies to generate revenue to fund other avenues for expansion with a "Product Review" section possibly along with recommendations.
Just my 2 cents if any of it makes sense or is relevant =]
Olly
<You show remarkable insight my young friend. B>

Re: Membership and Donations - 7/20/07
Dear Bob and Crew,
No reply required.
<Mike>
I completely agree with your friend Olly. Forcing people to join, especially newcomers, will likely drive them away from the site.
Requiring too much personal information, and too early, will likely scare them off as well.
In my opinion, neither of these would suit, or serve your site well, one of the last bastions of service without a catch. No spam - no scam (Tag Line anyone?)
<I'd copyright this... pronto!>
The average human will require some time for their justifiable prejudices against strange and information hungry web sites to subside. Have some faith that this will happen after you and your crew inevitably rescue them from impending doom.
<Heeee!>
Too dramatic? An exaggeration?
<Nah and Hah... am copyrighting m'self>
Just read through the panic in many of the FAQ's you receive and decide for yourself. Newcomers will learn soon enough that your site exists to relieve them of their frustration and confusion, not their money and identity.
<Oooh, yes>
Again, just read many of the FAQ's and compare the ratio of questions posted to thanks posted. It is impressive indeed. Many are so confident in you and your service that they thank you even before you have answered their question! This is meaningful in that their level of trust and confidence in you, your Crew and the site is quantifiable. You have "white coat syndrome" working for you.
<No wonder my blood pressure's so high!>
(If you are not familiar with this one, it is, in part, that the richest most powerful people on the planet become like wide eyed children hanging on the every word and facial expression of even a young intern if they have some health concern that they can not identify / handle themselves).
The benefit is in not underestimating the value of the service you are providing and the level of appreciation of those who benefit from it.
I hope there was no misunderstanding. What I was suggesting in my previous e-mail was something completely voluntary with no tricks, hooks or catches.
<Yes... this was and is my understanding>
Newcomers would be permitted the opportunity to become comfortable with the site over time and through use the impressive services you offer, prior to deciding on their own to "become part of something great" once the appropriate level of trust has been established. I wouldn't imagine this would take too long at the speed you and your Crew operate.
Becoming a member remains the user's decision. One that I believe many would ultimately make once they realize the site is "clean" and is made up of helpful, honest people who respond using their own names.
Identifying members does not have to involve identity theft. It's all in the presentation. Have a look at how e-Bay identifies its members, while protecting their identity. There can not be any question that this has been hugely successful for them. Although their site exists for a different purpose, members of your site may also have something to offer (your chat style FAQ forums) as well as something to gain (your knowledge and experience).
Donating to the site / cause also remains the user's decision. I'm merely suggesting that you present them with the opportunity to make that choice (again, obvious, but subtle and polite).
After you've saved them a few fish, countless hours of fruitless endeavours, and even more money, they might just feel so inclined as to voluntarily help those that voluntarily helped them. I did.
What is to prevent you from introducing yourselves / your site as a non-profit site that exists for the proliferation of the hobby aquarist. (I would advise checking your state laws prior to using the non-profit term) or something along those lines.
<Good idea>
The whole idea was to better promote the opportunities available to your users.
The offer to send out your on-line magazine, for example, might be one of them. Just post "e-mail address required for on-line magazine subscribers only". People will get the message.
The bottom line here is that very little bottom line would be required to make the above available / visible to your users. The results can be measured over a period of time. The risk - reward scale is tipped in your favour, to the benefit of all.
Now you have my 4 1/2 cents. I thought the method in my madness was deserving of some explanation.

I very much enjoyed our discussion (I enjoy my work as well) and hope that something positive might come from the subject having been raised.
Mike from Canada
<And I do think this is the case as well... The real only "stumbling" block/s as it were are the usual social/individual inertia (yours truly being too lackadaisical), not knowing how to add such a feature (likely easily cured with the Catch-22, RIP, of having the funds to hire someone to generate/add code), and the ongoing lack of drive to make the site more sophisticated... Really Mike... we don't want to appear or change to something that "looks", "feels" too involved, hard, or scientific... Runs contrary to being approachable... Would indeed like to apply my/our efforts contrarily... develop sections for beginners... Cheers, BobF>

WWM Site "Usability" – 07/18/07
Hiya Bob...enjoying your stay on the Big Island I hope? About time for Chris and Jorie to show up isn't it? Do tell them I said "Hey!"
<Will do so>
I've been looking at ways to improve folk's understanding/usability of the site as we discussed. I asked Karen to take a quick look at the site for her input since improving usability of websites is "what she does" for living, and she pointed out a couple things right away. With these in mind I wanted to go ahead and run a few things by you and get your input.
<VERY good>
First, and most obvious to Karen... We need to add a "prominent" link to the top of the homepage that says "How To Use This Site!" which will take folks to a page (not yet developed) that will go over how to use/do keyword searches; including some Boolean search tips, as well as some explanation of FAQs/site layout and whatever else we determine will be of use.
<In total agreement>
Second... I think the page explaining how to send us a query should be pared-down and reworded to just that...our requests/rules/requirements for query composition. Maybe even set it up so an individual has to click a "I have read and understand" link to get to where they can write their query?
It won't stop folks from just breezing through/ignoring all, but it may give pause/catch those who "are" interested but just not paying attention.
<Also>
Third... Karen found the link headers that are listed after a Google search to be very confusing...e.g. euxangfdgfaqs. To be honest, looking at them from her perspective I'm sure they must look quite cryptic, even forbidding, to the lay person or beginning hobbyist. I don't know how these are set up, but I'm guessing they are headers you understand/originally created to help you with query placement and as such I don't know what if anything can be done here. I have a suspicion creating new Google search headers might be a monumental task in itself.
<This unfortunately is artifactual... from my early generation of file names period... the need for some descriptors that were "useful"... definitive, abidingly short (to fit in the constraints of software and particularly the "Navigation View" of the site...>
I can work on/compose these changes and will then send them to you for approval and placement on the site. To do this I will either have to purchase/learn the compatible software (MSFrontPage is it?),
<Yes, and can use any web-authoring software... or just send along changes/proposed new files and I will gladly place... Am very interested and yet hesitant to start you on the slippery slide of building the site... But would GREATLY appreciate your doing so...>
or I can compose the pages in a text editor (MSWord) and then send to you for conversion. Eric
<Ah, yes... Do please start. BobF>

Re: WWM Site "Usability" – 07/18/07
Bob, I forwarded your response to Karen and she has more questions re the Google search tool and how it finds search headers. Please see below...
Eric
<Ok>
"I would like to know - if Bob knows - how Google interprets and composes the headers for each hit on a search. I'm sure with the millions of hits, this is done programmatically and obviously, not manually.
<Our site is crawled in real time by G and others, but I know extremely little re the process. It appears however that not simply titles, but ALL the content, including images, titles therein, are included/scanned>
For instance, initiate a search in Google for Butterfly Fish and observe the headers. Then initiate a Google search within WWM for Butterfly Fish and compare the headers. Is there a way WWM can use the same method to generate the headers that Google uses? It certainly is more scannable, readable, usable, less daunting and understandable."
<Mmm... a good question... would take a HUGE amount of effort to go back,
change all... BobF>

Hello – 07/07/07
Hello, I just wanted to say hi to Mr. Robert Fenner and his friendly staff. Keep up the good work guys! Looking forward to talking to you again in the near future.
Sincerely,
Joe Reza from the El Paso Zoo, El Paso, TX.
<Hi Joe! How's things down your way? Any new exhibits going up? BobF>

WWM in the GWN, Crypt redux 6/30/07
Thanks again for your help!
<Welcome!>
Just this past week I observed something and know that you and your site are making a difference in Calgary, Canada. I went into a fish retailer and they had your website up and visible for customers and staff. I was there for about 20minutes and they must have referred to it twice. They were using it for compatibility reference for a lady's new purchase.
The other time I overheard them referencing your site for information on a bacteria.
<Ahh!>
Perhaps gone are the days where owners and staff will guess or misinform customers. The same owner refused to sell a family a pair of clownfish the same day they were buying their tank. He basically told them to get it up and running and come back in 4 weeks when they were familiar with the water parameters. I was happy to hear that.
<Me too>
Anyhow, thanks again!
P.S. Sadly, you may recall my plethora of emails in a panic for some information regarding what I believed to be Crypt ~ hence my 3 fish in quarantine. I lost my Yellow Tang and Foxface in a quarantine tank 3 days after capture. Do you happen to know if those NanoTanks (that include lights, filter, skimmer, etc) would deprive the water of oxygen?
<Mmm, should not>
The lid is pretty tight fitting and the has fans... although the fans seem to blow hot air out. Just wondering... I can go into more details in a subsequent email if you are interested in exploring with me.
<Up to you... Easy to have a small system become oxygen deficient with a good deal of biomass present, metabolizing... Bob Fenner>

Pix of the day – 06/11/07
It was only 3 months ago, I started my tank. 55 gallon with an over the back bio wheel filter and regular fluorescent lighting. Since finding your website (and apparently a whole bunch of money)
<Heee! Dollars with wings come to mind...>
I have moved to a 75 gallon with 40gal refuge, 30gal sump, 2 150w MH and 2 actinic VHO 110w.
<And next month?>
Needless to say everything is going great, Thank you so much for all of your help, and it is not much but it is all the payoff that I have to offer right now, hope you enjoy it and please let me know if you place it on the site.
Thanks again
Dave (Bratz)
<Thank you for sending this along. Will post today. Cheers, Bob Fenner>

Re: IMAC thanks 6/5/07
And while we're on the subject of thanking everyone...
A huge thanks to you, Bob for your humor, friendship, hospitality and inspiration. And, for those of you who have never "worked a room" with Bob at a hobby conference before, it's an amazing experience!
Jennie (PufferPunk)- for your wonderful hospitality, killer tanks, and superb "diplomacy" with Chicago's finest! P.S.- your doggie rocks!
Jorie- You and your husband are two of the nicest folks I've ever met!
Thanks you so much for arranging a great Saturday night, and for grabbing the pizza for me! I was the butt of flight attendant humor the whole way home (I'll tell you about it sometime!).
Eric R.- You are yet another one of the nicest guys on the planet (WWM seems to have an excess of 'em!). You selflessly endured torture in the back of John D's SUV and inspired us all...Well, at the very least, you made everyone else that much more comfortable! I know that you're the first guy on my list to buy a drink for at MACNA!
Alex- You're the coolest engineer I ever met! Your humor and overall coolness are going to be a HUGE asset to the readers of Conscientious Aquarist!
Mac L- One of the people that I'd definitely trust my Fungia to on a table saw! Looking forward to working with you on the mag, too!
Brenda- Definitely the heart, sole and backbone of "Scotty's Angels"- a master at scamming free tee shirts from vendors, and an inspiration to us all!
Michele- My new "bestest buddy" and friend to manufacturers of digital camera memory worldwide! You rock!!! When she's around, you gotta be on your best behavior, or it WILL be documented!
All kidding aside, we have some of the best people you'll ever meet right here on WWM! Glad that you're all part of my family! I'm privileged to be apart of this group! It's great associating new faces (and old) with names, and creating new memories!
Truly a great weekend for all who attended and I'm looking forward to the WWM Crew conquering MACNA in September! Hope to see you all there!
Regards,
Scott F.

Re: the FAQs. It's interesting that a few groups seem to dominate the questions: goldfish, bettas, mollies, Oscars, etc. Very useful to know, because it means I can pitch story ideas to TFH and PFK much more effectively. 6/5/07
<Ahh!>
I sent off a nice "Goldfish 101" article to PFK the other day, on the strength of this. Is there the same consistency among the marine questions?
<Yes... and as "telling" is the use of our stats tool... the new one for WWM reachable here:
http://www.wetwebmedia.com/WWMAdminSubWebIndex/wwmsponsors.htm
Where one may scan what files, topics/search terms viewers are using...
Cheers, BobF>
Neale

Technology for WWM 4/11/07
Good Morning Bob:
<Hey there Brad!>
Say, on 1/29/07 a fellow named Mike wrote to you regarding enhanced search capabilities for WetWebMedia (in that case, cached searches). You may already know about this technology, so forgive me for butting in. If not, I believe that it may revolutionize your site. Google has a low cost software/hardware solution that can give your site a great deal more horse (fish) power. It can be test driven by viewing the product tours and demos at http://www.google.com/enterprise/mini/ .
<Thank you for this... just read over...>
In the most basic application, you could leave your site exactly as is, but then allow subscribed members to do research using a more powerful search device that will: 1) allow readers to see all results related to a search, 2) to sort these pages by category, 3) take the reader to the exact spot on your website where the text exists (instead of to a page where dozens of less related letters are also stored), and 4) it would allow the readers to view cached text if so desired. You could also allow readers to view your incredible library of photographs, and then purchase high resolution copies.
<I really like these features... My only principal hesitation has to do with the "subscription" issue... Do you think folks would be inclined to subscribe? Our longstanding procedure has been complete anonymity, free-use...>
I suspect that this enhanced search technology would cut down on the number of repetitive FAQs you receive, and at the same time generate revenue for WWM. If you have further interest after viewing the product tours, the fellow listed below would be happy to assist you.
Hope all is well,
Brad in Basalt
<Thanks much for introducing this idea, possibility... Revolutionary as you state... Am going to query our Crew as well re>
Andrew Greene
Google, Inc.
Sr. Enterprise Sales - Western States (US)
Email: <mailto:agreene@google.com> agreene@google.com
Direct: 650-253-3252
Cell: 415-272-5658
Fax: 650-618-1835

 4/11/07
<Yes> >

Hi folks- just wanted to emphasize the importance of this. Many times, as of late (past 6-12 mos.) when I've checked in on the forum, I am horrified to see the amount of bad advice floating around. I'm not blaming anyone, as I know we all have limited amounts of time and can only do so much at a time, not to mention I understand how free speech works, and don't want to try to regulate what people write on the forums, but we DESPERATELY need some qualified aquarists to answer the zillions of questions out there. As of now, at least as far as FW goes, we've got Sabrina and Jason, plus a couple of other intelligent regulars, but there's a HUGE dearth of good responses to questions. By the time I look at 911 and FW, I'm usually so depressed that I don't go further to look at Marine, so I won't extend my comments to that section...

So, bottom line, if you go to answer queries and don't find any that you can/want to answer, GO TO THE FORUMS and spend a few minutes answering ?s there!

Cheers,

Jorie

Re: Your input please... 4/11/07
<Sab>
I will ask about the mini search appliance of T.R., as he has much more knowledge of its use than I. However, I don't think it would be something that could be of good (enough) use to us; the Google search appliance is usually used by companies that have numerous computers, files, documents, etc., and an employee can search on "health benefits" (for example) and get all documents and folders that have "health benefits" anywhere in the document name, text, etc., as the search results. I'm not sure if or how this could be applied for our use. I do see that it has uses for websites, but I don't know how useful it would be in our application. Perhaps T.R. can clarify, as he has a growing relationship with these devices.
<Ah yes. Much appreciated>
<<T.R. says a Google Search Appliance would really only be useful if we had members-only content. Though it would allow for some search customization, T.R. feels that it really wouldn't be worth the while, or cost of the appliance. We discussed it via IM, and with his permission, I have pasted excerpts of our conversation for you at the end of the email, in case you'd like to read it in his words - he states things better than I can, and has some good comments.>>
>Thank you both for this<
As for subscription based benefits.... I'm still more than hesitant to be interested in charging members for our services.
<Me too>
I have always been fascinated with information being a free commodity, and wish/feel that it should always remain so. If I have information that will help a 7 year old kid keep her pet goldfish alive, I don't wish to charge her for it. I *do* think that some folks would pay for subscription-based benefits, but at what "real" cost to us?
<Tremendous... in NOT supplying, getting this to the intended user/recipient>
<<My thoughts exactly....>>
The "real" answer, in my opinion, is to turn WWM into a site of dynamic content, rather than static pages, and make the indices a little more "elegant" for users. This would be a very large task, but it would improve not only the experience of the fellow/s maintaining the site (you), but it would improve the end-users' experiences, as well. T.R. and I have toyed with the idea of doing it piecemeal to build a "second" WWM to present to you to play with and see if you like, but it's a big task for two folks with regular jobs.
<Uh, yes... or one w/o (me)>
 And with the added excitement of finding a new web host, it's just not a priority. Maybe after a successful move to a new host (and, yes, a good webmail system is at the top of my list of "needs" for the new host!) T.R. and I could devote some time to figuring this out.

<<We would love to, though funds are tight right now, what with both of us switching jobs - him a couple weeks ago, and me a jobless wonder until next Wednesday, when I start at Apple. If we can find some way to afford it, we both could actually come this weekend, though for just a few days in his case. I'll see what I can scrape together and I'll look at airfares.>>
>Mmm, no rush... though/and WWM has money to help<
A couple o' questions, so I may be better prepared with finding a new host:
How much space are we using at DataPipe?
<We're up to paying for 400 megs>
Or do you mind if I go ahead and log in and find out?
<You're welcome to log in any time>
<<Argh, very little info to be gleaned logging in at DataPipe. Ah well.>>
>Perhaps our stats tool:
>http://www.wetwebmedia.com/WWMAdminSubWebIndex/wwmsponsors.htm<
What are our current monthly charges at DP (or, again, do you mind if I log in, try to find out m'self)?

<<And do you know our monthly bandwidth allotment? Thanks for the info/help.>>
>See the above, log-in, pw for the stats tool... 3-4 gigs per day<
All the best