Sending people to other sites doesn't further discussion here

[Rhea’s mum]

I completely understand where you are all coming from with questioning why we send people elsewhere. My opinion is that there is only so much we can tell them and type. If we tried to tell each new member who had bought a cham on a whim and is now looking for help because they are in decline or have realised the set up may not be the best the more experienced, active members of this forum would never be off here and it would be a full time job.

I think it gives the new member a chance to explore and learn at their own speed instead of a huge chunk of type with other people chipping in too. Generally speaking I think there are 2 types that join. The people that start out as lurkers, gathering all the info reading all the threads relevant to what they are worried about/researching, before posting. Then there are the people that jump straight in, the complete opposite to the lurkers.

As others have mentioned the FB groups I am a part of have started to turn the way mentioned. Most help or questions go direct to admin. I find it is becoming a place to show off your chams and enclosures, get other peoples opinions on these but not to ask questions about anything because it is their way or no way. I also don't like the fact that anyone can become an admin of a FB group.

I know that when you first join you get an email saying to introduce yourself in the lizard lounge (I think I remember that correctly) maybe some links could be added onto that email (I know not everyone will read it or look at the links) but that way it could be said this is one way to do things and a general husbandry set up (not sure how this would work with other sites etc).

Just a thought and my pennies worth

 

[Howdyshay]

Couldn't agree more. I've had mushrooms pop up, some spiders, centipedes, millipedes, beetles, just so much that makes a beautiful balanced eco system. It's not complicated to recreate, I had several bio cham enclosures with just about an inch of soil lol. They worked as well as anything, of course plants had to be potted still, but it kept things clean.

Well if there might be spiders I'm out! LOL

 

[Howdyshay]

You never ask me about bugs, I don't even know who you are anymore!

I kinda feel left out of the bug project too James. I mean I "bug" you almost daily about bugs so you'd think it would come up! or is it the bug project I do know about???

 

[Howdyshay]

As a newbie, I appreciate both the referrals and the discussion. I think there is equal amounts of both. Some folks on here love to share experiences and have the time to do it. Some know a lot of great resources and share them and add their own 2 cents. That's whats great about this forum. It's really what you make it.

 

[JacksJill]

Returning to my original point there is nothing wrong with giving out a well established care sheet but I would ask you to also encourage the OP to come back for any questions and fine tuning. I am as guilty as anyone for dropping a care sheet when I'm short on time or patience. I've started to blog the answers to questions I can no longer bear to type the required key strokes. We know chameleon care is not a one size fits all proposition and I would hate to find new keepers getting sucked into fb groups that are just there to sell chams or GFB other places where they will end up giving water in a shot glass.
I really value the discussions here and you never know when a healthy debate might spring from a new members specific question. You have all seen it happen. In short I value all of your opinions, sometimes even he who shall not be named.

Have a beautiful weekend all!

 

[snitz427]

As a newbie cham mom, I liked the direct info from those here on the forum. But, I also liked being directed to other site info too. I know there's a lot of misinformation out there and it was good to know which info sites have accurate info.

I think part of Jill’s point was that it is not bad to share that info, but to post the content or a summary here for discussion, along with the cite or link.

a problem I have had often is that I search the forums for a question - fond what I think is an answer in an old thread - only to get a link, with no context. More often than not, that link no longer works - so all the knowledge and research that went into that question is lost to anyone who looks for it later.

 

[jamest0o0]

I think jill is a robot bent on destroying chameleonacademy. This forum needs less discussion, more memes.

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

I never knew it was a recognized thing or had a name! I’ve always just thought of it as ’newly Licensed nurse syndrome’.

There's also a phenomenon known as "The Zeal of the Convert," sometimes expressed as, "There is no zealot like a convert."

Like the Kübler-Ross model, it has been found to extend beyond its initial meaning.

 

[Ramrod]

the Badder-Meinhof phenomenon: when you first learn about a subject and think you know all about it until you actual learn about it and realize you know nothing.

Wow, I know a few that fit into that category

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

Don't get me wrong I believe there are a great number of useful sources of information all across the internet. I really like what Bill has done with the Chameleon Academy and his podcast series. That said I keep seeing a disturbing trend of people answering simple questions with a recommendation to look there. Why not just quote or paraphrase the information here and site the source. Sending people away doesn't further discussions here. If we all just follow one care sheet like it's cannon nothing new can be learned ideas will not be exchanged.

I would just point out that the name of this domain is "chameleonforums.com"—not "repositoryforallknowledgeaboutchameleons.com" I infer that to mean its primary intent and purpose was/is to be a place for discussion and exchange of ideas, while including a modicum of reference information.

Sites like Cameleon Academy, Neptune the Chameleon, caskabove.com, et al are primarily repositories, and (most) have no forums for discussion/exchange of ideas, questions, etc. (No sleight intended, but I just don't put "comments sections" on a par with forums. )

IDT the intent is to send people away. I think it is to provide more comprehensive information—expressed better than the average bear—and to anticipate follow-ups with answers that can be found on the referenced article, site, or search.

I've been on forums where there are rules against posting the name, URL —or even mentioning the existence of—"competing" or similar forums. So much for the free exchange of ideas.

IME here, people invariably come back with follow-ups or for clarification. I can't imagine anyone not coming back; this is the place they got the referral to the answers they sought.

There's also nothing stopping anyone here of following & reviewing those links, quoting a passage, and adding their own observations/opinions on them to the discussion. I've seen it happen. I've done it, and it's been done with links I've provided, and I think led to some constructive—and sometimes entertaining—discussion.

One thing I've observed on this forum is (IMO) an unbelievable amount of redundancy of both questions & answers. I've seen instances of (nearly, if not) identical questions in the titles of 2, 3, or more threads on the same page. Yet referring anyone to the archives (hence keeping them on the site) is considered by some here to be "rude," followed by boilerplate answers that can be found multiple times in the archives, or on the other similar threads. (I've done that myself, because it seems to be the culture here—not that there's anything wrong with that—just an observation.) I've seen—and been on—other forums (going back to Usenet) that consider asking questions whose answers can easily be found with a simple search as being a waste of peoples' time—and "rude". Times change. We adapt.

Without getting into levels of knowledge or experience, "answerers" could write up boilerplate (paraphrased) responses as suggested, and copy/paste—or like many—just refer them to what they know is good complete time-tested information expressed in a well thought out format, which FWIW, may be on another site.

Forum definition: a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.

Exactly.

 

[JacksJill]

I think jill is a robot bent on destroying chameleonacademy. This forum needs less discussion, more memes.

Foiled again!

 

[JacksJill]

One thing I've observed on this forum is (IMO) an unbelievable amount of redundancy of both questions & answers. I've seen instances of (nearly, if not) identical questions in the titles of 2, 3, or more threads on the same page. Yet referring anyone to the archives (hence keeping them on the site) is considered by some here to be "rude," followed by boilerplate answers that can be found multiple times in the archives, or on the other similar threads. (I've done that myself, because it seems to be the culture here—not that there's anything wrong with that—just an observation.) I've seen—and been on—other forums (going back to Usenet) that consider asking questions whose answers can easily be found with a simple search as being a waste of peoples' time—and "rude". Times change. We adapt.

If you find a cure for folks being to lazy to search out an answer that is readily available will you please put it in the water and we can just wait for everyone to get thirsty.

 

[Lennoncham]

Wow, I know a few that fit into that category

Lol. I can often be one of them.

ya I was wrong on which theory it was. Not the badder - Meinhof phenomenon but the dunning Kruger effect.

been a long time since I took psychology.

 

[JacksJill]

a problem I have had often is that I search the forums for a question - fond what I think is an answer in an old thread - only to get a link, with no context. More often than not, that link no longer works - so all the knowledge and research that went into that question is lost to anyone who looks for it later.

Doesn't it kill you when you find an old old thread on a species you are researching and they have pictures of that elusive animal or special habitat and it was a photo bucket image and it is now forever lost. Breaks my heart every time.

 

[snitz427]

Doesn't it kill you when you find an old old thread on a species you are researching and they have pictures of that elusive animal or special habitat and it was a photo bucket image and it is now forever lost. Breaks my heart every time.

Yep. Drives me nuts. Sometimes I might research something for hours... think I found exactly what I'm looking for... and then "Ooops. This page does not exist."
*shakes fist*

 

[jamest0o0]

Yep. Drives me nuts. Sometimes I might research something for hours... think I found exactly what I'm looking for... and then "Ooops. This page does not exist."
*shakes fist*

I smash my phone against the wall, hunt down the thread IRL, and force it to give me the information I need.

 

[snitz427]

I smash my phone against the wall, hunt down the thread IRL, and force it to give me the information I need.

But where are you hunting down the threads IRL... because I wanna come with you. I still need answers to my unanswered questions on those 10 year old threads!

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

If you find a cure for folks being to lazy to search out an answer that is readily available will you please put it in the water and we can just wait for everyone to get thirsty.

It didn't used to be that way. BG (Before Google) there was AltaVista, and becoming adept at searching out information was a necessary skill. I couldn't put a date on when things changed—it was probably gradual and imperceptible (at first, anyway). A dumbing-down of internet users. If I were to guess, I'd guess it was generational, but IDK.

 

[jamest0o0]

But where are you hunting down the threads IRL... because I wanna come with you. I still need answers to my unanswered questions on those 10 year old threads!

Interdimensional globalists

 

[snitz427]

It didn't used to be that way. BG (Before Google) there was AltaVista, and becoming adept at searching out information was a necessary skill. I couldn't put a date on when things changed—it was probably gradual and imperceptible (at first, anyway). A dumbing-down of internet users. If I were to guess, I'd guess it was generational, but IDK.

the issue is that the webservers that hosted that data either deleted and reused inactive data links, or they shut down altogether. Either way, the info is gone.

that’s part of @JacksJill point (I think). Copy the relevant data here, AND link to the site. So if one day that site is affected in anyway, we don’t lose the context down the road.