James (et al),
I heartily concur with your assessment of Alistair as a person.
He is always courteous and ever willing to share his knowledge. However, in
this instance, he fired a salvo that he might perhaps have not intended in
quite the way it came across. Believe me, I’ve done it more than once! Email
can be a very abrupt medium as you illustrate.
Where I think you missed the mark was in not fully quoting the
sentence you relied on to apply terms to some respondents that seem a bit over
the top. The full sentence went “While I respect everyone’s right to
report sightings and hearings, can we please report what is interesting or
different, rather than every time the bird engages in syringeal expansion.” The problem
is that what is “different and interesting” varies according to the experience
of the contributor. To some people that seemed like an exclusionary statement,
because a number of chat line observers, who might otherwise contribute information,
don’t know what might be different and interesting for the chat line audience
and are intimidated by perceived greater expertise. I reiterate my opening
statement about Alistair in that I don’t think he intended it to be taken this
way and I for one had a good laugh at the Koel’s ability to drive even a
committed birder nuts, albeit by proxy. I too find the Koel’s call repetitive,
to the point of annoying, early of a morning when I am trying to catch the last
few winks of sleep. Nevertheless I find it encouraging to know that I am not
alone in the experience and also educational as to where this is happening.
Cheers
Shaun
From:
[
Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2008 11:24 AM
To:
Subject: [canberrabirds] "Reporting Koels - Why?" A last word?
I have just read and twice reread the recent debate on reporting
koels in the online archives would like to comment that (as an outsider – I do
not subscribe but read the archives) I believe that this shows some vocal
Canberra birdwatchers in poor light.
I read the most recent reports first, so I was intrigued as to the
nature of the scandalous email someone had written. This
email supposedly condemned koel watchers as having nothing
positive to report, then arguing to restrict what could and could not be
written to the online forum and generally scaring beginner bird watchers from
reporting their observations. I was surprised, then, to read the original
offending email, which I found did not proscribe what topics could be written,
nor was there any put down of beginners. On the contrary the email makes the
point, which all the detractors appear to have missed, “I
respect everyone’s right to report sightings and hearings”. Remainder
deleted for space considerations.
