Steve Childers, KOI USA Editor on Subject of “Growing the Hobby”
Carl, president of the World Wide Koi Club asked at Koi-bito.com “
Wouldn’t you agree though that the nastiness that occurs on some of these boards , and even in this thread, is more of a detriment to the hobby than our new club is?)
So to answer his question I still have to ask why on earth would one of the leaders of the WWKC/k0iphen group continue to come over here to Bito? Could it be that Bito offers a better learning experience? Yes, it could, but Carl never get;s involved in those learning threads about koi themselevss. Nope, it typically ends in a political discussion that would otherwise not have arisen to begin with. Funny how he infers to the nastiness of “this board” yet almost without exception, any “nastiness” that occurs here seems to involve others from other boards? Hmmmmm, wonder why that is? Oh, could it be that they run back to their home board proclaiming how unjust others were to them at other boards? After they stirred the pot themselves?
Why Carl do you continue to do this? If you do not like the so called “nastiness” here, why do you continue to come back? Does the WWKC not provide you with enough knowledge or entertainment?
Steve”
Your siggie doesn’t just display your club’s name — it’s a link to the World Wide Kooks Club home page which recruits members and proudly trumpets: Our official chat board is www.k0iphen.com and we invite you to join our club and help it grow.
Considering that ‘Bito is home to more than 50 folks (whom I can probably name off the top of my head) who have been attacked, slandered, banned, subjected to letter writing campaigns, harassed at work and threatened with law suits through the years by KP, its owner and his surrogates, tell me again why you’re surprised at our aversion to your cause?)
Steve”
(Steve . . .
I was editing my post to include them when you nailed me. 
Let it not be said that I am not an equal opportunity “Hammer.” 
Steve)
One shouldn’t have to purchase only show-quality Koi to be considered truly Koi kichi. I do agree that it’s important to make the distrinction between water gardening and Koi keeping because they are, indeed, very different hobbies. A water garden with Koi is not a true Koi pond and never will be. With this said; however, I feel water gardeners and newbies (we’ve all been there) should be welcomed and encouraged to learn in a manner that doesn’t scare them off. I’ve seen this happen and it’s sad. Last year I attended my very first Koi show and finally got a chance to meet some of the fellow Koi kichis I’d been chatting with for years in these forums. I hope to enjoy a similar experience this year.
With this said, I must admit that I’ve found this thread to be very entertaining…
)“I agree with your whole post J&G, especially the portion bolded. The issue typically arises however when watergardeners (or their commercial interests) come to a “Koi” board and (for lack of a better term) “preach” innaccuracies and falt out lies. Whether a koi costs $1000+ or $10+ is in most cases irrelevant. The environment that both should be entitled to however should be equal but unfortunately many do not understand this simple fact and that is where most issues come into debate. Many people do in fact leave the hobby as they learn that perhaps the hobby is not what they were led to originally believe (not the same as watergardening and not as easy to maintain awhat is in most cases a sunstandard pond for koi). Others grow and learn by listening and testing for themselves the tried and true methods of successful koi keeping. Many go to great lengths and expense to travel and learn from professionals and advanced hobbyists. While as you state many may get “scared off” along the way, many more who make the effort to research their sources properly always seem to gravitate in one simple direction, forward and into the established koi community who’s members always welcome these individuals with opens arms once they have demonstrated the ability to listen and learn.
Steve”
“The internet, a double edged sword. Yeah, I know, much of what I am about to say has been said already but today I had yet another example. First off, the internet offers people an almost immediate response to questions. This is sometimes good and sometimes bad. The good part is that a question can be answered and a problem corrected immediately. The bad part is that the answer is wrong or not completely accurate and the quetioner’s response is then misguided. Now this is NOT limited to the internet. There are many sources of information out there on koi and koi ponds. Again, some of it is good, some is bad. If we think about periodicals out their on the subject, there are very few “good” ones as it relates to the koi hobby. Yet there are many out there on watergardening that give the perceptions at tleast that the same principles apply….and they don’t for the most part. The difference between the internet and other methods is that of time. often times one has time to check on the credibility of sources but in many cases people take information without regard to its source and act too quickly. Back in the early to mid 90s when the internet was really in its infancy, poeple would in fact travel to koi shows and other events to check on information. I know I did. After disasterous results attempting to utilize many of those watergardening type periodicals I took it upond myself to find credible sources. I searched out and found advanced hobbyists and listened. In the late 90s as the internet took hold I became amazed at the disporportionate amount of bad information being passed along on some web sites. Luckily I found NI. With a core group of advanced hobbyists, they “called” those on the carpet that attempted to pass along bad info. The Famous Lansing “e venom” was invented. Tom had (still has) a way of letting folks know where the rubber meets the road so to speak and backed it with science and fact.
Back in those days, NI and its regulars were called every name in the book by those who had been called to task. Yet, more and more of the principles that we think are second nature started to take hold elsewhere, including here on Bito. Yes, there are often times debates but fact based debate is always a good thing. Unfortunately many who don’t have a leg to stand on get away from facts and then attempt to sway the debate in other manners. But I digress.
Just today, on another board, a relative newcomer was asking some questions about TPRs. In his statement he said that he understood that GPRs should have twice the flow as TPRs. I chuckled to myself and asked him where he heard that and why was it that they should have twice the flow? He said that he heard it from an individual on yet another board who was a leader and someone that seemed to know what he was talking about. OK, fair enough, but no “Fact based” information really. So I typed out my response including the history of the TPR (JR, Sean Hunter, Nigel Caddock) and the effects on a round pond in creating a cyclonic current. I then went into the history of elongated pond utilizing TPRs and how under some circumstances they can work and under others why there is a shortfall. Finally I explained to him the first pond that incorporated GPRs into its planned design and why. I haven’t heard back yet but I imagine he was surprised when he realized that he was communicating with the person who first introduced the concept of GPRs into koi ponds.
I think I will send Peter Waddington an email and let him know that vortexes and diffuser drains are the wave of the future!
I am still wondering why a GPR would be said to have to have twice the flow rate. I sure can’t think of any fact based science for it.
Bad info can lead to bad decisions. Its very hard to verify sources via the internet. There really is not a good method of “peer review”. Yes, each board will have its “advanced” members. But, are those members actually “advanced” in the grand scope of things? It takes a national organization (or even international) filled with experience and knowledge to really sort through these types of issues.
The advantage of “live” interaction is the ability to demonstarte real time the principles under discussion. Utilizing a picture to discuss skin quality as an example does the subject an injustice. Live on the otherhand leads to light bulbs coming on for the first time. Yes, the internet and boards such as Bito can be a very good alternative, but will also always be second best to live interaction.
Steve”
