User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 79

Thread: Discuss: Nomenclature edits on forum posts

  1. #17
    ps3isawesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Bay Area, CA, USDA 9B
    Posts
    688
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've had mods correct my post before and honestly I love it. Saves me the step to do it myself. Although, I wouldn't know if the corrections are wrong to begin with lOL
    Last edited by ps3isawesome; 03-06-2015 at 09:34 PM.

  2. #18
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    183
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It seems to me that there is a general consensus of people who would like to be contacted via PM about nomenclature before heavy edits to posts are made by the mods, and that certain rampant editing through threads has irritated some members. That being said, I greatly appreciate when nomenclature (mine included) is properly corrected. Correct edits are extremely helpful to me and I'm sure to others on this forum. Claiming that an correct edit done for nomenclature reasons on someone's post out in public is offensive or belittling sounds very ridiculous to me. If the name was originally posted incorrectly by the original poster and edited correctly by an admin, whatever embarrassment or offense taken was deserved, in my opinion (taking one's lumps). Or maybe we can all just learn to take ourselves a little less seriously,
    Last edited by Eric; 03-06-2015 at 09:24 PM.

  3. #19
    BaseDrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Bay Area, CA - Zone 10B
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have mixed feelings on this subject. I think that accuracy in naming is important and respect the desire for the names to be written as correctly as possible. However, I do think there are a couple of issues with the current way it has been going.

    As others have mentioned sometimes what one person thinks is correct may not actually be so. In some cases an error may be very clear, other times it may be disputed or in a grey territory. There are so many species of carnivorous plants and the names seem to be in such a constant state of flux that I don't see how it is possible for anyone to be truly 100% accurate in their naming, even when working off of collected databases (which can be prone to their own errors.)

    I have read through all of Joseph's posts on naming conventions and have worked to improve both my accuracy and consistency in naming conventions. I learned a lot from his posts and I was glad to expand my knowledge on the subject. For example when to use single apostrophes (S. 'Judith Hindle') and when to use quotation marks (S. leucophylla "burgundy").

    That said, I don't particularly like my thread being plastered with red text that something like S. x readei or S. x moorei are not accepted names. I don't think anyone can dispute the fact that using S. x moorei to denote a Sarracenia cross composed of S. leucophylla and S. flava is both in common use and understood. Typing out S. x moorei is a whole lot easier than writing out the full name each time, even if it is not 100% scientifically accurate. The S. "x" names make it a whole lot easier and quicker to easily convey the general make up of the plant. Doing a simple search for S. x moorei, S. x excellens, S. x catesbaei, etc, yields plenty of results on what the cross is and pictures of those crosses.

    Just to go back to my S. x readei, it came to me listed as S. x readii when I bought it from the SFSU greenhouse. That's all I know about the plant. I don't know if it was S. leucophylla crossed with S. rubra, or S. rubra crossed with S. leucophylla (or whether that actually matters, seems like listing the order of the parents is another issue still being debated.)

    To sum up, I don't think every post and every instance of a naming "error" should be edited or changed throughout a thread. A simple note in the thread about the nomenclature would serve to both educate the poster as well as alert others reading the thread about the issue. If the poster wants to go back and edit their posts with the correct name they still have the ability to. People will learn the names better when (or if) they have to go back and make the changes themselves rather than it being done for them.

    ps3isawesome, I've seen you make a number of errors in your posts (mostly on Sarracenia boards or /r/savagegarden where I spend the most time.) For example, writing D. Capensis instead of D. capensis. I'd recommend you peruse through Joseph's threads on naming convention and see what you pick up. There's a lot of valuable information there.

    Cthulhu, if you would like me to edit my post in your thread for consistency let me know.
    Last edited by BaseDrifter; 03-07-2015 at 03:16 AM.

  4. #20
    anramitaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    283
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My two cents: Accuracy in nomenclature is a good thing but I don't think that is what's being disputed. It's the manner in which "correct" (scare quotes in deference to Cthulhu's objections above) nomenclature is policed by a single moderator.

    Obsessively editing an entire thread, especially when said edits are curt and punctilious or appear in red in the member's post, is simply uncivil. Why not send a PM, as others have suggested? Or, if you are concerned that member so-and-so will not see the PM, why not add a post to the thread? Something along the lines of "I think XYZ is actually PQR, here is the relevant link" or "'Judith Hindle' is a cultivar name, so we put single quotes around it. Here are a few more examples." The former fosters discussion by allowing other members to weigh in on what is or isn't an accepted name (I'm thinking here of the recent Heliamphora thread where nomenclature was disputed). The latter shows beginners how to do things without coming across as an angry schoolmarm.

    The edits that offend me the most are those that come across as pure pedantry. In numerous threads, Joseph corrects "Sarrs" to "Sarracenia" or "Nep" to "Nepenthes." Or, in a thread where context establishes the genus under discussion, he corrects "ventricosa" to "N. ventricosa" (with the inevitable comment that botanical names are binomial). Most of us know full well that a "Nep" is indeed a "Nepenthes," in the same way that we know a "mod" is a "moderator." I've said all of this before on another thread so I'm not going to get into it again, but let me add here that it is common practice in any language to use abbreviations for frequently used terms and especially as a kind of diminutive. Orchid folks regularly call their plants "chids" on forums. Sure, it's cutesy but no worse than calling your brother Thomas Tom or your refrigerator a fridge. I understand that some may bristle at such shortcuts, but at the end of the day this forum is a place for growers of all stripes to share information in an informal way. Sure, professional taxonomists and botanists may have to suffer the noob (<-- see what I did there), but professional educators in the humanities like myself must also suffer incomplete sentences, apostrophes in all the wrong place's (ha!), colloquialisms, and teh internet speech in general. Contextually, no one should have any trouble figuring out that "ventricosa" refers to "Nepenthes ventricosa" on a *carnivorous plant* forum. It is statistically unlikely that someone here typing "ventricosa" or event "vent" (*clutches pearls*) is referring to Hosta ventricosa or Erica ventricosa. Ultimately, for me it comes down to place. I feel that Joseph's taxonomic rigor might be better applied (and certainly more appreciated) at a scientific journal.

  5. #21
    Cthulhu138's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BaseDrifter View Post
    Cthulhu, if you would like me to edit my post in your thread for consistency let me know.

    That would be great, thanks.

  6. #22
    carnivorous plants of the world -- unite! DragonsEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,399
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Acro View Post
    What if the person made their flawed post and did not return for 6 months? What if they never came on the forum again? Then a PM would be pointless and the change would never be made.
    Quote Originally Posted by adnedarn View Post
    Even more likely than that, the extra effort of the moderator doing that job comes to mind. And the possibility that some people just won't care enough to do the work and make the change so the post goes unmodified by anyone. Too much of that and those willing to put in the extra work may lose interest. Or maybe even the mod then comes across the post again, not sure if they had already addressed that one either sends another message to the user (who possibly gets upset about being messaged twice) or at least is more wasted volunteer time by that moderator.
    Both of these are completely valid points. And I would add: the confusion/frustration factor for those people who are seeking information who are first-timers (or close to it) to this forum. I don't know how much traffic this site receives hour by hour, but there is the possibility of folks happening upon threads with nomenclature mistake between the time of writing and correction. This could lead to: 1) confusion or frustration upon the part of the visitor; or 2) the visitor -- if they are individuals who already have some knowledge of cps and are simply looking for a cohort of like minded individuals with whom to communicate -- coming to the conclusion that there are some very ignorant members here and thus not a forum worth joining. The increased wait time between the moderator's pm'ing the poster, and then the poster making the changes -- assuming the poster cares enough to do so -- compounds that possible issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Whimgrinder View Post
    Those are reasonable concerns. But you also face the potential scenario in which your members simply stop contributing valued content because they're insulted by this editing practice and don't care to set themselves up for more of it.

    While I do hear what you're saying, Paul, I can't agree with you. If a person is that "thinned skin"/immature that they can't handle correction, then she/he has no business being on any forum.

    Correction of errors as a moderator comes across them is more time efficient, and I don't see anything belittling about said correction being done directly by the mod. If the "red" makes folks see "red", then perhaps another color for the corrections would still make them visible without offending the poster's delicate sensibilities.
    "Blessed are the cracked….
    For they are the ones who let in the light."



  7. #23
    ps3isawesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Bay Area, CA, USDA 9B
    Posts
    688
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Base, the reason why I continue to make mistakes is because I just don't care to learn to proper way to capelize and what not. To me, as long as the name of the plant is correct, I'm good.

  8. #24
    Whimgrinder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,875
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by anramitaco View Post
    My two cents: Accuracy in nomenclature is a good thing but I don't think that is what's being disputed. It's the manner in which "correct" (scare quotes in deference to Cthulhu's objections above) nomenclature is policed by a single moderator.

    Obsessively editing an entire thread, especially when said edits are curt and punctilious or appear in red in the member's post, is simply uncivil.

    I feel that Joseph's taxonomic rigor might be better applied (and certainly more appreciated) at a scientific journal.
    Yes. Precisely!

    So - why has Joseph not contributed anything to this discussion?? I'm far more likely to find my way to middle ground if he were to make an effort to defend his position and explain his tactic - or at least add his voice to the discussion.
    Last edited by Whimgrinder; 03-07-2015 at 08:19 AM.

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •