A Poll - Who's Responsible ?????

[MUCHO REEF]

And you made me rethink some of my positions on other topics as well! Thanks!

How so?

 

[pascal32]

Buyers responsibility - a good seller will educate new customers and as a result naturally persevere. I took out the political part of my post for the sake of not diverting the thread

 

[lazytaper]

It's the buyer's responsibility.

 

[emerald crab]

A reefer licence issued by the local safety authority can be a solution.

 

[The Escaped Ape]

A reefer licence issued by the local safety authority can be a solution.

For the store owner or for the reefer? I like the idea of store owners being tested to see that they're responsible, but I'm not sure I'd trust local authorities to administer it...

 

[redneckgearhead]

Well, I changed my position on the show "tanked". It really bothered me that they show the aquarium hobby as "just add water". And I fear that alot of fish will die/suffer because of this show. And I stated this in the threads regarding this. BUT It is my belief that the people that buy the fish are responsible for them! This thread opened my eyes to my own hypocrisy.

 

[XSharkboyX]

Problem is a lot of people are retarded, and one thing retarded people are good at is blaming everyone else when they do something idiotic, especially thanks to today's "protect their fragile little egos" culture. Legally you'll most likely lose, even if the buyer puts the zoanthids into a smoothie or sets an rv on cruise control and walks into the back to watch a movie.

I'm curious as to what humanity's going to look like down the line now that we've set natural selection aside and started racing towards dumber fatter weaker slower...

:lmao: Awesome!

 

[MUCHO REEF]

Well, I changed my position on the show "tanked". It really bothered me that they show the aquarium hobby as "just add water". And I fear that alot of fish will die/suffer because of this show. And I stated this in the threads regarding this. BUT It is my belief that the people that buy the fish are responsible for them! This thread opened my eyes to my own hypocrisy.

I hear you loud and clear on Tanked.

I think you might be a little too hard on yourself hypocrisy wise. Not sure really what you mean specifically. Threads do sometimes make us think about a lot of things we normally don't.


Mucho

 

[pascal32]

A reefer licence issued by the local safety authority can be a solution.

More laws and government agencies to control them? I'm kindly going to disagree. I believe Florida did something like this and you can get arrested for sellig a frag - don't remember the details.

 

[A. Grandis]

So simple:

Responsibility of consumer: to learn how to take care of the organisms and get all they need for that. Most of it could also come from the seller, besides others.

Responsibility of seller: let every consumer know the danger (if any) of the organism to be sold, if the seller knows!!!!
Seller should know!
I wouldn't be surprised if sometimes they don't.

Would a seller sell a Lionfish without warn the consumer of it's "spines"?
What about a snake? Poisonous or not...
That's normal stuff...
Why not with zoas?

No big deal.

Perhaps the sellers need to be instructed about Palytoxin.
Just like in this forum we see the sticky about it.

Grandis.

 

[MUCHO REEF]

A reefer licence issued by the local safety authority can be a solution.

Though your intent is honorable, I'm not sure a legal mandate will occur. But who knows, maybe someone in DNR, Fish & Wild Life, etc might be reading this and suggest just that.

 

[laugh]

Your analogy makes no sense. There is a difference between lying about the condition of a car and not educating someone about the potential dangers of driving.

 

[MUCHO REEF]

So simple:

Responsibility of consumer: to learn how to take care of the organisms and get all they need for that. Most of it could also come from the seller, besides others.

Responsibility of seller: let every consumer know the danger (if any) of the organism to be sold, if the seller knows!!!!
Seller should know!
I wouldn't be surprised if sometimes they don't.

Would a seller sell a Lionfish without warn the consumer of it's "spines"?
What about a snake? Poisonous or not...
That's normal stuff...
Why not with zoas?

No big deal.

Perhaps the sellers need to be instructed about Palytoxin.
Just like in this forum we see the sticky about it.

Grandis.

Forgot to mention, I often think about post # 28 of the thread below.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2063473&page=2

gmyers0203 had no clue and was very grateful for learning about something she was completely unaware of till reading this thread. For that reason alone, I think sharing a word or two won't hurt.

Mooch

 

[h20player101]

Are you going to also warn about getting puncture wounds from vermatid snails? Tangs sharp tail? The sharp edges on reflectors for a T5 retro kit?

I have had all of these happen to me, why? Because I was stupid, not the LFS.

 

[650-IS350]

Just as an example, DD always warns whether a fish is poisonous, agressive or what.

Minimum Tank Size: 125 gallons
Care Level: Moderate
Temperament: Peaceful
Reef Compatible: With Caution
Water Conditions: 72-78° F, dKH 8-12, pH 8.1-8.4, sg 1.020-1.025
Max. Size: 9"
Venomous: Yes
Diet: Herbivore
Compatibility: View Chart

http://www.liveaquaria.com/diversden/ItemDisplay.cfm?c=2733+3&ddid=131843

 

[MUCHO REEF]

Just as an example, DD always warns whether a fish is poisonous, agressive or what.

Minimum Tank Size: 125 gallons
Care Level: Moderate
Temperament: Peaceful
Reef Compatible: With Caution
Water Conditions: 72-78° F, dKH 8-12, pH 8.1-8.4, sg 1.020-1.025
Max. Size: 9"
Venomous: Yes
Diet: Herbivore
Compatibility: View Chart

http://www.liveaquaria.com/diversden/ItemDisplay.cfm?c=2733+3&ddid=131843

By simply stating they are venomous, thus possibly saving someone some serious grief, or mentioning a single sentence regarding zoanthids and their potential dangers, yep, I can do that. Thanks 650-!S350 :thumbsup: