i keep reading threads where arguments break out regarding true this and true that in regards to aleady named zoa's.
i do find this is becoming ridiculous and tobe honest the way the zoanthid data base works is to blame and these petty arguments are only gonna increase as time goes.
let me explain wat i mean as far as database workings.
eg 10 people have had similar coloured/pattern zoa colony in their tanks for a couple of years and tho all slightly different they are obviously very close morphs of each other and none have been named/id etc,
i come along and buy a frag from one of them and within a couple months ive got it listed on zoaid.com calling it a "JB"
so now the other 9 people with a similar morph find that their zoa's are somewat regarded as second rate varients of JB's and not the real deal etc.
this is happening now and will continue to happen in the future and the root of this problem is the way in which individual morphs of a variety are getting a name which then somehow degrades all other morphs in that colour/pattern variety to everyone.
so im now asking for a change when a zoanthid is named on the site regarded as the bible by most (zoaid.com) that they should be regarded as "variety or family" and be named as so eg .....ARMOUR OF GOD VARIETY" .... and for zoaid.com to post a few different morph zoa pictures within each variety/family
this will then stop all the petty arguments and stop many varient morphs being regarded as second rate/not the real deal etc cause someone got a name put on one of them.
cause for all we know the ARMOUR OF GOD zoa may actually be a second rate zoanthid morph of an original thats been sitting in peoples tanks long before AOG appeared.
just my 2 cents worth on the naming game.
ps... i used AOG just as an example cause theres an argument currently on that variety goin on in another thread)
i do find this is becoming ridiculous and tobe honest the way the zoanthid data base works is to blame and these petty arguments are only gonna increase as time goes.
let me explain wat i mean as far as database workings.
eg 10 people have had similar coloured/pattern zoa colony in their tanks for a couple of years and tho all slightly different they are obviously very close morphs of each other and none have been named/id etc,
i come along and buy a frag from one of them and within a couple months ive got it listed on zoaid.com calling it a "JB"
so now the other 9 people with a similar morph find that their zoa's are somewat regarded as second rate varients of JB's and not the real deal etc.
this is happening now and will continue to happen in the future and the root of this problem is the way in which individual morphs of a variety are getting a name which then somehow degrades all other morphs in that colour/pattern variety to everyone.
so im now asking for a change when a zoanthid is named on the site regarded as the bible by most (zoaid.com) that they should be regarded as "variety or family" and be named as so eg .....ARMOUR OF GOD VARIETY" .... and for zoaid.com to post a few different morph zoa pictures within each variety/family
this will then stop all the petty arguments and stop many varient morphs being regarded as second rate/not the real deal etc cause someone got a name put on one of them.
cause for all we know the ARMOUR OF GOD zoa may actually be a second rate zoanthid morph of an original thats been sitting in peoples tanks long before AOG appeared.
just my 2 cents worth on the naming game.
ps... i used AOG just as an example cause theres an argument currently on that variety goin on in another thread)