• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Help for the rest of us: Thread suggestion

Should we make this thread idea a reality?

  • Yes, this would be beneficial

    Votes: 11 52.4%

  • No, not such a good idea actually

    Votes: 9 42.9%

  • Yes, but there needs to be some changes made (please comment)

    Votes: 1 4.8%
  • Total voters
    21
Roy Munson said:
This was my first reaction too, but then I thought about it some more. Amel isn't an invention of man, and neither are the other mutant genes. But butter-stripes and hypo-lav-bloodreds would have been unlikely occurrences in the wild. Even single wild animals carrying these mutant genes heterozygously would be very unlikely.
Click to expand...
Dean--
I just wrote an entire reply trying to support my original statement, but the more thought I put into it, and the more I was able to organize what I was trying to say, the more I realized...you're right. So I deleted it.

I guess the genes must exist somewhere in the wild, but the beautiful morphs that we know, love, cherish, and lust after are only possible through the interaction of man, who is as curious as he is clumsy.
 
tyflier said:
Really? I disagree...all we did was give the genes an opportunity to become homozygous and thrive, rather than remain heterozygous or be killed.

The genes are out there...always have been. They simply have never survived in a homozygous state long enough to be passed on successfully and repeatedly in the wild...I think ;)...

The amel gene isn't an "invention" of man. We simply provided a safe place where a homozygous amel snake would not be immediately visible and killed within minutes of hatching. At least...that is my understanding...
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. I was not saying that the colors in themselves is an invention of man but it took us humans and breeding to get the color combos we want. When was the last time you seen a lavender snake in the wild. I am not saying it's wrong. But just look at what we did - we have determined what mixing of original colors and randon mutants that naturally occur in nature to get the color strains, morphs (if I understand this term in its correct context), that we want. I think it is absolutely great. A bit daunting when we go to get another snake in trying to decide what morph we want; but, great nonetheless.
:crazy02:
 
I would be willing to create such a thread if the demand was high enough. I honestly feel sometimes like creating the FAQ's were a waste of time simply based on the number of basic questions that are asked in the very same forum of that particular FAQ---when the answer to the question is right there for them to see.

It almost seems like some people just ignore the FAQ's and just post the question. I know that they've been useful to some people---evidenced by the almost 10,000 views for all of the FAQ's combined---but it still is a bit disheartening to see so many basic questions asked when they're all answered in the FAQ.

I'm sure this type of thread would be useful, but how much would it be used?
 
Joe-

I think that a thread of this nature WOULD be incredibly helpful to a good number of people. However, the problem I see, is that the people who would need, wouldn't use it. And the people that WOULD use it...already have it in the form of the search function.

As you found out with your other FAQ's, people are basically lazy by nature, and it is much easier to post a picture of your new snake and say "What Kind is this?" than it is to look through pages of photographs and find out which ones most closely represent yours. Sad and unfortunate as it is, far too many people are far too lazy to dop a little bit of reading and research, and find it is MUCH easier to just post questions and pictures, and not really care about much else.

How many "new members" come in, ask a question, post 2-3 pictures, get their answers, and then never come back? How many times have you seen the exact same question posted in the SAME FORUM, only 2-3 topics apart, or, even worse, one right after the other?

And while your effort is MOST appreciated for the FAQ's, quite simply...the people that need it most are too lazy to use it...which is, I fear, precisely what would happen with a topic of THIS nature.

95% of the known morphs have a picture somewhere on this forum. I think the only way for a topic of this nature to truly get used in the manner which it is intended, would be for it to be a seperate, searchable forum, where each sub-category is a specific recessive gene, and each topic within that category is the gene as it looks alone, as well as the most common combinations of multiple recessives.

The problem with that is that it already exists...in hard form. It's called the Morph Guide. I think that it would be a great addition to the forum here, but I don;t think it would be used and appreciated the way that amount of work would deserve.

But if you DO make one up...I'll put a link to it in my signature, like the others ;).
 
I do know a forum that has a subforum where one can create threads for any morph or combination and let people post their specimen of it. Replying to the posts is not allowed, so it an easy palce to see what a morph looks like in all variaty's... I know it is a popular subforum.
 
simpler idea

I like this idea, but as already stated most morphs can easily be referenced by doing a search with the morph name. Personally, what I would find infinitely more useful (as someone who's been out of the loop for a while) is a quick reference sheet of trade names. Ie. Goldust = Ultramel + Caramel, Ice = Lava + Anery, or even more basically Snow = Amel + Anery. This would help much more I think, as well as help remove some confusion. I know I personally must search 10-20 minutes each time I find a new morph name I've never heard before just to find out it's a combination of a few well known recessives (or not :) ). However, as was already stated, those newer people who post q's like "my snakes eyes turned blue, is he dying?" obviously would get no use from this and likely would never put in the effort to find it. However, for those who are more dilligent and even looking to breed but are simply confused it would prevent questions like "what do i get from blizard x ghost?"

Just my two cents and I apologize if it's also already been mentioned in the past.
 
I don't think it's a bad idea but I don't think it's a good idea either. Contradictory, yes.
There's loads of places that you can find out that information, if you so wish.
A lot of you guys already know whats what in the morph world. Me I'm just thick. I can't tell one from another no matter how many sites I visit, no matter how many times I'm shown. If someone really wants to get into I.D.ing corns best of luck to them, but I know it won't help me. And it won't help all the other thick ones either, they'll all still post, instead of researching for themselves.
MIKE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top