Hi Tweets,

Aw c'mon, I wanna get to bed. I have to start early tomorrow (snivel).

>I applaud and second Jim's statements on this subject.
>
>While Michael's use of the current ornithologically-correct lingo fits in
>perfectly with the users of a scientifically oriented list, I don't think it
>is a good fit with Tweeters.

Denny, I've found that accuracy is not the exclusive tool of the scientist
but also of the amateur. Am I wrong to think this? That beginners need
accuracy much more than they need inaccuracy. Am I wrong to think this? That
bird ID requires accuracy much more than inaccuracy. Am I wrong to think
this? That the explication of migration dynamics requires accuracy much more
comfortable cant. Am I wrong to think this? That there is a significant
proportion of people on our list who would resist strenuously any proposed
dumbing-down of it as implied in your above remarks. Am I wrong to think this?

>Many of the people subscribed to Tweeters are
>beginning or inexperienced birders who are learning with nearly every post
>they read. Why try to confuse people with difficult terminology?

Because it is not difficult unless or until you misrepresent it as such,
Denny, as you are doing, and because these people need to be taught well,
not badly.

>Just spit
>it out in the easiest terms and get on with it.

The strangest thing about this whole terminology debate is that I *have*
been advocating using the easiest terms, not the confusing terms you prefer
from way back. You and some others are *still* not getting it. **It is the
arbitrarily incorrect use of English by birders which confuses beginners**.
They hear you say Fall Migration in June and wonder if it means an early
winter. They see a bird in 'Winter' plumage in August and wonder what the
hell's going on. I *know* this because when I teach a class of beginners I
*encourage* them to ask even the 'stupid' questions like "Why is it called
'Fall Migration" while we're still in June?" "Because the terminology
birders use is eccentric," I reply, "Try 'southbound migration, instead.",
and those are the kind of questions they ask. In my small way, I'm trying to
clean up the mess these terms of misusage create by proposing more accurate,
simpler, more realistic alternatives. And yet you *seriously* propose
saddling these poor beginners with the same messy, misleading terminology....?

>I personally have used
>"breeding" and "non-breeding" or "winter" to describe plumages for so long I
>don't feel compelled to attempt to change.

Then don't, but for the love of mike, Denny, stop characterising anything
different for someone else as useless or taking snide little shots such as
"ornithologically-correct" before you've given it an honest --and I mean
*honest*-- trial, otherwise, you sound like someone who can't see the need
to stop driving his Model 'A' for these new-fangled chromed things. I read
somewhere that a paradigm shift occurs not through acceptance, but only when
the last authority opposed to it dies off.

>While I'm at it, I also object to inserting the scientific names of the
>birds without putting them in brackets. "Osprey Pandion haliaetus" is more
>confusing to read than "Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)".

Thank you, Denny, for your opinion. We've had this discussion privately
several months ago, but I guess I need to say it as publicly as you are now
doing. As I said to you privately then, email has no way of italicising
taxonomic names, so I can't do it the standard print way: colloquial name in
regular face, taxonomic in italics in parentheses or not depending on the
editorial style of the journal. As there is no standard style for doing
this, I had my preference, but since you objected so strenuously, I would
give *your* preferred style a try. By the end of the first week I knew I
didn't like it, but I tried it your way for a couple of weeks *anyway* to
give it an honest trial. I did you the courtesy of letting you know
privately that I found it uncomfortable and was reverting to my preferred
style before I actually did so, but you did not trouble to acknowledge the
courtesy, and I received no answer. I am not going to change again, Denny,
so either get used to it or use your 'delete' key. Now get off my case about it.

Michael Price A brave world, Sir,
Vancouver BC Canada full of religion, knavery, and change;
mprice at mindlink.net we shall shortly see better days.
Aphra Behn (1640-1689)