"...the original posting included the full names of the species in
the body of the text, but used the band codes in the subject line, which
had it spelled out white-throated sparrow & white-crowned sparrow, would
have been too long to be practical...."

This is what I came up with for an abbreviated subject line that I suspect
the large majority on the list could quickly decipher: "Montlake: Wh Thr
sparrow and Wh Cr sparrow - pugetnesis +" This would also allow people like
me to get everything I would want out of the subject line of the post
without reading the body of the text - i.e. that a White-throated Sparrow
was seen at Montlake Fill and that a noted subspecies of White-crowned
Sparrow was also seen there and that if I wanted to read further additional
sightings for Montlake or more information was available.

For me, and I expect a number of others, having subject line that clearly
tells what the body will be about is more important than what is in the body
of the text. For most posts I don't want to read anymore than what
noteworthy bird was seen where if it is about a sighting of a noteworthy
species and wouldn't open the e-mail to read the text. If it were some
discussion about behavior, habitat, status of a species or other discussion
about a bird species I would hope that the subject line would clearly allude
to this so I would be able to determine from the subject line if it were a
subject of more interest to me or one that I had something to add to. I can
then quickly go through my daily digest of subjects and choose the few posts
to read the text of that are of especial interest to me.

Stewart Wechsler
West Seattle
mailto:ecostewart at quidnunc.net


-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Kessler [mailto:northraven at cox.net]
Subject: Re: [Tweeters] RE: 4 letter codes - good for a minority at the
expense of the majority?


Brett -- right on. what seems to have been totally lost in this thread
is that the original posting included the full names of the species in
the body of the text, but used the band codes in the subject line, which
had it spelled out white-throated sparrow & white-crowned sparrow, would
have been too long to be practical. whatever this debate has been
about, it is not about whether the original posting was effective
communication for anyone interested in actually reading it. I am on
another state listserve that no longer has robust discussions, or as
much as there used to be of good bird posting, because a few sought to
define rules for everyone. one thing I generally enjoy about Tweeters
is the breadth of discussion and the range of topics. it would be sad
to loose that.

chris kessler

Brett Wolfe wrote:
> Well Stewart, nice try, but this IS still an open forum for birds. As
> such, I agree with the compromise folks that seem to win this thread
> every year - write out the name at least once so folks who are new,
> and the folks who just refuse to learn or think about what they are
> seeing, but use the codes thereafter /if you so choose/. You have
> placated the masses, and should be free to write in the manner most
> appropriate to your own style. If y'all decide to ban outright (as we
> Washingtonians seem so wont to do these days), then this forum will
> cease to exist for many good birders, myself included, because I won't
> wish to be associated with such a forum. Ban cat threads all you want,
> but don't ban ANY bird discussion. Period.
>
> All I ask is that you try to be more open-minded to the _compomise_
> that can happen here. We are all adults here, right? I know that I and
> many others have previously promised to write out the names whenever
> we use the legitimate 4-letter AOU bird codes. If one of us happens to
> forget once in a while (I'm sure it isn't malicious in intent), can't
> you just let it skip once instead of starting this damn annual flame
> war? We are all bird lovers right? Right? Goodness I hope so!
>
> Good birding everyone, and please try to remember that we can all
> compromise and be happy instead of trying to push other folks around.
>
>
>
> */Stewart Wechsler <ecostewart at quidnunc.net>/* wrote:
>
> "And if you are interested in what all of the AOU codes are (they
> are ... far quicker to write if you see a big mixed-species flock)"
>
> I would agree that 4 letter codes can be valuable to learn for
> exactly the purpose above - that is for quickly taking field
> notes, but not for communicating to an audience that mostly hasn't
> learned them. (I've used 4 letter codes for botany field work,
> but can't imagine using them to post to the native plant society
> list) While they save time in the field for those take a lot of
> field notes and who choose to learn them, they will use up time
> for every other Tweeters subscriber that spends time pondering
> which bird they are or spends time reading a subject line or post
> that they don't understand because they didn't choose to take
> the extra time to figure it out .
>
> They are also a good tool to communicate with what I expect is a
> small minority of Tweeters subscribers that have memorized them or
> the few who can guess every one in a second - i.e. good for you.
> By using them you will save yourself a few seconds of typing and
> then use up what I would expect is a much larger cumulative number
> of seconds or minutes spent by the rest of the Tweeters
> subscribers for whom it is not worth the time to learn them - i.e.
> bad for the rest of us. I would also expect that the "inner
> circle" that knows these codes are people that tend to post more
> and are more likely to be getting each e-mail as it is posted
> rather than being on the daily digest. There may be a
> disproportionately small number of people that find the posts
> frustrating that would post their thoughts and objections and
> confess that they don't know something that the "inner circle" knows.
>
> I would be curious what percentage of subscribers have learned
> these codes. I'd bet it is under 10%.
> Stewart Wechsler
> West Seattle
> mailto:ecostewart at quidnunc.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Brett Wolfe [mailto:m_lincolnii at yahoo.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, March 19, 2007 7:08 PM
> *To:* Matt Bartels; Tweeters email list
> *Subject:* RE: [Tweeters] Montlake confounding codes - WTSP &
> WCSP = White thrsparrow and Wh Crown sp
>
> Ignore this Matt. You did what you were supposed to and wrote
> the bird names in your email. And as the reigning King County
> birding champion, you have to apologize to no one.
>
> The codes told me what I immediately needed to know, and
> anyone else who is interested in the Montlake Fill woulda read
> your note and jumped over to the Fill. Cue another 20 emails
> whining about 4-letter codes in 3, 2, 1....
>
> And if you are interested in what all of the AOU codes are
> (they are actually quite easy to learn with few exceptions,
> and far quicker to write if you see a big mixed-species
> flock), you can get them here:
>
http://www.birdpop.org/DownloadDocuments/Alpha_codes06_Common_Name.pdf
>
> Cheers!
>
> Brett A. Wolfe
> Seattle, WA
> m_lincolnii at yahoo.com <mailto:m_lincolnii at yahoo.com>
>
> */Stewart Wechsler <ecostewart at quidnunc.net>/* wrote:
>
>
> You've all heard it from me before, but if I know if no
> one says something
> again others will follow suit and start to do more subject
> lines in
> frustating code, slowing down everyone else's figuring out
> what their
> e-mails are about and whether or not they want to take the
> time to open
> those e-mails. For those who don't use these codes every
> day WTSP =
> Zonotrichia albicaulis and WCSP = Zonotrichia albifrons.
>
> Stewart Wechsler
> West Seattle
> mailto:ecostewart at quidnunc.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Bartels [mailto:mattxyz at earthlink.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 10:30 AM
> To: Tweeters email list
> Subject: [Tweeters] Montlake Fill monday morning - WTSP &
> WCSP[pugetensis]
>
>
> Hi all -
> I made a short visit to the Fill this morning before the
> rain really
> started.
> Over in the garden by the CUH buildings, a tan-striped
> White-throated
> Sparrow was hanging out in the southeast corner.
> Best sign of spring was the pugetensis White-crowned
> Sparrow song
> filling the air -- up until today, I'd only heard gambelii
> songs.
>
> I didn't see the Cinnamon Teal[s] recently reported, but
> the ducks &
> geese were out in good numbers, including the 6 Greater
> White-fronted
> Geese, hundreds of American Wigeon, & a few Wood Ducks.
>
> Good birding,
>
> Matt Bartels
> Seattle, WA

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.13/725 - Release Date: 3/17/2007
12:33 PM