[Taxacom] FW: Why Defend the Code?

Robin Leech releech at telus.net
Fri Oct 9 20:36:27 CDT 2015


No not everything is about him, but that is what sets up the problem, the worry, the concern, etc., by him.
Any chance we can move on?  
This starting to sound like T.S. Elliot's The hollowmen:
This is the way the world ends, not with a bang but a whimper.
Robni

-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: October-09-15 6:12 PM
To: Taxacom List; mivie at montana.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Defend the Code?

And that "correspondent in New Zealand" wouldn't be called Rich, by any chance, would they? You know, that well-known, objective, humanitarian/philanthopist ... cough!

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 10/10/15, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Defend the Code?
 To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "Taxacom List" <TAXACOM at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Saturday, 10 October, 2015, 12:28 PM
 
 Stephen,
 
 Well, since that first line
 was taken from an email from a correspondent  in New Zealand, and was not my line, and not  attached to any name,  clearly it must not  apply to you, because after all, you have an  honorary something.  You see, Stephen, not  everything is about you.
 
 Mike
 
 On
 10/9/2015 5:13 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
 > Putting to one side the personal attacks  aimed at me, and the associated false claims (e.g., I do not  have "no position", I have an honorary position),  I actually agree with Mike that "our system of  nomenclature is under attack", and that this is a  problem to be solved. I disagree with Mike that the way to  solve it is to mindlessly defend the Code as it is. The Code  needs to change in order to solve this problem.
 Specifically, it needs to be simplified so that increasing  numbers of people don't just throw their hands up in  despair about it and walk away. Claiming that anyone with  half a brain can easily understand the Code is only going to  frustrate those perfectly intelligent people who find it to  be more difficult. Make it easy to do nomenclature, and the  problem will solve itself.
 >
 > Stephen
 >
 >
 --------------------------------------------
 > On Sat, 10/10/15, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
 wrote:
 >
 >   Subject: [Taxacom] Why Defend
 the Code?
 >   To:
 "Taxacom List" <TAXACOM at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>  >   Received: Saturday, 10  October, 2015, 12:02 PM  >  >   This may have been  precipitated by a  >   recent  set of events, but it is  >   targeted at a broader group  of messages that put me over the  >   edge on the  >   last one.  No individual  person, living or dead, if  >   specifically  >   referred to below.
 >
 >   I just received a private
 email asking why I would waste my
 >   time
 >   challenging someone with no
 position, no credibility and
 >   well known as a
 >   pedant and seeker of
 attention?
 >
 >   Why indeed.  Because I am an
 educator and a
 >   systematist.  It is time
 we
 >   all wake up to a few
 things.  First, our system of
 >   nomenclature is under
 >   attack.  Few students are
 given a class in its use,
 >   most are told the
 >   rules are difficult and
 arcane.  This is giving rise to
 >   a movement to
 >   simply do away with
 compliance.
 >
 >   Second, compliance with our
 Code is voluntary.  There
 >   is ZERO
 >   enforcement available.  We
 are just a thin line from a
 >   break to anarchy.
 >
 >   Therefore, when someone wants
 to, repeatedly, claim the Code
 >   is poor, is
 >   difficult, is not well
 thought out, or otherwise in need of
 >   endless
 >   negative blather, there are
 people who read that.
 >   Hundreds more are
 >   exposed to this forum than
 ever post to it.  If such
 >   negativity comes
 >   from someone who projects a
 facade of expertise, people may
 >   even believe
 >   him or her.
 >
 >   I understand the Code is not
 perfect, but it does
 >   work.  It does require
 >   diligence, and takes time
 from other activities that may be
 >   more fun,
 >   but it is not that hard.  We
 need to reinforce in the
 >   minds of our
 >   peers, and especially the
 younger members of our profession,
 >   that using
 >   the Code is what is expected,
 and it is not something to
 >   dread.  And,
 >   when mindless attacks are
 made claiming it is defective,
 >   difficult or
 >   irrelevant, we must defend it
 vociferously.
 >
 >   Mike
 >
 >   --
 >   __________________________________________________
 >
 >   Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D.,
 F.R.E.S.
 >
 >   Montana Entomology
 Collection
 >   Marsh Labs,
 Room 50
 >   1911 West Lincoln
 Street
 >   NW corner of
 Lincoln and S.19th
 >   Montana
 State University
 >   Bozeman,
 MT 59717
 >   USA
 >
 >   (406) 994-4610 (voice)
 >   (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
 >   mivie at montana.edu
 >
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   Taxacom Mailing List
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   The Taxacom Archive back to
 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org  >  >   Celebrating 28 years of  Taxacom in 2015.
 >
 >
 > .
 >
 
 --
 __________________________________________________
 
 Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D.,
 F.R.E.S.
 
 Montana Entomology
 Collection
 Marsh Labs, Room 50
 1911 West Lincoln Street
 NW
 corner of Lincoln and S.19th
 Montana State
 University
 Bozeman, MT 59717
 USA
 
 (406)
 994-4610 (voice)
 (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
 mivie at montana.edu
 
 
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.



More information about the Taxacom mailing list