coelacanth

yes, it was a fun thread. I know there are a number of people who enjoyed it (though they probably wouldn't admit it on the forum for fear of being ostracised). Its just a shame that more people didn't have the nerve to get involved, because the ones that did hardly provided much of a challenge for someone as inflammed as I. With regards to the book it turns out that local booksellers probably won't order it in for you, so if you want it you'll have to buy it online at the link provided in my initial post. In a bit of a turn-around to what I stated about it being well worth purchasing, at the price it is on there I would have to say that it isn't worth getting. It's small and actually quite basic - if it was available in NZ at an appropriate price then it would be worth getting but not if you're forking out that amount of money. However, if you're of a devious bent and have access to a library copy then you could always scan the whole thing onto your computer.

well, never say never

nothing to do with me

hmm, not quite understanding the reference there are you?

Well this thread has died! I go away for a week tagging killer whales and you can’t even talk amongst yourselves! I’m very disappointed in all of you.

you can order it on line, or just ask your local bookstore to get it in if they don't already stock it. If you want to just read it, check your local library. I know the Christchurch libraries have it (not much help for you, I know, as you are not in Christchurch )

apparently it is on my terms....I control your posts also, I'm confused as to why you would ask for your own post to be locked? It seems a most odd request....

Clap….clap…clap. A truly masterful post

May I suggest a dictionary and a thesaurus?

Yawn. Nice attempt at sounding smart. Come back when your posts contain less “fail”. However as you imply I have offended 99% of the forum then I shall indeed apologise for having offending you Cricketman p.s. are you really such a fan of mine that you believe me to be making a “Come-back”?

Finally some people are discussing the book, at least a little bit. Please continue. I do like Caryl's signature incidentally. I may have to use it myself in the future

If you are going to participate please try to keep up. This is of course a completely random number of absolutely no mathematical value - the reason being that it is very obviously a direct reference to the original (also imaginary) 99% statistic. As per the above. If you do not understand a concept it's probably better not to draw attention to that fact by trying to be clever about it. You cannot best me with stupidity. Ah, emoticons. Along with acronyms, the refuge of those who lack the ability to indulge in word-play. But, well, it is Dixon after all....

I, on the other hand, love to indulge in what livingart calls "mental sparring" (I think "mental fencing" has a nicer sound to it though). It's what separates us from the animals - the stupid ones at least Sad to see you bow out so soon, I doff my hat to you good sir.

That may very well be true, however I simply agreed with MarkLB's assessment of himself, suggested he read the book, and also suggested a way in which to improve himself given his own opinion of himself as he stated. You may note that I referred to the book myself in that post so by your own reasoning it was no more off-topic than MarkLB's response. (By the way livingart, I do include you in the 1% of the initial signature percentage I gave Other people can come to their own judgement of where they fall)

as 99% of the members cannot spell themselves, I'd quite agree that based on their own abilities they would certainly have "got [your] meaning" as you so colloquially phrased it. However I'm not so sure why you believe that your own poor spelling skills left me in a state of confusion, as I quite clearly gave you benefit of doubt in assuming you knew the correct word to use but could not spell it. Perhaps reading as well as spelling lessons are in order for you?

definition of the word "troll" from Wikipedia the topic of the thread (i.e. the new book which has been recently published) is appropriate for the forum. It has been other members who have taken the thread off-topic based on my personal signature which had nothing to do with the thread's subject. You may note that there has not been a single post on the actual topic of the thread....

Well I'll take your word for your likely inclusion in the percentage. It would however suggest that reading the book would be a step forward for you, whereas deciding NOT to read it on the basis of your claimed lack of mental acuity is just keeping you at said point. By the way, here's a hint: I assume you simply spelled "advice" incorrectly, rather than using the word "advise" in an erroneous fashion. Spell-check - or a dictionary if you have one - does go at least some way to hiding that you're within the percentage

go on and say it. I can take it

http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/821452 brand new book out, "New Zealand Native Freshwater Fish For Aquariums". Its great to see a book like this finally out -- and most importantly one that has been written by someone (David Cooper) who actually knows what he's talking about, has all the relevant experience, and who is well-regarded by the scientific fish community in NZ. Well worth buying for anyone out there who keeps natives.

In the shop I saw them at I was informed that they go mad for chocolate mud cake.....

I saw land hermits in a Tasmanian pet-shop last year. Only $5 each! I restrained myself from trying to smuggle some home in my socks...

Edited by Mod - Billaney, comment not called for. DoC has NOTHING to do with breeding or releasing trout or salmon!! Fish And Game are responsible for that. They are completely different organisations! MaF is also a different organisation with different responsibilities. MoF is also a different organisation with different responsibilities. Is this getting through to anyone? You might as well say that DoC are hypocrites because hobbyists like to keep African cichlids. I'm constantly amazed at the huge amount of anti-DoC and anti-MaF feelings commonly displayed on this forum. Its really pathetic.

Ambystoma are a group called mole salamanders, and they are called that for a reason. To say that they are better off as aquatic larvae because they seem "sad" when metamorphosed is like saying that butterflies look so pretty fluttering around in the sun and are thus "happier" than they are as caterpillars. Its just the way nature is. Don't put your anthropomorphic attitudes upon it. [ps, the above is not about "artificial" metamorphosing, just about the comment quoted]

don't want to be picky or anything, but aba-aba aren't knifefish. They are in their own family Gymnarchidae, and are closely related to mormyrids.