Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[clarki]

Here are the most common and widely accepted definitions of jest and sarcasm:

jest:    A thing said or done for amusement; a joke

sarcasm: The use of irony to mock or convey contempt

You said in the post I questioned the following: " I think Rodney should publish the names of those that got the answer wrong and we should have us a good ol' fashion public shaming."

1. The words convey contempt for those who got the answer wrong and you call for their public humiliation.
2. There are no smileys to indicate jest, therefore, words can and are taken at face value.

Thus, if what you said was meant in jest, you should have given your readers the courtesy of a 'winky' smiley or something int those lines. Absolutely no jest transpires in your post the way it is worded and posted - hence my comment.

Dear Mr. Milo

Then we shall have to agree to disagree. Merry Christmas.

Regards, Mr. clarki

[DragonSpeed]

Mystery fish?  Mystery Month!

"December 2012 Mystery Fish Contest"

That's a LONG way from now. 

[Riverman]

Milo considering your profession it is not really fair to argue the meaning of language with us mere mortals  .For myself I was sure of that fishes I.D. but once I googled salmon identification I found a whole bunch of online info I did not know was available.As I went thru the inf I began to think maybe this was not so much a contest as a sneaky way to get a lot of anglers to better educate themselves.In my case it worked because I picked up on some subtleties I did not know before.Two thumbs up for this.

[canso]

Even at first glance, you can see the absence of spots, eliminating most.
 Should be easy at that point.

[Sandman]

Even at first glance, you can see the absence of spots, eliminating most.
 Should be easy at that point.

I am sure it was quite easy for the hundreds that fish for sockeye every year.

[Dave]

Even at first glance, you can see the absence of spots, eliminating most.
 Should be easy at that point.

Exactly Canso   Years ago during my AFS days with DFO I taught FN people basic salmonid biology and fish identification was a component.  At the time I was shocked that these people could not differentiate between different species – to them, mainly upper Fraser and Skeena watershed bands, they were just salmon.
Frustrated, I tried using the process of elimination of species ie. no spots eliminates coho, pink, chinook, steelhead and other trout/char, leaving just 2. As there are virtually no chums in these upper watersheds it became easy.
I also found the spotting on tails to be another easy way to eliminate species and when adding this information to species distribution, size and coloration, general run timing and life histories and it all came together.

[canso]

I am sure it was quite easy for the hundreds that fish for sockeye every year.

When a fish does the first swim by, what exactly are you looking for?
I tend to notice spots, adipose, and mouth in that order, depending on time of the year.
Yes I catch sockeye but in the ocean they don't look like that, rarely have I seen one from the river.

[Sandman]

When a fish does the first swim by, what exactly are you looking for?
I tend to notice spots, adipose, and mouth in that order, depending on time of the year.
Yes I catch sockeye but in the ocean they don't look like that, rarely have I seen one from the river.

Personally, I notice the hook first.  Where is it?  Is it hooked well?  Yes?  Then I can breathe again.