Livestock Budget Increase Poll (Contest Members Only)

[superduperwesman]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

Ok, just to put my opinion in as some one who would probably have entered this if I would have known about it sooner.

You still can

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

an increase in live stock budget is not a good idea, the final judging from what I understand is going to be by canreef members based on a picture of the tank. sooooo someone who started under the premise of the old budgit and is pretty much done as they went high tech will be able to buy a small frag or two. but some one who is just starting (like me if I decide to get in on it) could skimp on the equipment and high tech stuf and lay everything down on live stock. the end result would be a tank that looks amazing.

Someone who started under the old budget and went high tech on the equipment will now be able to have more live stock... someone who wanted to focus more on livestock can now focus even more on it... which I'm sure they we'll love either by increasing quantity or color and quality

At the end of the day the only people who can legitimately be disappointed are the ones who only wanted/budgeted to spend $300 and now feel that others will be at an advantage because they're now spending more... but I'm sure the voters will take into consideration... especially seeing the money spent must be posted.

Plus at the end of the day... "amazing" is a relative term... I'm sure some people in the DIY section would rather see a 10 gallon with some innovative design and 2 frags then a stock AGA stocked right full

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

rules for entering were already set and in all fairness once some one has joined under the declared rules then they can't be changed, or it makes a joke out of the whole contest.

Rule # 3b: the rules can change ahah
^ and that's the exception that proves the rule

It's not a joke it just takes time to get everything ironed out nicely.. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither was this contest.. but so far I think it's starting out on a pretty good foundation for the first go round

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

that would be like paying 100.00 for a ticket to win the dream house then two weeks after you buy your ticket they add a rule saying only people over 65 can win.

Not the perfect parallel... increasing the budget will not omit anyone from the contest

[Marlin65]

It does not matter to me one way or the other but I am with stirCrazy on this one. To change the rules half way though is not ethical.

[superduperwesman]

Originally Posted by Marlin65

It does not matter to me one way or the other but I am with stirCrazy on this one. To change the rules half way though is not ethical.

Yeah if everybody broke the rules all the time things would be a mess... but you can't claim that any rule change is always unethical?? If so I think my buddy Josh would be a little upset that he has to ride at the back of the bus. If the foundation of something is less than ideal from the start then a change is required and that shouldn't really be a problem as long as it follows the correct "Management of Change Process."

And in this case it is apparent that a majority of the contestants would agree that a change is required... I guess if we wanted to be more fair we could add up all of the 0's, 50's, 100's, 150's and divide the total by the number of contestants so that everyone's vote influences the actual number increase, so even though a contestant may lose to the majority they can still bring the average down oppose to being a losing majority with no actual influence on the outcome.

If we do it like that it'll kinda be like government elections... you lost on the whole but hey you still get a few seats in parliament ahah

Might be a little more representative of the true situation?

Which would mean a $95 increase given the current votes at the time of this post if my calculations are correct.

[StirCrazy]

superduperwesman, you seem to be the only one arguing this, is it you that wants the budgit increased as you don't feel you can do it for under 300?

anyways, guess I forgot.. rules we ment to be broken

guess that means we can start posting cars and table saws in the buy and sell section on the board as no one will mind if we change the rules.

Steve

[superduperwesman]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

superduperwesman, you seem to be the only one arguing this, is it you that wants the budgit increased as you don't feel you can do it for under 300?

Ahaha...... ahahah Seriously??? Says the guy who post an argument ahahah I mean it's no fun when you do my job for me. What's the point in trying when you just disprove yourself?? Better luck next time.

I just joined the contest yesterday so I just thought I'd get in my opinion before the closing date.

But yeah I guess I'm the ONLY one arguing.... oh right... and YOU blahahh. Oooh thats right it takes two to argue?? And I guess everyone on the other 5 pages don't matter either??

I've made tanks for less I could do it again... but it's to early to tell what I want to do so I figured add cushion and if I come in below... good. And at the end of the day everyone not in the contest seems to want the budget to remain unchanged... and then they'll probably complain about how pitiful the tanks they'll be voting on are.

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

anyways, guess I forgot.. rules we ment to be broken

guess that means we can start posting cars and table saws in the buy and sell section on the board as no one will mind if we change the rules.

If you recall:

Originally Posted by superduperwesman

Yeah if everybody broke the rules all the time things would be a mess... If the foundation of something is less than ideal from the start then a change is required and that shouldn't really be a problem as long as it follows the correct "Management of Change Process."

I don't recall saying rules were meant to be broken? More like at times they need to be. I guarantee if you take the argument "rules should never be broken" over "sometimes rules need to change" (which is what you seem to be alluding too with your sarcastic eye roll) you will lose every time because arguments brake down in absolutes and because you can't judge something by it's abuse. You CAN NOT RATIONALLY DENY that rules sometimes need to be changed... and I think I've already proven that with my buddy Josh.

I think not posting your table saw on a fish forum is founded on something a little more solid than an obscure number selection.

But feel free to... not argue some more??

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

superduperwesman, you seem to be the only one arguing this, is it you that wants the budgit increased as you don't feel you can do it for under 300?

anyways, guess I forgot.. rules we ment to be broken

guess that means we can start posting cars and table saws in the buy and sell section on the board as no one will mind if we change the rules.

Steve

What's with all this rule talk? The rule would be "stay within budget", increasing the budget doesn't change the rule, it still applies.
Plus you can't say wesman is the only one, not one person in the contest voted to keep the budget the same, to me that says something.
Sorry to say but I really don't think anyone in the contest is doing all this to impress everyone on Canreef. We're doing it for the fun of it and I personally still want a nice tank to look at the end of the day and feel a budget increase will help that.
You're entitled to opinions but I don't see how ethics has anything to do with this and if we're going to use parallels and examples lets use ones that actually make sense, after all sometimes you have to flush twice, and that doesn't mean the world is going to end.

[Der_Iron_Chef]

I'm just wondering when this contest is going to be fun? All this arguing, coupled with smiley emoticons and passive-aggressive crap is ruining my impression of this whole @^@#$ thing. Who wants my $20 entry fee? I'm about to step out.

[rocketlily]

Originally Posted by Der_Iron_Chef

I'm just wondering when this contest is going to be fun? All this arguing, coupled with smiley emoticons and passive-aggressive crap is ruining my impression of this whole @^@#$ thing.

I agree. Please don't step out. We need some sanity in this contest.

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by Der_Iron_Chef

I'm just wondering when this contest is going to be fun? All this arguing, coupled with smiley emoticons and passive-aggressive crap is ruining my impression of this whole @^@#$ thing. Who wants my $20 entry fee? I'm about to step out.

Well I'm having fun and I think Wes joined because he saw he was missing out on all this entertainment. A little debate is good for everyone and judging by the views we get on some of these threads others are definitely enjoying all this as well. You can't seriously be that sheltered were a little debate and a few smiley's make you run home to mommy This is all fun stuff what would you rather talk about? Rainbows and unicorns?
If you can't tell, I'm just kidding

[superduperwesman]

Originally Posted by Der_Iron_Chef

I'm just wondering when this contest is going to be fun? All this arguing, coupled with smiley emoticons and passive-aggressive crap is ruining my impression of this whole @^@#$ thing. Who wants my $20 entry fee? I'm about to step out.

I'm having fun

Every debate/discussion is beneficial and builds you either by reinforcing what you already know or making you realize that you might need to rethink something... in either case you're better off. People learn by discussion which includes debate which is PART of the reason these forums like this exist, so we all can learn. So far I've learned about more than just fish And generally when people always agree nothing changes... and then things would never improve... we've got so much important stuff ironed out so that in the future there will slowly be less and less problem sources.

If you don't like the debate/discussion you don't have to participate... just build your tank... but I don't really understand how you have problems with discussions like this and then you contribute something completely unproductive like the above statement^.