A Plea from the Fungi Forum members

[FungiJohn]

Hi All

I've posted information about our standard reply regarding eeee's in the main 'Wild about Britain Web site' forum just so everyone knows what we are trying to do.

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...tml#post848011

John

[Lancashire Lad]

Firstly, I'd like to wish everyone reading this a Happy New Year.

Secondly, Id like to request that everyone who participates in WAB's fungi forum makes a special new year resolution - and sticks by it.

And that resolution would be:- When anyone posts a request for ID or whatever, to which you suspect may have edibility undertones, then regardless of how tempting it might be to add a little extra comment, a sly dig, or even just a reply that might be written in full innocence, but yet might still prove inflammatory - if you are that person who is about to reply - please, please, please:-
Report the post, and use the standard reply exactly as requested by Fungijohn.
The standard reply alone - nothing more, nothing less!

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...tml#post848011

The standard reply is polite.
It gives the enquirer the benefit of the doubt.
It covers the possibility that the enquiry may have been made in all innocence.
It covers the possibility that the enquiry does, or does not have edibility undertones.
It fulfills WAB's legal responsibility.

It puts the onus back onto the original enquirer to clarify his/her intent, with very little chance of leading to unsavoury bickering and ultimately, removal of threads.

More importantly, rather than having needless squabbling there for all to see, and creating needless work for the moderators, it can only maintain and improve WAB's fungi forum reputation as probably the best on the internet. - Let's all - each and every one of us - strive to keep it that way.

Happy New Year all,
Regards,
Mike.

[gobbiner]

Well it cant be any fairer than this thank you John, and a happy new year to all

[pressld2]

Very well said Mike!

Dave P.

[fairplay]

Fine words Mike, but there is a problem.
Recently, well this year more correctly, there have been a lot of posters sending in photos of what they believe or want to believe to be Lepista nuda.
Where we believe or have reason to believe the specimen has been collected for the pot, we are asked to refer the poster to the sticky. This usually results in the poster saying yes, they have read the sticky, but do not intend to consume the fungus. So simple - WAB is now in the clear and the poster receives her/his confirmation. of it being a Lepista.

Are we that dumb, that we believe in every case the poster is not going to go back into the woods and collect the whole lot and invite some friends round for a fry up ? OK, picking whole baskets full of Wood Blewits is not going to be the end of the world, but it will not be the Wood Blewit in every case - it is most likely to lead on to collecting other fungi.
What about the proliferation of so-called Gastro Pubs that are now popping up everywhere ?
The current catch-phrase is 'locally sourced food' - some even make a big do of the fact that they obtain their 'wild' fungi fresh locally when in fact this would be illegal.

Is it too far fetched to imagine the proprietors or would be proprietors of such establishments sending in photos of their finds to WAB just for confirmation before cooking them up for their customers for huge profit or even putting the idea into their heads?

All they have to say is no, they don't intend to eat it, and yes they have read and understood the sticky and WAB is happy and the poster is happy.

But I am not (if I happen to be the person who is replying at the time)
There is a certain word called ETHICS and where a person has promptly said they have read the sticky, but doubt remains in the eye of the responder, I believe it is wrong to give that person the benefit of the doubt.

In the most recent case, the poster mentioned both Chanterelle and Wood Blewit in the same paragraph, immediately raising suspicions of an edibility issue, and the fact the poster thought the 'Blewit look-a-like resembled a Chanterelle sent out warning signals that this person is no where near ready to start experimenting with fungi.

Yes, I was in the wrong not to refer the poster to the relevant sticky in the first place, but I knew she was bound to say yes and that she had no intention of eating it, so there was little point, so I made a polite request as to why she seemed pre-occupied with Chanterelles and Wood Blewits.
ONLY somebody who had been caught out would take offence to this normally inoffensive question, but all the same she still took offence when Solus put the sticky to her - thus confirming my suspicions.

I like to think everyone here on the WAB fungi forum fully endorses the new laws put in place to protect the fungi in Epping Forest and the ethos that goes with it, but I'm seriously beginning to wonder am I the only one that really cares ?

Neil.

[Lancashire Lad]

Hi Neil,

Although you make reference to one recent thread, might I just clarify that my post was not written with yourself, or indeed any particular person in mind. – There has, as you say, been a good number of these “edibility – or not edibility” type threads this year, with replies from numerous contributors.

It might just surprise you, but I agree with almost everything you have said – and I too care a great deal about this forum. I care about the many people who make genuine contributions to it, and about its integrity as a globally accessible resource. Most of what I have so far learned about fungi has been originated via this forum, and I only want the best for it.

Yes, there have been occasions when, even though the poster categorically states they have read the sticky, and have no intention of eating the fungus in question, I personally remain very sceptical as to the truth of their statement.

Like you, I believe that depending on the wording, the way that photos are presented, and the general tone of an enquiry, one can occasionally get a feel for such things. – But I still believe that an initial response with the standard reply is the way we should all go.

My reason is simply this. – The standard reply does give the poster the benefit of an opportunity to explain themselves, and depending on the reply, might just sway me one way or the other.

If I’m still not convinced, I offer no potential ID. I remain silent and simply take no further part in the thread at all. If members more experienced than myself subsequently offer ID suggestions, then so be it. – But it is sometimes blatantly obvious that the most experienced of WAB’s contributors are staying silent, and that surely says something in itself.

If things don't seem to be above board, then silence provides no opportunity for squabbling. – The enquirer doesn’t get the sought ID, any use of the fungus is without doubt “on their own head”, and the integrity of our forum as a useful resource to genuine fungi fans remains intact.

I don’t doubt this means that an occasional genuine enquiry won’t get the response it might deserve – but if you suspect an enquiry as being dubious, you can be pretty sure that others will have the same suspicions.

Regards,
Mike.

[fairplay]

Thanks Mike.

It's difficult to explain how I feel about the whole thing, somehow it is like knowing WAB itself is protected with a legal shield around it and quite rightly, but the active participants (especially if they are not as articulate as yourself) are left to their own devices - 'naked' is probably the best description of how i feel right now.

Neil.

[ashgale]

after reading Lancashire lads post, I think he has hit the nail on the head,
but I think the attitude of some of the members here does leave a lot to be desired,
whether its concerning the "E" subject or indeed, any other topic,
and while the mods come down heavily on those who infringe the "E" rules,
nothing seems to be done about this flagrant rudeness that frequently rears its ugly head ?
after all, people come to WAB to learn, and if they don't ask they wont learn,
the questions that are sometimes asked, may seem obvious to some members, but the asker has not got this wealth of experience of some members, so its not at all obvious to them,

the little group I sometimes tag along with on forays, has several people that used to be avid fans of WAB, but due to the attitudes displayed by the certain few (luckily only a few) no longer even look at the forum now, in fact, when I raised the subject of WAB, no one even wants to discuss it !
there are probably a lot more people who also feel the same about wab now, after being on the receiving end of some of the replies, a sad state of affairs indeed !

despite the mods having put in place measures to deal with the "E" subject, some members still take it on themselves to admonish the poster,
if everyone followed the mods guidance, then as Lancashire lad rightly says, the whole thing could be dealt with in a much more pleasant (for everyone) manner,

ok, moan over,
and a happy new year to all.

ashgale.

[gobbiner]

Originally Posted by ashgale

nothing seems to be done about this flagrant rudeness that frequently rears its ugly head ?
after all, people come to WAB to learn, and if they don't ask they wont learn,
the questions that are sometimes asked, may seem obvious to some members, but the asker has not got this wealth of experience of some members, so its not at all obvious to them,
ashgale.

I totally agree with this, the trouble is when i on more the one occasion have questioned this Rudeness the thread just gets locked or deleted it seems the knowledge they have on fungi/fungus deems then untouchable

[Dorts]

I agree with all that Mike says.
It is such a shame when there is a necessity for such a plea to certain Wabbers.
Dorts.