So, here I am at the end of the day, reading through the recent posts to the "list." The main topic for today: lurkers. This thread is starting to sound very similar to the "where have all the reports gone" postings.
Perhaps I did not properly introduce myself when I joined this list before "we" started labeling everyone as lurkers, newbies, active posters, experts, novices, fly shop employees hungry for list information to take credit for and share with "non-listers," password possessing archive searchers, takers who don't give anything back, flyfishers worried about out secret spots becoming public, sharers with others who give nothing back, you get the idea. Anyway, I feel compelled to reply to some of this labeling. First, let me get back to introductions, because, I have found that it is much easier to resent, hate, dislike, blame, (insert your own descriptive word here) things, processes, or unknowns than "people." My name is Eric Hausman. I am in my early 40's and married. I have a 6 year old son and 3 month old daughter. My son likes to fish; I have even taught him to cast a fly, but he only likes to go fishing if I can guarantee that he will catch something. This happens with a 6 year old after only a few trips without success, and it puts me at a great disadvantage since I cannot guarantee that fish will be caught even though I have been flyfishing for over 20 years. I am certain that, as he gets older, the jerk on the other end of the line (reference here to the "books" thread intended; Gerich, I think, if memory serves me correctly; and, I leave it to you to decide which end) will be less important than the quality time a father and son share on the trail or at the river, but, for now, I wish I could offer more fish. If I am really lucky, I get to fish 10 times between April and November - usually it is closer to 5. I started lurking - that's what it was then - last year. I must say that the wealth of knowledge and information on the list can be intimidating when you first show up. During the past year there were some posts that referenced some list members getting together to go fishing. Someone even put out a message asking if any list members were interested in going to a particular place (Yak, I think) on a particular day. I responded to that post, individually (not to the "list"), that I would welcome the opportunity, and, while I could not offer much in technical expertise, I would gladly drive and provide good company. There was no response. No newbies need apply? I have accepted the fact that it will be a long time before I can devote the time necessary to master the technical aspects of flyfishing, maybe never, who knows. I am not aware of specific techniques or scientific names, I just go to the river and fish; sometimes I just sit and listen to the water rush by. Does this mean that there is no place for me on your list? I think not, but respect your right to think otherwise. Someone asked how newbies find out about the list. In my case, I was at a party at my cousin's house talking to one of his guests who happened to share my interest in flyfishing. He sent me a message the next day and I introduced myself to the list shortly thereafter. In many ways, some unknown to us presently, we are all related. Many regulars have suggested that the "newbies" start posting or find a new place to lurk. That prompted me to wonder - do those same people want to read that someone (one of the 200 who do not post regular messages) went out to a river or stream and fished for 6 hours, saw some small bugs flying around and, perhaps a few fish rising, but did not catch anything? What would be the value in that? Further, what constitutes "regular?" I post every time I fish; for me regular means 5 to 10 messages a year about where I went and, to the best of my ability, what I saw. Every now and then I even get to tell someone (you) that I caught something (clearly, my wife does not care...). For you, I must be a lurker, since 355 to 360 days a year I don't have a story to tell about where I fished and how big the fish were. Statistics and numbers can be deceiving (I know this well). I make it a point not to go where I am not welcome. Frankly, there are too many other places I can visit where what I have to offer is appreciated for what it is. I offer what I can, not what someone else wants or expects. Lately, I am feeling less welcome here. Alternatively, I recognize that there are many on the list who, despite their extensive knowledge, find value in what is said here, fishing related or otherwise; some might even be lurkers. Since Sept 11 I have come to realize how small and fragile the world really is. We are all fortunate that there are places to go where, if only for a short time, we can escape into a dream that is flyfishing. These are my thought, on fishing, lurkers, reports, and life. Eric Hausman In a message dated 11/8/01 4:59:28 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Subj: Lurkers > Date: 11/8/01 4:59:28 PM Pacific Standard Time > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kent Lufkin) > Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I just found that the WAFF list now boasts over 250 email > subscribers. I also learned that only about 50 subscribers post to > the list on a regular basis. That means that roughly 80% of WAFF > subscribers are so-called 'lurkers' - people who receive the list's > email posts but who do not respond with posts of their own. > > In fairness, I'm sure many lurkers are novice fishers, fishers who > don't feel that they have anything worth contributing, or are > otherwise just plain shy. A number of lurkers are probably > now-and-then fishers or are just too darned busy to post even an > occasional email. > > However, I also know for a fact that a number of lurkers are fly shop > employees or owners. They subscribe to the list, gathering valuable > fishing information which they then feed to their customers as a > 'value-added' perk. > > For whatever reason though, lurkers take but don't give anything back > in return. > > > I personally enjoy reading the posts to the list - even the > off-subject ones, the newbie questions that we've all heard before > (and asked ourselves once upon a time), the subjects I'm not > interested in, and even the occasional spats between subscribers. I > read 'em all, delete most, and respond to a few. > > Bottom line is that I've learned quite a bit more about flyfishing > than I would have without subscribing to the list. > > But I'm beginning to wonder about all the wonderful information and > advice we've been posting. It bothers me to think we've been > innocently sharing it with others who contribute nothing back to the > group in return. Not to mention the trove of past posts available in > the searchable archives. > > > Thanks to technology and the subscribers who've generously shared > their skills, we now have the capability of 'unsubscribing' lurkers > from the list. > > We can also password-protect the archives on our web site, making > them available only to active subscribers. > > The questions though, is should we? > > > The list is only as good as the information that subscribers post to > it. If lurkers don't contribute to the group, their absence won't be > felt. > > On the other hand, restricting the list smacks to me as just another > form of elitism, the same kind of smug, 'I'm-better-than-you-are' > attitude that others think characterize we flyfishers in general. > > What do you think? > > > Kent Lufkin > >
