Note that I did not say "without research" but "without testing". By which I included things like checking the salinity. Using a refractometer may not be very difficult, but surely it needs to be done?
Yes and no. Using a hydrometer is extremely easy and for a FO testing the salinity is less important than for a reef. And since the person is on this forum, they obviously want to learn something. Prefectly possible to go without testing if you trust a cups/gallon amount of salt.
It should be clear from my post that I do not think that any fishkeeping should be done without research.
No, but you pulled out the standard "SW needs much more research than FW, if you don't want to research much then just do FW" point of view which is, quite frankly, wrong.
We are talking here of a poster who was not even aware of the difference between freshwater and marine, who did not know that clownfish live in the sea etc.
But who has come on here and learnt.
So your whole argument about how you know, from years of experience, when things are wrong is not really relevant.
I'm sorry, when did I say that years of fishkeeping allow me to know when something is wrong? I have kept SW tanks for a year, FW maybe 4 or 5 but I did not, in any way, say my expertise allows me to know before test kits. My main reason for not trusting tests is having so many false readings from the test kits. False readings are far more dangerous than none at all, especially with a healthy maintenance regime.
I am quite sure that it holds true for you, and that your expertise tells you more than any test kit could, I just fail to see how that will help the OP.
Because I am informing the OP that one does not have to spend years reading books on using LR and cheato just to have a clownfish in a tank. Again, I never claim it is my expertise that lest me see if something is wrong. I just look for changes and occasionally google or TFF search the symptoms. No years of expertise necessary.
I get the impression that these threads are being used for venting old disagreements that have nothing to do with the current poster. In which case it might be better to start a new thread.
They are used for me to point out that SW is not a super difficult hobby that requires years of mystical learning and testing every 5 minutes to ensure success. They also let me point out that FW is just as demanding of research than SW depending on how much you get into it.
Since you brought up how difficult SW is and how it requires far more research than FW :
"
If your girlfriend (or yourself) is not that interested in how the thing works, but only thinks it would be cute, then I'd take her round the freshwater section of a good aquatics shop and see if anything there takes her fancy. But note that even a freshwater tank needs a certain amount of research."
Only a "certain" amount of research, but obviously less than the mighty SW as FW is for people who don't really care how things work. Surely you understand why letting such an inaccurate phrase pass without comment would have been foolish.
As a result of the above, I think my posts are more than relevant to this current thread.
