# Open Topic Part 2



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



Barry said:


> Let's be clear, people leave on their own will, unless they are banned, which she was not. There have been a few noticeable figures, (her and Pedro) who decided to leave when the discussions got to "hot." I strive to keep discussions civil, not "safe."


I think we need to be more clear here. The "natural" forum here on beesource was, for years, not 
"treatment free", but "natural beekeeping".....most (if not all) of the actual discussion was about "natural treatments". When the conversation goes from "no treatments" to "if I do use a treatment, which is the most natural", then the whole conversation becomes about the treatments...we've seen this time and time again, and it is why Dee stopped participating here.

Only recently has this changed...the forum that exists now did not exist when Dee left. In any case, until recently I've advised anyone that wants to discuss treatment free or "organic beekeeping" (as Dee uses the term) to join the organic list (where no discussion of treatments is tolerated). It still has the feature that it isn't crawling with non-treatment free beekeepers reading the posts, unable to help themsleves from chiming in...this allows for some discussion that can't happen here.

In any case, I just wanted to point out that the forum you are reading now is not he forum that Dee left.

deknow


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Post removed voluntarily by poster


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



deknow said:


> In any case, I just wanted to point out that the forum you are reading now is not he forum that Dee left.
> 
> deknow


So where is she if she succeeded in influencing a forum to be less confrontational to her views? If you believe in something you don't give up because giving up means you doubt yourself or your beliefs.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Dan, published research has to be able to withstand examination publicly in minute detail...that is the point of publishing a peer reviewed study....it isn't supposed to be a "claim", it's supposed to present reproducible "proof".

Lots has been posted on the organic list on lots of topics....the only on topic topic, however, is keeping bees without treatments. Treatments are, by definition, off topic....just as they now are here on beesource in the treatment free forum.

For the record, I've not "demanded" anyone that they have to read a study in detail...I spent my time understanding what Seeley's study claimed, did, and did not do. Thus far, no one has offered any substantive criticism of my critique....I've taken the trouble to clarify my thoughts where asked to do so.

I'm not sure why you think such a critique would be unwelcome on the organic list...or what you think wouldn't be allowed....treatments are the only real big no no....and if you can't find a forum to discuss the treatments you want to use you aren't looking too far.

deknow


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



beemandan said:


> And that is all I'm going to say about this.


I don't think anybody who is paying attention believes that anymore. I'm not sure if you're just trying to convince yourself or what! :scratch:

There's a difference between discussing small cell studies and discussing treatments. Treatments belong in the Pests forum, the lack thereof belongs in the treatment free forum. It's that simple. You wouldn't discuss frame wiring in Topbar hives.

Thanks Dean for clearing that up. I went back and dug up Dee's email, and reading it in that context makes total sense. Her meanings in words are not always crystal clear as you know.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



Acebird said:


> So where is she if she succeeded in influencing a forum to be less confrontational to her views? If you believe in something you don't give up because giving up means you doubt yourself or your beliefs.


If you get to manage Dee's time, do I get to manage yours? This is a history that happened over 10 years or so...and in the meantime, she built her own list to over 4,000 members, and spends her online time (dial up AOL internet) mostly on the organic list....oh, and she spends the rest of her time running a commercial beekeeping operation without help.

She didn't give up, she did it herself and made it happen. I mean none of this as any disrespect to Barry or Sol, but it is 10 years later, she has replaced what she was hoping to find here. Her goal was not to "influence" this forum...it was to have a discussion of beekeeping without treatments and feeds...she has succeeded.

deknow


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Post removed voluntarily by poster


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



deknow said:


> The "natural" forum here on beesource was, for years, not
> "treatment free", but "natural beekeeping"


Biological Beekeeping was the forum name when Dee was participating. She stopped participating around 2003 - 2004. She left and started her own group.



> then the whole conversation becomes about the treatments...


If you can go back in the archives and show this was happening, I'd like see it. In my mind, nothing much has changed. We can still talk about treatments here if it is in the context of going from treatments to treatment free, showing logical steps to achieve it. This has always been a difference Dee and I have had. She is extreme in this area, no mention of any kind of treatment is allowed. I have always felt that that is counter productive and there are times when this needs to be discussed as a way to get from point a to point b.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

When I first joined Beesource, this was the biological forum. It was a very quiet section then, and discussion of treatment was not allowed.

Then things got fired up when a certain Wired For Stereo signed up. Statements were made, and a bantering style developed, that has attracted participants of diverse opinions, and reasons for holding them, and a willingness to argue them for better or worse!

As an effort to "clean up" this mess, the forum was renamed. Also, numerous polls were taken, on just about anything.

In practise, nothing has changed. Discussion of treatment is still not permitted. This is fine though, because as per an example yesterday, if someone shows up who really wants to discuss treatments, they are welcome to move their discussion to another section and continue. So far as I'm concerned, the whole thing works well. We don't want people who wish to only discuss non treatment, to be forced to discuss treatment. 

I didn't know Dee had found the old biological forum so unsatisfactory she felt compelled to leave, I've never seen her post here. Anyway if that's her choice, you can never please all the people, all the time. I doubt the claim she was "driven off".

What's changed here in the tf section? Little, other than it's gone from a fairly quiet section, to a pretty lively one hosting sometimes raucous debates and vociferous opinions! I've learned a lot here and even been convinced to start some sc hives, although I have not been convinced what the eventual outcome will be. I'll have to find that out when the time comes.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



Oldtimer said:


> Then things got fired up when a certain Wired For Stereo signed up.


:scratch:WiredForStereo signed up nine years ago this month.



Oldtimer said:


> What's changed here in the tf section?


:scratch:This is not the TFB forum, this is the 'Bee Forum' forum (when posted).


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Well, it appears the this thread fragment has been moved from the Bee Forum.

Let me reaffirm my former assertion that I was incorrect when I said that Dee had been run off by opposition to treatment-free beekeeping. I wouldn't be the first person to misunderstand something Dee wrote. Deknow's clarification helped to contextualize the email that I had received.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*



deknow said:


> I think we need to be more clear here. The "natural" forum here on beesource was, for years, not
> "treatment free", but "natural beekeeping".....most (if not all) of the actual discussion was about "natural treatments". When the conversation goes from "no treatments" to "if I do use a treatment, which is the most natural", then the whole conversation becomes about the treatments...we've seen this time and time again, and it is why Dee stopped participating here.


Those "natural treatments" discussions came years after Dee had already left. I wasn't keeping close tabs on the forum and it kind of evolved into something more like you say. That is when Sol pressed me for a revamp of the forum and a push to get it back on track.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Let me post a portion of exactly what Dee said. 

"I was also too stubborn to cave into essential oils and acids, etc"

"I will not go back!!!!"

I can't post most of the rest of it. Like somebody said, you wouldn't want to meet her in a dark alley.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Well I think that makes it fairly clear it was simply her own choice.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

And I respect Dee for holding strong to HER convictions.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Dissagree Barry. LOL!

I've got strong opinions. But I'm still willing to discuss with those who differ. And to learn. ( Occasionally  )


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Alastair is right. It was a very quiet forum when he signed up last year.

I signed up way back in December of 2002 under the name WiredForStereo (if you do a Google search, the top 8/10 hits are me) and I participated for a while, but eventually, I got busy doing life and beekeeping and only checked in from time to time after about 180 posts. When I checked in again this spring, I was a little dismayed, and upset that most every discussion was devolving into yes/no treatment-free beekeeping arguments with a healthy portion of 'I wanna talk about natural treatments' as well. As you know, I don't believe that there are such things as 'natural treatments'. The truth is, 'softer treatments' are ubiquitous today. A treatment is a treatment.

So I pushed for a little restructuring and at Mark Berninghausen's repeated insistence, I half heartedly asked to be a moderator. Now I don't want to impugn Barry's intelligence, but he said yes.  Anyway, I asked very politely for Dee to come back and as you see, she won't.

My goal has always been to open this forum to newbees (the kind that want to learn, not the kind that want to teach) which is why we must address questions about small cell studies (many thanks to Dean) and practical beekeeping (many thanks to Michael.) 

And I will not deny stirring the pot.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

*Re: Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells*

Alastair, yes, I personally feel the same way about it, yet I can still respect her having her own convictions. I respect her, not necessarily the conviction.


----------

