POTW-when is a gobi not a gobi?

Hi all,

The subject of our most recent POTW contest was "gobbies."

The winner (by public vote) was a lovely image of a fang tooth blenny.

Since blennies and gobbies aren't even related, should the result stand?

I have an opinion, but would welcome others!

Adam

:-D

Ans: When it's a blenny!! :-D

Taxanomically speaking- no. I mean.... If it looks like a duck ......but clucks like a chicken.... then...do you still call it a duck?

Looking at the entries- methinx the line between blenny and goby has been blurred to the point of bokeh! :-D

Well- at the end of the day- it's all about the public vote- so vox populi applies.

The people have spoken.

:-)

I remember a similar discussion at a photosociety when a cuttlefish was entered in a fish competition - difficult to argue when the name includes fish and the photographer isn't into taxonomy.....

Funnily enough, in the CMAS spanish competitions there is a Whole Fish category (a fish that has to be shown complete in the pic) and cephalopods are allowed...

I have a rather puristic view on the question. For several resons, when the subject clearly does not agree with the title of the competition, I think it is clear that it shouldn't be entered in the contest, and if entered, should be erased. First of all, why would there else be titles on the weekly competitions? Second, I think that Wetpixel at least on some level has some kind of educational purpose, so including dolphins in a shark competition, flatworms in a nudibranch competition, or, to take this example, a blennid in a goby competition, I believe sends out the wrong message. Third, how should this be stated in the rules? It is allowed to enter stuff that is somewhat similar, but not really different from the subject of the week?

There are of course weekly titles that allows people to enter more or less whatever subject the photographer wishes to enter, and that is perfectly fine. However, in the competitions with more stringent titles, either defined by systematics or by a strict subject, I believe that the subject should at least have some relationship to the title. I guess one could get away with a lot on subject titles (a wreck competition could potentially have an ice berg in it with the title "Titanic II" for example), but I believe that systematic titles should have entries with a subject included in the title. And, as a blenny belongs to a different suborder than a goby, I would think that a blenny should be disqualified from a goby competition. But then again, a cephalopod is without doubt more different to fish than blennies are to gobies, so I might be way to restricted in my view on the organization of nature .

Cheers Bent (who spends quite large parts of my life teaching differences between whales and fish, mice and bats, flies and bees and so on and on and on...)

I agree with Bent C.

When a competition "stretches" the category, it's leaving those who play strictly by the rules at a disadvantage. Perhaps another great Blennie shot could have won but wasn't entered by someone who understands the difference. FWIW.

Rand

We have the same dilemma at LAUPS. We pick a category like juveniles and someone enters a gorgeous tiger shrimp (on a starfish no less) and wins because he said the guide told him it was a juvenile. We had a category of blue fish and a blue ribbon eel got voted out because "everyone knows that eels aren't fish". In this case, I agree that if the contest is gobies then only gobies should be eligible to win.

Bill

I thing its a bit late once it's won .. but before a winner is posted and pref before the voting goes live then sure it should be removed from the competition.

Once it has been voted for and won it unfortunately shows that no one knows the difference and so to remove it would be calling everyone who voted out as well as the entry. Maybe use it as a lesson .. lets do an id thread where common misnomers can be addressed such as this.