Mycology: Science or Hobby? A Modest Proposal

[Steve Pencall]

Mycology: Science or Hobby?  A Modest Proposal

(NOTE: This is a lengthy post--I even spell-checked it.  However, I urge  
bionet.mycology users to read all of it before hitting "Delete."  In fact,  
I would urge you to forward this post to friends or colleagues who only  
occasionally read bionet.mycology.  It is my hope that discussion of, and  
eventual action on, this proposal will prevent the possibility of any  
conflict about the content of bionet.mycology.)

PREFACE

Before I get to the heart of my proposal, I should note that I have long  
eschewed the use of the term "hobby" for amateur mycology.  I prefer to  
use "avocation" as I believe that it better describes the approach of many  
amateurs to mycology.

Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary tells us that avocation is "a  
subordinate occupation pursued in addition to one's vocation especially  
for enjoyment."  A vocation is of course, one's regular employment.   
Webster's defines hobby as "a pursuit outside of one's regular occupation  
engaged in for relaxation."

Although the difference is subtle, there is an unmistakable suggestion  
that although both refer to leisure activities, "avocation" refers to a  
deeper commitment to that activity.  In popular usage, "hobby" has often  
been used to imply an activity used to while away leisure hours, while  
"avocation" is generally used to describe something which is seriously  
pursued to add meaning to those leisure hours.  In short, "hobby" suggests  
something trivial, "avocation" something of greater significance.

Anyway, I find it an eerie coincidence that as I was walking back to my  
car last Friday afternoon (Oct. 20) after sending e-mail to several  
mycological correspondents, I was thinking "What a shame it is that there  
is no UseNet newsgroup specifically for amateur mycologists!"  On the  
drive home from school through LA rush hour traffic, I cogitated on the  
matter and thought about it from every angle conceivable to me.   
Blissfully unaware of what was going on in the ether around me, I came up  
with a proposal to (possibly) solve this "problem," as well as answers to  
what I believe are most of the possible objections to it.

When I checked into the mycology newsgroup on Monday, October 23 and read  
the post from John Pitkin and the thread that followed, the feeling of  
deja vu that overcame me was almost (but not quite) enough to make me  
believe in such a thing.  Anyway, here goes.

THE MODEST PROPOSAL

Start a NEW newsgroup for amateur mycologists in the rec. group,  
tentatively to be called rec.mushrooms.  This assumes that such a new  
group can be established, i.e. develop sufficient online support to  
impress the UseNet overlords that such a new group is as vital to the  
future of humanity as the alt.sex groups and others.  As has often been  
noted, UseNet is NOT a democracy, so such a proposal will have to get  
solid support from the online mycology community, amateurs and pros,  
otherwise it will fall faster than a deliquescing Coprinus.

I realize that right away some people will object, while others will  
simply be bewildered.  I have anticipated most of the objections and  
questions, so BEFORE you warm up the flame-thrower, please read on.

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

1. Q. What's wrong with bionet.mycology?
   A. There is nothing "wrong" with bionet.mycology.  It is just not the  
most appropriate place for amateurs.  Many amateurs, especially those new  
to mycology, check into bionet.mycology and are confused or turned off  
when they see "Tenure track position in Plant Pathology" or "14th  
International Symposium on Zygomycetes"--my abject apologies to  
zygomycologists.  Several amateurs have told me that they checked out  
bionet.mycology a few times, found it not to their liking, and haven't  
gone back.  Some feel intimidated by posts that they don't understand, or  
may feel like they are trespassing on the turf of academics.  Even if you  
put out the welcome mat, some people will be turned off by what they see  
inside.

To use a nineties term, amateurs need their own "space".  Even if "most"  
of the pros on bionet.mycology are friendly and helpful, amateurs feel  
like guests, not residents.  Amateurs need a place to be themselves; to be  
able to swap recipes or collecting tips.  As much as love bionet.mycology  
and I do, it is NOT that place.  Many amateurs feel as though they are  
being judged, and it is not a comfortable feeling.

2. Q. Why put the new group in the rec. groups?
   A. For the reasons I have mentioned above.  The whole bionet looks like  
academic turf to a lot of Netizens--be on your best behavior lest someone  
swat you with a virtual ruler for getting out of line.  I've lurked on  
quite a few of the rec. groups and people seem to be a lot more relaxed  
and informal in them, and that should facilitate communication between  
group participants.  Isn't communication what the UseNet is all about?

3. Q. As has been pointed out, bionet.mycology has very little traffic.   
Won't TWO groups be starved for traffic?
    A. I'm sure that someone told Sam Walton that his first WalMart would  
be starved for traffic.  Anything is possible of course, but I think not.   
I believe the audience of each group will feel a sense of freedom, even  
liberation, that is bound to result in an increase in traffic in both  
groups.  Professionals will be liberated from wading through "trivia", and  
amateurs can feel free to express themselves without fear of disapproval  
from the pros.  

After a period of adjustment, traffic in both groups will climb because a  
tighter focus on the real interests of each community will make each group  
more attractive to its respective audience.  It is a demonstrable truth of  
economics that having more choices always means more customers.  Let us  
not forget that all mycologists, both pros and amateurs, will benefit by  
having more of us communicating online.  WE ALL WANT MORE CUSTOMERS!

4. Q. Won't communication between amateur and professional mycologists be  
hindered by fragmentation of one of their few common outlets?
   A. No, this assumes that amateurs and pros will go their separate  
ways--never to meet again.  As long as both groups are aware of one  
another, this should not be a problem.  People can (and should) configure  
their newsreaders to receive both groups.  I expect that frequent  
cross-postings, casual references to postings in the other group, and  
mention of the other group in the FAQ's should alert sentient habitues of  
one group to the existence of the other.  I don't worry too much about the  
non-sentient habitues, do you?

5. Q. Isn't starting a new newsgroup a lot of work?
   A. Probably.  I've never done it.  Any volunteers?

I welcome additional questions, comments or suggestions, but most of all I  
would welcome the earnest efforts of ALL online mycologists, amateur as  
well as professional, to get behind the establishment of a REAL HOME for  
amateur mycologists on the UseNet.

Steve Pencall
<spencal at nextlab.calstatela.edu>
Editor, The Spore Print
Journal of the Los Angeles Mycological Society

"Leave the beaten path and dive into the woods"
--Alexander Graham Bell