Two very different zoos this evening. The category: reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. ZooChat Cup In summary, the rules of the game are as follows: - You may choose whatever criteria you like to decide how to vote, as long as it only relates to the category above. - You can use whatever resources you like to inform your vote, including Zoolex, Zootierliste, the ZooChat gallery, trip reviews, zoo maps, books and wherever else. You don't have to have visited both zoos to vote. - Votes are public and can be changed at any time before the poll closes. - The aim of the game is to provoke debate. Post explaining why you voted the way you did, and why others should join you. - Voting closes in four days - The one thing you can't do is vote based on anything other than the relevant category. Tomorrow, Pairi Daiza vs Rome.
As Hannover barely has any ectotherms at all, and the ones they have not inspiringly housed at all, and Moscow an insane amount of ectotherms, this will be a walk-over...
Ok, hear me out. At face value, this should be a walkover. A look at Zootierliste says Moscow has 265(!) species of reptiles. If it's not the most substantial collection of its class in the world I'd be shocked. They have dozens of viper species alone. I haven't even bothered to look at their amphibian and fish holdings. Hannover has, what, a dozen or so common species, in more or less anonymous exhibits? And yet, as you'll see, I've voted for Hannover. I've been to both zoos, and I can't in good conscience vote for Moscow in this category. Here's what I wrote in my review of Moscow in July last year: Looking back, I feel I was kind. This very new building displays reptiles in conditions worse than many pet shops. Worse than some of the dodgy industrial-scale breeders you see on YouTube. I cannot speak to the conditions behind the scenes, but given that off-show facilities are more, rather than less utilitarian than display tanks as a rule I don't have high hopes. Yes, collection matters. Welfare matters more. Vote for Hannover.
Moscow Zoo is one I would really love to visit, even just for the experience. As well as the nostalgia really, considering I used to stay in Moscow around three times per year since I was around 19 up until I was about 25. But now that it’s become such a ballache to get a visa, it really deters me.
I actually gave this a long hard thinking. I have not been to Moscow zoo, but for a variety of reasons I would love to - mostly because in my mind, Moscow is the great beast that had or has had everything, and mostly made it work, alas in what is most likely then and now sub par standards. But still, I am lucky to have obtained historic documents about their sun bears, polar bears, gorillas and so on and to me this seems to be an institution, that - one day - i will have to spend a week or so at, just to diffuse this beast into my 'system' (or out, whichever comes first). Now, I am a strong supporter of all zoos scientific. I do not mind (to the contrary!) non fancy enclosures, I am happy with no theme-park atmospheres and if it is shabby looking, fine, but if it is kept solidly functioning for its intended purpose I can easily take the worn out - antique if you will - look. That being said, the welfare of the animals has to - as CGSwans rightly pointed out - matter more. So on that front, yes Hannover should get my or anyones vote. So with kind of heavy heart I am voting for this and against the 'beast'. DUH!
This one hasn't quite attracted the same level of interest as Wroclaw v Arnhem,,,, I have been to Moscow, but it was more than 30 years ago, and I'm not even sure I visited the Reptile House. But the impression I have is that the people at Moscow are genuinely interested in animals, in their maintenance, in their variety. Conversely, Hannover, impressive though it is in some aspects, is just, on balance, a theme park with animals as the attractions. It may be unfair to suggest this, but I don't get a sense that the people in charge, the people calling the shots, have that same interest in animals - especially i the supposedly less interesting animals covered by this vote. Which is why, having visited a few years ago, I would not particularly want to return to the zoo - and why, here, I have voted against it.
These are very fair points, but I will counter that there needs to be more than 'interest' in animals, there also needs to be 'concern' for them. The reptile house I saw at Moscow featured a couple of the worst aspects of the private reptile industry, the ethics of which I find appalling. The housing conditions were grossly inadequate. And while I don't mind morphs in general, and even think they can be aappropriate in zoos in certain contexts, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw a scaleless corn snake on display. This is a 'morph' that is better named as a 'deformity'. Hannover might not be 'interested' in its animals, but I have more faith in their values than Moscow's.
Having visited Hannover I really can't vote for it in this category, and having heard the arguments against Moscow I can't vote for it either. So I'll sit this one out and let the chips fall where they may. (But I'll be hoping for a Hannover win I guess)
You know, running with my analogy related to the democratic outrage that is first past the post voting, this might be an opportunity for people to attempt to vote strategically. If you genuinely felt neither zoo 'deserves' to win on this category, then it's arguably in scope to vote to try to achieve a tie, as that will cause a replay with a new category. Risky business though, as you might miscalculate and end up throwing the result one way or the other. Anybody game?
Nooooo! I think first past the post is fair provided people vote properly (for the best zoo in the specified category) though I suspect some struggle with significant inherent bias. Don't encourage anyone to vote "tactically" it spoils the integrity (and fun/frustration) of the poll., Great thread by the way, generates some interesting debates and well worth a re-run in a few years (maybe four yearly like the European Championships). The Burgers v Wroclaw was fantastic (though the latter was robbed).
It should have played better if it didn't want to be robbed... I hate saying this, but the comments have convinced me to vote for Hannover in this category. The best collection in a non-specialist zoo is hard to beat, but if they don't care well for their animals they don't deserve a win, no matter who it's against (as long as the opposition does have animals in decent enclosures, within the category)
One of my other obsessions is psephology, so get me started on the perfidies of first past the post at your own risk. Australia has gifted the world the gold standard in single member constituency ballot systems: if only David Cameron had bungled the preferential voting referendum instead of the Brexit one you guys would be doubly better off. Anyway, back on topic. Glad you're enjoying it. I don't see any particular need to restrict the game to a given timeframe or interval between competitions. They can simply be 'ZooChat Cup I', 'ZooChat Cup II', etc. I have a bunch of process improvements I want to try so I'm of a mind to run a second one in the second half of the year, though I will pass custody of the concept on to somebody else sooner rather than later.
Don't disagree with any of that at all. First past the post is, in my opinion, awful, in terms of electing a government but I think it serves this competition well. I voted to change things in the preferential voting referendum but unfortunately our country seems incapable of getting the right results in referendums. I've got a bit of a soft spot for the concepts of the voting system in Nevil Shute's In The Wet but I'm not certain it would turn out well in real life.
The reason I think it'd be better to spaced out at least a bit more is to avoid repitition (of same zoos being matched up, perhaps on same categories) and familiarity breeding contempt. I'm probably being overprotective of your format -I'm the same when I come across great TV shows, I get a little paranoid that later series are made either for money, viewing figures or habit and as a result they're less "special" and taint the whole endeavour.
If you're talking this competition, I'll let it go -them's the rules and ultimately opinions differ (even if I think they're wrong) If you're talking life in general I could give umpteen examples where going with a majority was not a right decision and has ended quite badly. Unfortunately people (myself included) are flawed, do not have perfect information, may not even be interested in good, unbiased, information to make a decision on and do not always act logically or even if self-interest. It's amazing how many people vote for a political party (on whatever side) because that's what they've always done, that's what their parents have always done -without ever really thinking about matters too much.
Not too worried about repetition of contests - if you were to say the same 64 zoos were involved (not necessarily true) then every zoo has 378 possible combinations of opponent and category, but if the same combination did recur it’s easy enough to reject the result and draw a second category to keep things interesting. But the design changes I have in mind make that even less likely anyway. There will definitely be at least a short break between them.
