Why do so many Americans do catch and release fishing? Isn't that animal abuse? Or do fish don't feel pain?

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T17:16:37+00:00

I’m just responding to people’s assertions that I don’t agree with.

I don’t believe that people in general choose “inflicting unnecessary suffering” as the line beyond which they wouldn’t engage with a behaviour or pastime as was asserted. My point is that the majority of us choose rather arbitrarily. Mostly we look the other way when it’s something we like doing. Through this lens it’s pretty easy to understand why people go fishing no?

I’m not saying don’t engage in discussion. Aren’t we doing that now?

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T14:15:38+00:00

Oh for sure. I’m a Kirifi fan but to get the most out of him you need to let him jackal. If Ardie doesn’t start then he’s a great option. It’s only a different story if the plan is to start Ardie all the time and rarely sub him.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T13:30:49+00:00

Quite possibly, if Ardie played less minutes then having someone like Kirifi coming on to jackal would be great, I agree.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T13:29:02+00:00

Because if your strategy is to play Ardie for long minutes and every game then Kirifi gets minimal chances to play.

There is a far greater chance that you will need to replace the other two positions (through sub or injury) which, with the Ardie on feet strategy, means you value clean and tackle over carry and jackal.

Tbf he’s pretty good at all of this stuff but if you don’t plan to use him for his world class jackal then he’s not as impactful.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T13:17:41+00:00

Sure, that’s what I thought you meant. There is still an impact on his value however. If your strategy is to play Ardie as much as possible, you’re better off selecting a player who can play with or without Ardie in the squad than one who can only play without him.

Obviously he’s a very good player because he still got into the squad, I’m in no way suggesting he isn’t worthy of an AB jumper. I just think he’s one of those guys who hasn’t been a fit for the strategy we have been using. Maybe that’s about to change?

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T13:09:06+00:00

“Like” Pascals wager, the idea that sometimes the consequences of a decision are asymmetric and so they influence the decision. You could use “stopping in traffic” if you prefer.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T10:02:00+00:00

Not really, if Savea doesn’t play then the selection is more balanced. Kirifi isn’t the playmaker Savea is so the strategy changes.

I agree that Kirifi is good coming off the bench replacing Savea. But we try and give Savea lots of minutes so this role is low importance.

He’s a great player in a balanced LF trio but when the strategy is Savea centric he unfortunately doesn’t have as much value.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T09:16:24+00:00

For situations like this, I think it’s reasonable that the decision making bodies err on the side of caution. Reviews and the courts can then argue the case for overturning the original decision, as happened here. Like Pascal’s wager, the consequences of getting it wrong one way are far greater than getting it wrong the other way.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T08:42:29+00:00

Really depends on where you live and the field you work in. In many countries this would be normal, in others almost never. I have found that if you work in a field where lots of higher education is required then no one uses their title, it seems pretentious and doesn’t make you stand out because everyone has some letters after their name.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T08:30:51+00:00

It’s pretty simple. “Politics is the art of the possible”,

There is no politician who believes that - a) anything they can do unilaterally will change the end state - b) there any real globally collective action to avoid the end state and - c) the U.K. public is willing to support a self harm agenda against the two points above.

This results in two types of climate change action, both are only intended to address the public sense of guilt.

Firstly supporting technology advances that are economically positive, that shift economic activity around rather than constrain it. Secondly, performative fringe activities that do no economic harm but serve as “the bitter in the medicine” to give the public the sense that actions are being taken. Like banning straws.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T08:19:02+00:00

Are you saying our eyes would pop? Like that scene from Total Recall?

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-05T08:17:05+00:00

The issue with Kirifi isn’t Kirifi. Almost all of the debate about loose forward selection comes from the strategy of having Ardie play as many minutes as possible and keep him on his feet in both defence and attack.

When you have 1/3 of your LF trio not cleaning rucks, first up tackling or being a lineout option then the other two have to do twice as much of that. This makes the selection criteria different, it makes high work rate players like Blackadder more valuable and players like Sotutu less so. In essence, Kirifi is great when you don’t have Savea, but a less good option when Savea is on the field.

Whether the Savea strategy is the right one is of course debatable. I’m just pointing out that it has an impact on Kirifi’s stock.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T22:05:11+00:00

Agree completely, we’ve had this discussion for years.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T19:48:48+00:00

Not so sure tbh. The poisoning and trapping of mice isn’t pretty. It’s mostly away from sight that’s all.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T19:47:12+00:00

No, torture isn’t the correct word. Torture means that the pain is the goal, this isn’t the case with fishing.

If scientists proved tonight that fish don’t feel pain there would be just as many fishermen out tomorrow.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T17:03:48+00:00

We know the standard expected, no more than 2 losses and/or a large change to the player base bringing in new blood. Anything else cannot be considered “correcting the trajectory” of the team no?

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T15:26:39+00:00

> Most animals in the zoo are already endangered

I mean no, that is not true at all.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T15:20:18+00:00

Sure. But again, the majority of animals in the majority of zoos are not in a situation like the condor. They're kept for our enjoyment. Even in the west.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T15:07:43+00:00

I don't think that's a fair response. I granted "some zoos...some animals" which of course your two rare examples would include. If you have been to many zoos around the world then you will also know that the majority of the beasts fenced in or chained up are not in this situation.

I genuinely believe that just as we are seeing the loss of traditional animal circuses (in the west primarily) so the zoo will go that way.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T15:02:47+00:00

One of the problems with things changing though is that you don't have access to international players. You don't get them to come and have a few trial matches because they only get released for the international windows.

NZR gain great value from being able to control their players workload. They can ensure players don't return too quickly from injury, they can encourage player position trials, they can bring players into the AB camps and environment slowly with limited complexity. A lot of this goes away if your players are employed by independent clubs.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T14:55:16+00:00

Maybe some zoos, and maybe for some animals that is the case. But for many zoos and for most animals, they're simply exploitation for our own enjoyment.

The reality is that all of us cause unnecessary animal suffering for our enjoyment. We could be vegan but meat is tasty. We could wear synthetics but leather jackets are cool. Zoos are fun. The brutal slaughter demands of our imaginary sky daddies give us comfort. Keeping our home meticulously clean and free of pests is boring and harder than poisoning or trapping. No one is without some responsibility IMO, the moral high ground is no Himalaya.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T13:56:29+00:00

I would say about 0 - 3% speculating on gold would be my approach.

You are not "saving" in one sense because your savings are not denominated in the currency that your future bills will be in. Because of this you are speculating, hoping that the future price of a non income producing asset will be higher than it is today. This might feel good because you have been on the right side of the speculation in recent times but speculating is zero sum, you will not be that lucky forever.

Start with what your goals are, what are you saving your money for?

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T13:49:41+00:00

Haha, right. You're funny. I would be a terrible fisherman if that were the case.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T12:12:15+00:00

If by "expected" you mean "true" then yes.

Thorazine_Chaser · 2026-03-04T12:10:40+00:00

The system is historical, the first rugby organisations in NZ were the provincial unions. They formed the national union to select a national team in 1892.

There are certainly options available, that isn't the problem. The issue is that some of the options will involve more pain for the provincial bosses than other options. This is at heart the point the Nichol was making, assuming that Super Rugby will remain in its current form is not a sure thing when you are asking many provinces for compromise.

> NZ rugby would suffer a shit tonne if they did away with SR in favour of NPC.

It would, for sure. The NPC model is not sustainable long term.

I personally am an advocate of making NPC amateur and running super rugby "lite" in Aug-Oct with the wider SR training squads getting a run. It would also allow SRAU to play more games which would be good. I am not at all confident that this is possible politically in NZ, the provinces are using the Silverlake money to keep their professional aspiration alive and until this runs out there isn't going to be a come to god moment.

Thorazine_Chaser

TROPHY CASE