Mike Conner

[William Anderson]

Man, that dude was verbose and an amazing contributor. I hope he will join us again sometime.

w

[daringduffer]

Mike is doing well, I have been in regular contact with him as he has provided some really valuable research materials for the new book that Bob Smith and I are co-authoring (the tile keeps changing but is an update from Edmonds & Lee but includes techniques etc).
As you say a great wealth of knowledge.
Mark, he has refrained from coming back to the forum which I agree is a great pity.

What's the story here Phil? As a relative new-comer, since I first started posting, this guy has wandered the corridors of this board like a ghost!

I am beginning to wonder if he was ever real...

Not a ghost - more of a legend. Not only is he a goldmine of information - he also seems to have immediate access to it. If the devil is in the details, well...he must be a close allied.
A toast to many happy returns...

dd

[Soft-hackle]

Hi Mike,
I do not blame you for not wanting to deal with people who are simply abusing you for the sake of doing just that. It is not at all appreciated, here. Now, often written words are misinterpreted or misunderstood simply because we are not communicating face to face. One can not "read" body language, voice intonation, or see gestures. Misunderstandings like this often occur honestly and without malice. When these things do occur, who would like to have punished for such an honest misunderstanding or mistake? I'm not saying this is the case in all the problems and abuse you've taken. I've seen some of it, and I think it is uncalled for and down right inexcusable.

You are most welcomed, here, and as far as I can tell, no one, here, has acted in that manner toward you. Again, it is your choice to post or not, and we appreciate you being open to receiving requests for assistance through e-mail, if that is what you want.

Mark

[Soft-hackle]

Mike,
You definitely have a right to your opinion, however, I don't think anyone else saw the problem as deliberate in a manner in which it was personal, abusive or derogatory. As I said words can be and are misinterpreted. I certainly form no conception of you based upon what someone else might say about you or to you. My concept of you is formed by what you say and your actions. If someone else wishes to judge you by what someone else has to say, they have a problem. Up to this very point my opinion of you remains consistent. I consider you very knowledgeable in the art of fly fishing and tying. You have shared your knowledge freely, herein, and it has been appreciated by all in this forum.

None of us are going to agree on what everyone says, but there is a way to disagree without making it personal or abusive and there is a way not to take someones disagreement as a personal attack or as abusive. It is my belief we all learn from each other, and what you do or think might not necessarily agree with what I do or think. What works for you might not necessarily work for me, but that does not mean I dislike you or have formed a personal opinion of you based on a difference of opinion. It is behavior and attitude that influences that.

With that said, you are still welcomed here, and I wish you the best as well.

Mark

[GlassJet]

Gentlemen, and of course, any Ladies who might be present,

And me...

for many years now I have been the subject of ongoing abuse, character assassination, denigration, defamation, and personal attacks, per e-mail, and in every group I have posted to. Sometimes anonymously, often not. It is all very well to say that one should ignore such things, but you are not the subject of such attacks. Thin skinned? I think not.

Hi Mike - so you are real...

I am really sorry you feel like you do. I share much of your scepticism regarding internet forums and some of the more unpleasant dynamics that can arise in these 'communities' where the participants can hide behind a veil of anonymity. I had an old maths teacher who once said something that has always stuck with me: 'The measure of a man's character is not what he does, but what he would do if he knew he would never be found out.' Must source that quote sometime...

I've had a couple of very unpleasant experiences myself on internet forums, (not fly tying - it was running dogs and involved animal rights activists - resulted in me becoming concerned for my own and my dogs' physical safety) and I said to myself I'd never participate in one again.

Then someone whose opinion I respected recommended this place... so against my better judgement I gave it a go - and it has been great!

Three main reasons i like it: 1) it is small enough to keep track of, 2) Most active participants are very open about who they are, as in real life, so there is none of that posturing behind avatars to make up for real life inadequacies, and 3) the international aspect of it - I am very interested in the cultural influences on fly design - even though we might tell ourselves we are tying for the fish.

So, providing you don't now go on to send me a mindlessly abusive PM, I'll stick around!

Thanks for email address - maybe sometime you can tell me why you think it is that the Greenwell's Spider is such a devastatingly effective catcher of trout!

Andrew.

[GlassJet]

The measure of a man's character is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out.
— Baron Thomas Babington Macauley, English historian and statesman (1800-1859)

Thanks for that - I had a sneaking suspicion my old maths teacher hadn't made that up all by himself...

The Greenwell spider eh? It is undoubtedly one of the most effective spiders extant, although the winged version is often a great deal more successful under certain circumstances, and depending heavily on how it is dressed and fished.

Philip (flyfishwithme) said that, and I did tie it up with a wing, but didn't have as much luck with it. That was the first wing I tied on a wet fly, and Philip showed me how to tie it in the older, rolled style, which personally I prefer to paired slips, but then I am temperamentally unsuited to neatness.

I say I didn't have much luck with the winged, but that is in comparison to the degree of luck I had with the wingless version, particularly tied short shank. I'd chuck it in and 9 times out of 10 a trout would get stuck on the end of it! So, regarding the winged version - didn't fish it much, as survivor bias crept in! (Small stream, wild brownies is my thing btw - though onto grayling now.

I've only started fishing spiders seriously this last year btw... so plenty of time to experiment yet!

Some variations which may be of interest;

http://www.flymphforum.com/phpBB3/viewt ... yles#p1248

Cool post! You should be around for some of the exchanges with Otter, regarding imitative versus suggestive...

Which reminds me - I have something to post about that, regarding a fly I 'invented' last year, that easily surpasses your fifty fish test, and then some! Mind you, I subsequently found out that someone else had thought of it before me - about three hundred years ago...

I'll try to post this evening, if I get time.
cheers,
Good to 'meet' the ghostly apparition.
Andrew.

[GlassJet]

You can find quite a bit of stuff from me on the board here, mainly to do with soft hackles of course, and a lot of other in a few other places,

Still some of my stuff here for instance;

http://www.wildfisher.co.uk/smf/index.php?board=118.520 ( my "handle" there was "Traditionalist"

This may also be of interest as it covers a number of things which still cause a lot of confusion for wet fly men;

http://www.flymphforum.com/phpBB3/viewt ... ?f=5&t=230

some amazing resourses out there - thanks for sifting them!
That last post is fascinating stuff, right up my street... will come back to that when I have more time.
Cheers,
Andrew.

[narcodog]

What a great thing to wake up to this Saturday morning, posts from Mike. I really miss your posts but understand where you are coming from.

Thirty years as a lawman and twenty of those in a small community I prefer to stay at home then go anywhere just to keep from running into folks that really don't care for me.

[tie2fish]

Welcome back, Mike.

[Roadkill]

Welcome back Mike!! Love the new links to Traditionalist posts. It is always fun to read the musings of an old master.