Would someone like to write a bio about me?

[entrancedbymyGCC]

In general it is a pretty good bio, and keeps the reader's interest despite its length. You might want to develop a short form version for use elsewhere, 1/5 to 1/10 the length, but I think the length is fine for this use. You did a good job.

WARNING, I'm a compulsive editor, so here are a bunch of detailed comments you can do with as you wish. They are meant to be positive suggestions, and you can of course ignore anything you don't agree with.

"Shooting birds with his Canon" -- did a bit of a double-take on that one, must have made a real mess! LOL

I wouldn't say you "tried" to capture flight with the camera, I'd say you DID it. This goes for the whole piece, don't be shy to say what you accomplished. If it sounds too strong, maybe "he made it a goal to capture..."

I wouldn't say "Merely" photographing birds, I'd say "Photographing birds".

I think the section on why you bought Spock would benefit from some emotional content. It says you didn't want a "typical mammalian pet" but why you wanted a pet at all doesn't seem compelling...WHY a pet at all? WHY did the bird idea resonate enough to pursue it? And why name a bird after Spock's Beard, just your fav at the time or ????

I'd be real cautious about referencing birdtricks.com by name and there is more detail there than I think really adds to the bio. I'd shorten it to something along the lines "Micheal tried various things including an extensive DVD course ordered online, but nothing really clicked" and leave it at that. I'd focus on what ideas and techniques didn't work, not on the specific origin of them. On the other hand, the plight of the new owner faced with getting the bird out of the cage vs. teaching tricks is well taken and well described and, personally, I'd give that more prominence in the paragraph.

I'd title the next section "Kili" rather than "Kili Phase", as the latter implies something that was of transient importance instead of a lasting bond.

OK, now we have a positive reference to birdtricks... I'd either make it a sort of formal endorsement of which they are aware and link to the site, or genericise the references, but in either event think about how birdtricks' lawyer might read it. Note there is a fluctuating tense in this paragraph. " Has gotten" instead of "had".

"Duke" rather than "Duke Phase"...
Some grammer here: "Around the same time as getting Duke, Michael began to make greater efforts at socializing Kili to other people to reduce aggression and one person birdedness. " I believe it would be more correct to put this, "At about the same time Duke was purchased, Micheal began to work with Kili to improve her socialization. She had become something of a one-person bird and showed some agression to other people". It also might be a good idea to lead up to this by mentioning it in the "Kili" section.

"Also featured" not "Also features".

I note this section is not really just about Duke... may be retitle it? "The flock expands", "Kili meets Duke?" something that captures what the section is about, which is the overall expansion of your parrot involvement and the things you did differently with Duke.

"Flight Phase" maybe "Taking Flight"?

Again, I think you want to be very careful about negative specific statements in "print". Unless there is a very good reason to name names and you are cool with the risks, it may not be worth it.

By all means put in a link to the ParrotForum! and capitalize as you do on the actual site.

The mention of Duke in conjunction with severing ties with Birdtricks sounds ominous. Are you implying what it sounds like? Did I miss something?

"Advanced Flight Phase" "Advanced Flight"

Mona sort of just appears here in the middle of the bio. Since her intro appears above the bio it is kind of OK, but you may want to have the bio stand alone and thus introduce her a bit.

The wording against the breeder you didn't buy from is again rather harsh and by-name. To say that the breeder originally contacted had a policy of clipping babies very young and that's not what you wanted is fine, but this is fairly condemning in tone --- which may be what you really mean, but it's safer to promote what you favor than to use pointed language with respect to people by name in print. It's just my opinion, of course.

Maybe segment off the last paragraph to highlight it "Truman joins the Flock" or something.



WHY did Michael begin considering another parrot? What would a new parrot add to his life?

[Michael]

Wow, this is very helpful. Clearly some things were mere mistakes while others I didn't consider in that regard. I won't be able to work on specific changes until tomorrow, but I just wanted to mention or ask a few things in the meantime.

When I began reading this, I was dreading what you'd have to say but really your criticism was just helpful and considerate.

First off, the Introduction by Mona is meant to serve as the condensed version of the bio. Basically "if you don't feel like reading the whole thing, just take my word for it that he's good" is supposed to be the message. I don't know (from an outside perspective) how compelling it is but that's the idea. Or to stimulate someone to read the bio in full.

Do you think the double take with Canon phrase is overboard and should be replaced?

Why is it a big deal to mention birdtricks by name? I'm trying to state my influences but also show how I've changed over time as well. Basically it's a 3 phase progression. First I learned from BirdTricks stuff, then I wrote for them and developed my hand at parrot training/writing, and then finally I broke off and have headed down my own path (theparrotforum, trainedparrot). I'm not slandering them nor really promoting them. I'm just trying to state matter of factly that I learned from them and contributed to their products for a little while. If I hadn't blogged for them and developed some stuff, I probably would have never started forum or my own blog. In fact I started kiliparrot channel specifically for the purpose of sharing videos of Kili on that blog. Later on as I developed a following of my own, I decided to work alone. I did have my share of problems with their training methods and business but I don't mention them.

You said Duke's death was ominous... I'm not sure what you want me to change there. Basically what happened was that we had some stylistic disagreements, Duke was sick and died, I was depressed for a while and didn't feel like writing anything, I wanted to focus on my forum and my own articles, and they had picked up a new blogger so this was a convenient time to make my exit. I don't really want to include all that but what kind of change are you suggesting?

I didn't include anything about Truman because that still has to get filled in. In fact I had written the bio just before or just after I got him so there was no relevance at the time. The blog itself should chronicle my adventures with him and eventually I will have more to add to the bio.

What kind of problems am I looking at for mentioning people and companies by name? Is it just a case of they might get pissed off at me and say nasty things or can I actually have serious legal problems? What's the worst they can do? Ask me to stop mentioning them?

Thanks for your help, this will help me make the bio better and more appealing. Afterall, it's written for everyone else and folks like you.

[entrancedbymyGCC]

Hi, I'm glad it was useful! I'm going to be a bit terse because I'm on my iPod ( the bird being asleep where my computer is) and I don't type nearly as fast this way.

First off, the Introduction by Mona is meant to serve as the condensed version of the bio. Basically "if you don't feel like reading the whole thing, just take my word for it that he's good" is supposed to be the message.

I think it does work in the context of this site but someday you may be asked to give a talk or demo and will need a condensed version for the program. Also I think the exercise of paring to bare bones is good to hone the message of the longer piece.

iDo you think the double take with Canon phrase is overboard and should be replaced?

I actually kind of liked it, but it is a little risky as it is early in the bio. I personally would probably keep it, but a lot of experts would tell you not to.

The IPod interface is giving me fits and kittens with this. I will try to get a few more thoughts in and will edit to clean it up tomorrow.

About libel-- I don't really know how serious the risk is and I'm not even sure how the courts are treating blogs ... If you have a lawyer friend it might not hurt to find Pythia muchrisk there is.

Your explanation if your relationship with birdtricks in this post is IMO much clearer than in the bio and also not particularly worrying. Maybe it's a case of too much detail obscuring the message.

About Duke -- I had recalled he had gotten sick but something about the way that section was phrased made me think maybe he had died as the result of an accident related to those methods! I didn't think that was the case. If you like, I can suggest sample rephrasing tomorrow but it may also be clear when you reread that part.

That's all I have for now. Oh did you like the "manual of parrot behavior"? I noticed it among your reading and I had just ordered a copy from Amazon.

[Michael]

Oh did you like the "manual of parrot behavior"? I noticed it among your reading and I had just ordered a copy from Amazon.

Sorry, forgot to answer this last time. It's pretty good but far from a must read for all parrot owners. It's a collection of scientific essays written by medium to low end scientists about an unrelated array of parrot topics. It's mostly very cut and dry and quite scientific. Yet many of the essays are based on secondary research rather than primary. I would say the book overall is 99% useless in application to your pet but for someone really interested in science and parrots it's pretty informative. So for you it's probably ok but I wouldn't particularly recommend it to the average companion parrot owner.