Let me start this by saying that my intention is NOT to open up a giant, mud-slinging debate with this thread. It is my sincere hope that we can all discuss this topic in a calm and non-judgmental fashion. I apologize in advance if this thread turns into a poop-show, and I truly hope that it doesn't. However, I've been wresting with some of these issues a lot lately and I'm curious to get the opinions of others on them.

I'm trying this out primarily in the form of a poll -- never made one before but I think it's the best way to survey this. I'd also be very interested in hear peoples' thoughts on this topic directly, though please please please try to remain civil However, the poll is there mainly because I'm curious to get a feel for the overall proportion of people who do avoid working with the mutations in question. It generally seems like most people work with and accept these morphs, but I'm curious if there's a bit more of a "silent majority/minority" that don't than it appears on the surface.

My primary question is: Do you avoid morphs with known genetic flaws, and if so, which ones? Do you avoid spiders because they have neurologic disease, or do you work with them anyway? Do you avoid caramels because they may produce kinked offspring? Homozygotes with flaws? (Ex; bug-eyed super lessers or kinked/duckbilled super cinnamons?)

If you avoid one morph, but not another, what is the basis of that decision?

If a new morph is produced that is known or suspected to have a given non-lethal flaw, do you believe it should continue to be propagated (either to attempt to breed out the flaw, or because the flaw is perceived as acceptable), or should it be allowed to "go extinct?"

Finally, if you own and work with a mutation with a known flaw, did you know about the flaw before you bought that animal, or did you find out afterward?

Thanks in advance everyone.