hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re:Preferred Growers, Preferred Scientists, etc.

On Wed August 25, 1999 Clarence Falstad wrote privately to Jim Hawes:

<Are you finally agreeing with me that there are probably only two cells
layers in hosta meristems?

BTW if you haven't heard, Jim Wilkins is forming a task force to study
the registered/unregistered debate so it can adequately be looked at
from every angle. I am sure that if you write Jim he will even accept
you on the committee.

Another BTW the article about cell layers and the celadon effect has
already been published by Warren I. Pollock. If you use any of his
previously published material make sure you credit him.

As for the fight (debate) on the "Preferred Growers" please feel free to
do so. I understand much of it may be a dead issue but if you insist in
arguing some point so you can feel better, it is perfectly alright with

C.H. Falstad>

Dear Mr VP,

Thank you for your private correspondence to me. I am making it public
so that those concerned will be better informed regarding the
information you have provided..

I assume your correspondence is in regard to my post of Tuesday, August
23, 1999. Among all of the spontaneous posts which made comments on
mine(perhaps there were 25 or 30 of them), your post to me was the only
one expressing some support (between the lines)  to the AHS policy under
discussion. Most posts agreed with my observations and had comments of
their own to strengthen those I had suggested.... that the new AHS
policies (collectively, one policy) are bad policies which will do harm
to the AHS.

Even your post expressing the view that "much of it is a dead issue" (to
use your words), suggests the matter is resolved or settled. "It"?, the
matter?, the policy? the debate?, the discussion which was tabled at the
Convention? WHAT IS A DEAD ISSUE? Your abiguous statement leaves much to
be explained from you or from anyone on  the Board.

I prefer not to comment on your amusing attempt to badger me personally
about un-related issues, i.e.
1.How many tissue layers exist in a hosta meristem?
2.Suggesting that I request to be allowed to serve on Jim Wilkins'
taskforce to study the "debate", whatever that means.
3.Your advise that , in case I write an article about celadon, to make
sure I do not plagiarize Warren I. Pollock.
4. Your permission which allows me to continue in the debate if I wish.

The overall tone of your private post is so  amusing in your amateur
attempts to be insulting, that I have circultated it to others reading
comments on this subject. What is lacking  here by AHS officials is the
failure to see the truth of this matter as it truly is. THERE IS NO

Please provide some examples of proof that I am wrong. What are you
saying when you say "much of it may be a dead issue?" WHAT is a dead
issue?  I await an explanation. Until the policy is a dead issue, I
intend to continue to  beat it with a stick until it is dead.

Jim Hawes
AHS Member with only one vote which I intend to exercise appropriately

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index