Re: hosta-open DIGEST V1 #400
- Subject: Re: hosta-open DIGEST V1 #400
- From: email@example.com
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 23:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
>First, you liken the situation in the NALS to what is occurring in
>the hosta society. What situation is occurring in the hosta society?
I'm not refering to any specific situtation, but when I see two new
hosta related journals/magazines appearing, I wonder why. It seems to
me that the hosta society isn't filling the needs of its members if
its members have to go elsewere to get the information it wants. My
observation is that the amateur plant societies tend to cater to the
social interests of its members and tend to discourage the scientific
and technical side, even if it isn't offical policy. What I see as a
potential problem is a significent splinting of the current and
potential members between several different groups such that all of
them can't reach their potential.
Persoanlly, I really don't care that much one way or the other. I'm
still looking for a reason to join the hosta society. I'm not much
interested in the social aspects of the society. I find host-open to
be much more interesting then reading the journal.
>Your friend Ben sometimes complains that the Journal doesn't publish
>enough of his research,
Ben's problem is that his English is terrible and he won't accept help
in editing what he wants to say. Ben could make some significent
contributions to the Journal if he could resolve some personality
>I think it's apparent from your past postings that you're not a big
>fan of the plant societies, you've mentioned several times that you
>don't belong to the AHS, and you don't seem to be happy with the AHS
>or the NALS either.
Sometime during the winter when I have the time I go down to Charlie
Purtymun's place and read the Hosta Journals. For the most part I
don't find that much that really interests me. The garden visiting
articles and articles about the national meetings might interest some
people, but it's not what I'm looking for.
Both the daylily and lily societies have their problems, some of which
aren't much different then problems the hosta society faces. One
thing I do find refreashing in the hosta society is that there seems
to be a fair number of people who are willing to write articles. The
problem with the lily society is that it is stuck at a very low
membership level and the leadership hierarchy isn't doing much to
prevent any further loss. The problem with the daylily society is
mainly personality based and a very poor journal with little desire to
improve the journal. The problem I see with the hosta society is that
it is going through some growing pains as it matures with some
personality clashes as one of the catalysts for these problems. The
hosta society has some great potential for growth since hostas are
>As you can see from his table of contents, most of the material in
>his new journal is written by Ed himself....And, he will be
>publishing it twice yearly.
The question is how long can one person single-handedly carry on such
a journal of fairly technical material.
>I will say that Ed is not known for being concise. That was a big
>part of the Board decision to accept summary articles only and not
>the full collection of research data. The AHS cannot afford to give
>Ed the kind of space he wants for his articles, and he does not want
>them shortened in any way, but printed exactly as he sends them.
I agree that scientific and technical articles in the Hosta Journal
need to be written in a more informal, summary style then if they were
being published in a peer reveiwed scientific journal. It takes a
little effort to write such articles, but not impossible. I think Ed
is being somewhat unreasonable if he wants them printed exactly like
he send them. It seems to me that the Hosta Society loses something
when information like this can't be published in the journal
regardless of the specific reason.
To sign-off this list, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN