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


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds!  Get rates
of 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Ongoing APR* and no annual fee!
Apply NOW!

In a message dated 8/31/00 9:40:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
wmoores@watervalley.net writes:

<< Donald mentioned poor-growing symposium winners.  I think 
 some of the poor-growing TB's would be voted off if the ballot were 
 all-inclusive.  There are much better LA's, arilbreds, Siberian, 
 medians, etc. than some of the TB's on the list.  I wouldn't suggest 
 the Symposium ballot be used as a 'want list'  because of the poor 
 growers on it and because it isn't all-inclusive. >>

     What I think we may need is a runoff ballot in addition to the current 
system.  Take the top vote getters under the current system, and combine that 
into an all inclusive runoff vote.  

Mark A. Cook
Dunnellon, Florida.  

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