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: Decadence

Ditto.  This shouldn't be difficult to implement in this electronic age.  That said, it would take some work and one or two volunteers to get it done.  And more work to revise the judge's handbook.  Anyone going to volunteer to head the committee?

Maureen Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-iris@hort.net [mailto:owner-iris@hort.net] On Behalf Of Char Holte
Sent: January 9, 2012 12:50 PM
To: iris@hort.net; iris-photos@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [iris] Decadence

I agree with Tom's evaluation.  All the way!  We have two small hybridizers here in my area who do formidable work but get little recognition.  I can't tell you how great their work is but if you see their work you know right away they know what they are doing.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-iris@hort.net [mailto:owner-iris@hort.net] On Behalf Of DWiris@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 11:22 AM
To: iris@hort.net
Subject: Re: [iris] Decadence

Hi Tom,
Your suggestions make a lot of sense.
Dorothy Willott
In a message dated 1/8/2012 9:43:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, irises@telp.com writes:

> So,  I'll go back to my previous question, why does any iris with 
> obvious  problems climb the award ladder?

Hi Dana. It's long been my opinion  that the single greatest problem with the awards system is that it simply  *counts* the number of judges who vote for an iris, rather than capturing  the average assessment of all judges who are familiar with the iris.  Suppose an iris is evaluated by 100 judges in different regions, all of  whom are impressed enough to vote for it. Now suppose another iris is  evaluated by 500 judges around the country, and for 400 of them it does  not do well at all. But for the remaining 100 (who perhaps live in the  similar climate conditions), it is impressive enough to vote for. These  are two very different things, but the two irises will both receive 100  votes and be treated the same by the awards system. Irises bred by popular  hybridizers have a big advantage, and not just because of "politics", but  because the irises from popular hybridizers are grown by more people, and  an iris grown by a large number will get more votes than an iris grown by  only a few, even if just a fraction of those growing it actually rate it  highly.

I would prefer a system where judges rated each iris on a scale  (1 to 5, say), and awards given to irises with the highest average rating  from the judges who actually evaluated that iris. This would address so  many problems, and it could be easily tweaked to achieve other worthy  goals, such as requiring a high average rating from judges in different  climate areas.

Tom Waters   

Telperion Oasis ~  www.telp.com/irises    

Cuyamungue, New Mexico, USA (zone  5/6)   

To  sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the message text  UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement