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
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

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Registering

Gerry/Bob O'Neill wrote:
> At 10:32 PM 9/20/99 -0400, you wrote:
>   The major battle going on here is not about registration.  Sometimes,
> >it is possible to agree that an end result is worthwhile, and disagree
> about how
> >to get there and at what cost.
> >
> OK, I'll bite. Just exactly what IS the end result we want here? It sounds
> like we want to:
>     1) Junk the IAC
>     2) Junk the Preferred Growers Program
>     3) Junk any committees of any kind
>     4) Junk the present administration of the AHS
>     5) Junk the AHS (or at least turn it back (?) into a social club with
> annual conventions where we party, party, party and all live happily ever
> after)
I believe, that, as the problems that need to be delt with by the AHS,
are of a wide geographical area, and the "needs " of gardeners that use
Hostas, are equally widespread, what must to be done is the following.
1.  The process that is used to selsct the "board" needs carefull
review.  They are the policy setters.
2.  The primary problem in most of the "disputes" I see, is the lack of
communications.  Understood ( by all) channels need to be established. 
This could be done , at least in part, using local societies.
3.  The board, which is supposed to be our representitives (Jim Wilkins
words)should take to the "board Meeting"the thoughts and needs of all. 
I can find little evidence that they are asking for this impute, or in
fact welcome it.  They are about to have a meeting in early Oct.  How
will they know what to discuss?
4.  Before implimenting "new policy" the general membership should be
given a chance to review such, and "voice" opnions.  I am sure if this
had been done with the IAC list, and the perfered growers , a better
more relistic program could have been initiated.  
5.  The "board" needs to propose a change to the Bi-laws, that would
allow for a vote on major issues, from all AHS members, not just those
attending a convention "business meeting". This should be then brought
up as a motion from the chair, at the next convention "business meeting"

There are many smaller issues, but I think if these "problems" were
resolved, we would have a better organization.
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index