I think people here have risen to the challenge of answering your many questions as responsibly and generously as anyone might reasonably expect. How many have you thanked?
And yes, I reiterate that some of the responsibility for your own education lies with you.
AMW
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean A. Zera <zera@umich.edu>
To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Jan 1, 2011 1:46 pm
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Spec-X?
God forbid that anyone would try to learn something from other people
on this forum, instead of earning that knowledge themselves.
Quoting C*@aol.com:
>
> This is what I think:
>
> There is nothing the least bit unusual that a classification system
> of anything would need to be, or benefit from,being refined over time.
> Change is simply a positive response to ongoing thought, and may be
> necessitated by the need to refine the system, or because that which
> is being classified is changing, or because our understanding of
> things changes. This is certainly not only the case of the AIS
> system, it is also the case in the botanical world, rather
> notoriously so.
>
> There is no reason whatsoever that if an iris meets the criteria for
> IB and also a SPEC-X then it cannot be classified as both, or either.
>
> There is no reason to think that if one seedling is classed one way
> its sibling---which it may or may not resemble closely--must also be
> classified the same way. They are discrete and unique botanical
> entities.
>
> There is no good reason to reclassify things every time something
> changes. People who have an interest in these issues keep up with
> the changes. People who don't keep up with them but who care about
> the issues need to educate themselves. Nothing in life is static,
> especially information.
>
> The purpose of the AIS classification system is to effect cogent
> communication. It is an attempt by the collective to derive and
> achieve concord towards an accurate descriptive vocabulary to be
> used in discussions of a broad, numerous, various and ever expanding
> body of unique cultivars reflecting highly personal tastes and
> responses to a collective aesthetic vision which rewards
> distinctiveness. It also defines what at any given time is
> understood to be the ideal of a certain class, so that that ideal
> may be understood and discussed, as a standard for evaluation and
> comparison, and as a goal.
>
> This is not a compost heap, it is a quasi-casuistic dungpile. My
> suggestion to anyone who seeks enlightenment here is: Read the
> resources that AIS has published for you; buy or borrow the Check
> Lists so you can see what they actually contain before carrying on
> in an angry and paranoid manner; prioritize owning the basic
> literature beyond the AIS publications and read that too; abandon
> the idea that there is some boogeyman in the rainbow drama, and base
> your education and opinions on verifiable facts.
>
> AMW
> -------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
