Re: Re: SPEC-X
- Subject: Re: Re: SPEC-X
- From: R* P* <r*@embarqmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:02:04 -0500 (EST)
|
I would not expect someone who does not like Tbs to see when a plant that could be registered as a TB is distinctly different from the rest of that class. Making fun of others opinions, reflects ignorance rather than sophistication. I might suggest That the SPEC-X definition be removed from SIGNAs purvue since so many in SIGNA do not seem to have a wide knowledge of Irises, either hybrids or species. And in its present form the class requires a very broad understanding which it seems is not something that they choose to gain.
Are you serious?!?? I just fell out of my chair laughing! On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Chuck Chapman <i*@aim.com> wrote:
|
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re: SPEC-X
- From: &* A* Z* &*
- Re: Re: SPEC-X
- References:
- Re: Re: SPEC-X
- From: D* K* &*
- Re: Re: SPEC-X
- Prev by Date: Russian irises
- Next by Date: RE: Re: SPEC-X
- Previous by thread: Re: Re: SPEC-X
- Next by thread: Re: Re: SPEC-X