Re: bias?

 

Is the AIS biased in favor of the bearded irises?  Let's take a sampling of votes cast by its judges for Awards of Merit in 2010.

5,169 votes cast for TB.
1,256 votes cast for SDB
172 votes cast SPEC-X (29 for bearded + 143 for beardless).
135 votes cast for SPEC (18 for bearded + 117 for beardless).
231 votes cast for Louisianas.
62 votes cast for Californicae.
176 votes cast for Spuria.

Tallying all the bearded votes vs all beardless...
8,361 votes cast for bearded (including those votes in SPEC and SPEC-X category).
1,333 votes cast for beardless.


Want to compare Honorable Mentions?
11,742 votes cast for bearded.
2,243 votes cast for beardless.


Is this evidence of bias?  Draw your own conclusions from the data.


But let me ask you this... if AIS can't do a better job to promote growing different kinds of irises to its own judges.... then what hope does AIS have to achieve this mission with the public at large?  There's a white elephant in the room.  ;-)


Dennis in Cincinnati



On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Tom Waters <i*@telp.com> wrote:
It's not at all obvious to me that the AIS or its membership are "biased" in favor of the bearded irises. This has been tossed out as though it were a simple fact, when actually I think it is very much a matter of subjective perspective.

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