Re: AIS: Symposium/soap box

In a message dated 7/16/2002 10:40:38 AM Central Daylight Time, 
koekkoek@mtcnet.net writes:


>   Bill, your response to proposal # 9 sounds like you are thinking the list 
> on the Symposium is just somebody's (or some group's) whim. 

Yes, this is precisely what it is even though it is composed of the 
deliberative selections of accredited judges me thinks (grandfathered, 
schooled, active, retired, motivated, non motivated, opinionated, 
hybridizers, non hybridizers, growers, estate owners, condo dwellers, 
knowledgeable, not so knowlegeable, status seekers, knowledge seekers and/or 
other) all good people.

 But please note what the criteria are for being listed on the symposium.  
These 
> are given on page one of the symposium ( don't have mine any more because I 
> sent it in before I would forget, so I can't mention what they are) but 
> they are very specific, certainly not just some person's individual tastes 
> being reflected.
 
> Also there was a comment to the effect that voters rank their choices.  We 
> don't, of course.  Any ranking is produced by the number of votes obtained 
> by a particular cultivar.

I do understand this part of the process. I expect my previous comments apply 
here too. Except I might add we are ranking the judges choices when we tally 
and record the votes.

>     I would hate to have to do the counting if there were a completely open, 
> write-in ballot, no matter how many choices each person might be allowed.  
> It's a big enough thing to do such  for a smaller group like the Siberian 
> Society, but on a national scale that would be rather daunting.  Even for 
> the RVP, who does have other things to do, that would take an awful lot of 
> extra time.

I have the greatest of empathy for those who serve. If the objective is to 
produce a consensus of the AIS membership, counting/compiling is necessary. 
If the objective is to rank the selections of irises preferred by judges what 
we are doing is definitely easier. It does seem untenable that doing as we 
are could/should/would be construed as a consensus of the most popular irises 
among AIS members. Or, could be legitimately promoted by the AIS as such.

>     Finally (for now, at least, just to leave myself a opening to talk on 
> this subject again :-)  )  though many of us like beardless or other types 
> of bearded iris, we should keep in mind the fact that, whether it's one's 
> own preference, the tall bearded are the iris of choice by most iris 
> growers.  The numbers introduced, the amounts seen in gardens, the numbers 
> ordered would, I'm sure, bear that out.  It's probably not as one-sidedly 
> that way as it once was, as things like medians or Siberians become better 
> known, but I'd bet that even in any kind of open poll in which every single 
>  AIS member voted (not just median- or Siberian-lovers stacking the deck by 
> voting en masse while not all others did) the list of 100 top choices would 
> still be mostly, though certainly not all, tall bearded.

Your point here is well taken. The AIS should distinguish this list as being 
bearded iris. If not, it should endeavor to produce such a ranking.

>     That will probably raise some hackles, but it's not meant to do so, just 
> be reminders that there is, after all, some sense in the Symposium having 
> been constructed the way it is.  I don't mean to say it can't be improved, 
> but let's not be too ready to throw the baby out with the bath water.
> Arnold (who is cooking in the heat once again, as summer has returned to 
> the upper midwest)

I like babies, thinking them much like symposiums, which given time, mature 
into better entities.

Thanks and always appreciative of intelligent discourse,
Bill Burleson 7a/b
Old South Iris Society



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Save on REALTOR Fees
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Xw80LD/h1ZEAA/Ey.GAA/2gGylB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index