RE: AIS: Symposium/soap box #9
- Subject: RE: [iris-talk] AIS: Symposium/soap box #9
- From: M* R*
- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:49:22 -0700
Laurie, I agree with you. (Everyone: please re-read the e-mail following
this one) Not only are many knowledgeable iris growers not judges, but even
a fool can have a favorite and for that fool it is a valid favorite. Of
course, some people even like Mesmerizer and Thornbird, so there is
certainly no accounting for taste. If people without carefully trained
perceptions were allowed to freely vote their whims, iris like M and T might
win awards.
It does seem odd to believe that only people with excess time and money to
travel to "judges' training" opportunities are qualified to predetermine our
favorites. But then, the people with excess time and money are also those
who make the rules deciding whose votes should count. So nice of them to
offer to let us help rank their favorites for them.
Actually, I do appreciate all the efforts of AIS officers, etc., who are
undoubtedly doing their best to do what they think is the best possible job
in an imperfect world. So I do thank you all, but still appreciate the
opportunity to make valid complaints. Only by carefully considering all
viewpoints can a true 'bast and fairest" decision be distilled.
John Reeds
> From: laurief[SMTP:laurief@paulbunyan.net]
> Subject: Re: [iris-talk] AIS: Symposium/soap box #9
>
> >being a fully accredited judge
> >usually does mean a higher standard for evaluating iris
>
> I would expect this to be true as a general rule, but I still don't see
> the application of this higher standard as necessary or even appropriate
> for the Symposium. The trained and accredited judges can and should be
> assigned the privilege of granting official AIS awards to worthy irises.
> Their higher standards for evaluating irises makes them the only
> reasonable body for making award decisions. However, we are not
> discussing official awards here. We are discussing a POPULARITY poll,
> for Pete's sake! Why is my non-judge *opinion* of which irises I like
> best less valid that an accredited judge's *opinion* of which irises
> (s)he likes best? And how can a poll that so severely limits what is in
> actuality an immense collection of potential iris candidates possibly be
> considered an accurate representation of what the AIS membership at large
> considers the most popular irises worldwide? The short answer - it can't.
>
> I understand that tabulating write-in votes is a considerably more
> daunting task than merely tabulating a set number of candidates, but the
> diminished workload results in an inevitable diminishment of valid
> results. Of course, I'm stuck on the fact that the Symposium is touted
> (on the official AIS website, anyway) as identifying the 100 Most Popular
> Irises, which it very possibly does not and can not in its current
> format. Perhaps if it were renamed "The 100 Most Popular of the Award
> Winning TB Irises", the qualifiers would offer appropriate warning of the
> very restricted nature of the poll results.
>
> I'll tell you, with all the death in my iris beds this year, I am one AIS
> member whose opinion is definitely NOT being represented in the
> Symposium. I don't care how many accredited judges grant whichever awards
> to certain irises. If those irises can't survive in my garden, they
> aren't popular with me! If you want to know which irises made my
> popularity list, you're going to have to ask me ... not tell me.
>
> Just had to let that out.
>
> Laurie
>
>
> -----------------
> laurief@paulbunyan.net
> http://www.geocities.com/lfandjg/
> zone 3b northern MN - clay soil
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free $5 Love Reading
Risk Free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/NsdPZD/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/2gGylB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
