Points/Opinions

["Jennifer Glover" <jglover@autometric.com>]

> I question using an AGA member as a judge, not because I don't think that
> there aren't any experts in the organization, but more due to the fact that
> we probably won't let Judges submit enteries, and I don't want to exclude
> any AGA members automatically.

Why not have the judges submit an entry for the showcase, but not be entered in 
the
contest?  Most of the people that are being considered for judges will have 
beautiful
tanks in their homes, so why not let them show them off?  Most of the intent of 
this
showcase/contest was to produce public pictures of nice planted aquariums, so 
why not
encourage that?  I can't see Karen/others being peeved that they didn't win 
first
place :)  Most people just want recognition, exposure, or to educate/help 
others.

As for the name, if you haven't already made a decision, I like 
AGA International Aquascaping ShowCase
with 
AGA International Aquascaping Contest
as a runner up.  Though these names do bring up the question about whether the
aquariums have to have live plants.  The name does not seem to imply that the 
tanks
have to be planted tanks.  Just a thought.

As for the categories, I like having a size category.  It makes sense, because I
can't see comparing a six gallon tank with a 120G tank.  They are too 
different.  I
like the categories tiny, small, medium, large, and extra-large/huge.  The only
problem with size categories is the metric conversions.  I am not that familiar 
with
all the different ways tanks are sized to know how the categories would be 
affected
by standard sizes in America(gallons/inches) and the metric system (liters/cm). 
 How
about Tiny (6G and under), Small (7-20 Gallons), Medium (21-55 Gallons), Large 
(56-90
Gallons), and Ex-large (91G +).

I also like the idea of a biotope category as a biotope aquarium is really 
different
than the aquascaped/unnatural aquascape (Dutch/Orient) type aquariums. 
Unfortunately, how does a person rate these kind of tanks for aquascaping?  Not 
many
river beds are all that attractive.  Would the rating be based on how 
accurately the
riverbed/lake bed of that biotope is recreated?

As for categories, I would second (third?  fourth?) the idea of the superior,
average, etc. categories for judging.  It will defeat the competitive urge of 
some
people to win at all costs.  Why doctor a photograph when it will still be 
judged the
same?  The recognition will be based on how good the aquarium is, not on how 
good
everyone else's aquariums are.  (I am letting my American values of having 
everyone
be a winner show here)

I know we haven't discussed what the entries will have accompanying the 
pictures, but
I would like to see web address or emails, if the people entering have them.  If
someone has more info, but doesn't want to send in a twenty page dissertation, 
it
will provide a means to share it.

Jennifer Glover
Waldorf, MD, USA
  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@aquatic-gardeners.org
  with "unsubscribe aga-contest" in the body of the message.
  To subscribe to the digest version, add "subscribe aga-contest-digest"
  in the same message.
  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-contest