Re: George's thoughts, round two...

[George Booth <booth@frii.com>]

At 06:54 PM 7/17/99 -0500, you wrote:
>What "secret list" are you speaking of George?

Umm, OK, I see this may be a sensitive point. I retract that snide comment.
It was suggested by a now unnanmed person that I join the "secret list"
that was formed for this discussion. Sorry about that. And thank you for
the detailed chronology showing that it is indeed not a secret list and
that many people are supportive of the idea. 

>We have participation here from all over the United States, from Canada, and
>from Peru. I would love to have more input from other countries, but I
>_don't_ ascribe that lack of partication as any indication of a lack of
>interest.

Interest and cudos are a far cry from "Participation" as I found out in my
attempt to create a massive "chain video" of planted aquaria. Two hundred
and fifty (250) aquarists were interested enough to send e-mail or place a
brief, barely legible note ("Me too!") in a stamped envelope but only two
ever took the trouble to "Participate". 

>You continue to be welcome here and I look forward to hearing your input,
>good or bad, as this process continues.

Thanks. I'll try to be more balanced. 

There was some mention of "NO PLASTIC PLANTS!!!". How about plastic
driftwood? How about a plastic photo background of plants? I'm afraid those
are very common. I would suggest that all atttempts to regulate what is
eligible for submission are fraught with peril. 

For example, my 120g tank is glass and has a plastic photo backdrop. You
can barely see it through the plants but it is there adding depth and
filling in the few bare spots. Is that tank out? 

Our other two 100g tanks have solid black rear acrylic, giving an
impression of added depth. Illegal or not? 

I have to side with whoever suggested that any photo of any tank be
allowed. Plastic plants, rockscapes, algae farms, whatever the aquarist
finds attractive. If the judges do not like the overall effect, the score
is reduced. I personally feel that proper plastic plants with proper
"weathering" by algae can look quite nice. I would establish criteria as
the the overall attractiveness of the tank; the WOW! factor. Would you want
this in your living room? Would you pay money to have a tank like that?  

It's rather snobbish to suggest that only "real" aquatic plants can be
used. Since, of course, there are relatively few true aquatic plants (my
perhaps flawed definition would be "plants that only grow underwater"). If
a plant can grow emersed or submersed, is it a true aquatic? If a plant can
survive for X days underwater, does that count? A very slippery slope,
indeed. 
    
Well, it's late and I'm groggy from the fumes eminating from our freshly
refinished hardwood floor.  

George Booth
George Booth, Ft. Collins, Colorado (booth@frii.com)
  NEW! 7/11/99: On-line Aquascping seminar, Part 2. More to come! 
    http://www.frii.com/~booth/AquaticConcepts/

  ------------------
  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