Core Values after a Walk in the Park

["James Purchase" <jpurch@interlog.com>]

It's remarkable how invigorating a long walk in the evening sunlight can be.
Now, with the lights of downtown Toronto twinkling on for another night and
shining in through the window of my study, things don't seem half as
complicated as they did just a few hours ago.

I apologize to everyone for putting you through the process of me "thinking
out loud", but I live by myself and my fish won't talk back.

As I noted earlier, the comments and suggestions that have been coming in
over the past few days make it clear that on the major points or our "core
values", pretty much everyone is in close agreement or at least willing to
reach a mutually acceptable compromise.

George was right when he said this whole thing started because of a
discussion of Aquascaping in North America vs. how it is practiced in other
parts of the world. I remember it well, and have it archived in case anyone
still doubts it. That discussion did not revolve around gardening
underwater, it was about the stylistic differences in both practice and
approach among hobbyists in different parts of the world.

So, the first core issue IS aquascaping, not necessarily JUST aquatic
gardening. We are all primarily interested, I think, in freshwater
aquariums, so I don't think anyone minds narrowing our focus to the
freshwater aquascape. Should a beautiful brackish tank or a wonderful
paludarium be submitted, it wouldn't bother me, and I don't see us wasting
any more time arguing over it - we can accept them. This is not a general
"fish show" or a "photo contest". Our focus always was, and shall remain, on
the issue of aquascaping.

When the initial discussion on the APD turned from aquascapes in general to
actually discussing comparing them, I suggested using the Web as our
"gallery". Everyone here is in agreement over that, and as long as we
arrange things in such a manner that we are open to and capable of accepting
mail-in entries, Karen and the AGA are not likely to mind either.

Regarding AGA involvement - I'm sorry but the issue remains closed. I have
spoken to George privately and explained my reasons, and I assure you that I
do have them. Of those reasons I can tell you that having this affair taken
seriously by 1.) the press; 2.) the aquarium industry; 3.) potential
"heavyweight" Judges are very high on my list of priorities and I feel we
stand a much better chance of having all three if we are WITH the AGA than
would likely be the case should we be without that organization. The final
key is of course 4.) the aquarium hobbist. If we can line up numbers one
thru three, number four should hopefully beat a path to our door.

I can also assure you all that I have no hidden adjenda here for my
preference that this will hopefully be an AGA event. Within the aquarium
hobby, I am a nobody. If I started knocking on corporate doors looking for
donations of prizes for a "Web based aquascaping show" hosted by James
Purchase, Esq. of Toronto, Canada, they would fall all over themselves
laughing, after they shoved me out the door. Likewise the major aquarium
hobby magazines - "James who???". I can imagine sending Horst Kipper an
e-mail and asking that he act as a Judge for our little event. I'd be glad I
don't wear lederhosen!

Receiving the backing and the endorsement of the AGA should give us the
stamp of approval necessary to be taken seriously where it matters first.

The word used to initially describe the event was contest, and that is
unfortunate. My initial idea was more of a Showcase. We have thrashed
through that issue until we are all blue in the face, and we all finally
concede that it is BEST if we have aspects of both.

The SHOWCASE should be open to ALL Freshwater Aquascapes. We can worry about
categorising them for display purposes once we get the submissions, that's
no sweat.

All submitted enteries shall be SHOWCASED on the Web and we will advertise
accordingly.

We ran into major problems however, over the issue of the contest. What to
include, what to exclude, how to Judge, who to Judge, should we weight the
judging process or not. Maybe you didn't run into as many problems over this
issue as I did, but you all saw the problems I have been having with it.

Some advocated restricting the Contest to planted aquariums, others
advocated keeping it open to all; someone suggested that we put a bias spin
on the judging to favour planted tanks over all other types. This last point
seemed to gather a bit of momentum, at least in the comments that I have cut
and pasted into my little secret archive here (I've got it all, and your
names too....hehehehe)

But I had and still have a major problem with preconceived notions of
Judging. If we are going to hold a contest, I feel that we should get judges
who can exercise their own opinions within possibly reasonable guidelines
(along the lines of "it should be pleasing to the eye..." and not "the
substrate surface shall be covered at least 70% by plants").

We also have a major problem in arriving at ANY comprehensive and all
inclusive definition of just what constitutes a "planted tank". Remember the
"Rift Lake Cichlid rock aquacape" suggesiton, where it is just  algae
covered rocks with _maybe_ a solitary clump of Vallisneria? It could be
incredibly beautiful as an "aquascape", but the "bleach brigade" from the
APD would have their Javex bottles out before you could say stop. So if we
can't arrive at a suitable definition, why bother even trying?

Going back to core values, if we accept that the focus of this event is
aquascaping, then there is no way on God's good Earth that we can
legitimatly restrict the Contest portion to just tanks that _we_ all like. I
have finally come to the conclusion that as there is no simple, easy way to
exclude ANY aquascape, we shouldn't even TRY to do so.

Likewise with judging - if we can't agree on what a "planted aquarium" is,
how can we bias the Judging in favour of it? Give the Judges guidelines, to
be sure, or at least select Judges who are likely to have a good idea of
what a really nice aquarium _can_ look like, and then sit back and let them
do their jobs. Let the chips fall where they may.

I say this in full recognition of my former harping on making sure we were
in-line with core AGA values. However, the posted "Purpose" of the AGA says
absolutely NOTHING about aquascaping. Nada, zip, ziltch. If the AGA, as an
official body hasn't felt it necessary or possibly even desirable to place
"Aquascaping" into their own core set of values, perhaps I have been wasting
too much time and energy worrying about it for them.

So, to sum up, _my_ personal preference for a set of "common goals" could
possible be summarized and stated as follows:

1. This event is a Showcase and Competition of Freshwater Aquascapes, open
to aquarists from all over the world. It is inclusive of attractive displays
of any type. It is not a fish show nor a photography show. The focus of the
event is on aquascaping in freshwater aquariums.

2. Entries may consist of hard copy photographs, slides or transparencies,
or electronic images which have not been artificially altered other than in
brightness, tone or gamma. (this might need some work). Submissions may be
made via e-mail or using regular mail.

3. All submitted entries shall be Showcased on the Web-site and (possibly) a
CD-ROM, which will be made available to the entrants and the general public
at the end of the event for a nominal charge.

4. Entrants may, should they wish, request that their submission be excluded
from consideration in the Contest portion of the event.

5. Judging of the Contest portion of the event, by an independent group of
experienced Aquarists, shall be free from bias of any kind. Judges are to be
provided with general guidelines only and expected to exercise their own
good judgement in making their decisions. The decisions of the judges, in
inclusion/exclusion of any entry and on their choices of winners, is final.

Whew! Does anyone have anything to add/adjust/discuss on points 1 through 5
? (and please, let's just stick to the common goals. My editorializing can
go without comment.) We can perhaps focus my points with your input and then
move to voting on them. The core values, like the name issue, should be
democratically done.

James Purchase
Toronto
AGA member

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