Re: Misc.

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

Karen's further comments regarding an upper limit on the total number of
entries do ultimately make sense to me - especially as this is the first
time we have tried this. While I would hate to have to turn down a beautiful
but late arriving entry, I guess we do have a responsibility to ALL of our
possible entrants to handle this in as time efficient a manner as possible.
And I'd hate to have to be the one to tell the judges that they were
expected to do detailed reviews of 1000 sets of images. They'd probably all
quit on the spot.

I have a feeling that Erik should be the one to suggest a "workable" upper
limit, as he is the one who will be saddled with most of the scanning and
web-work. I should think that the upper limit should also ensure that all
images and other related materials will fit on ONE CD-ROM - it would be too
much work to try to do more.

Erik, what do you think you can handle as a reasonable upper limit, given
say a maximum of 5 images per entry? 100/200/500? I have no idea.

Also, you quoted a price of $1.20/disk earlier. I doubt that included the
"jewel case" and a liner or sleeve. I have seen special mailers for these -
but I don't know how the Canadian pricing would jive with what is available
in the U.S. (usually, things are more expensive North of the border). The
mailing cost of a cased CD-ROM would be nice to know as well, as would some
idea of a projected end price, both to the Contest and to the consumer. One
person had suggested $20.00, but that might be high.

>I think we should pick an arbitrary maximum number of classes that
>seems reasonable in order to present a proposal to AGA.  I think 20 classes
>gives us plenty of flexibility, but I'm open to other numbers.

O.K., but remember that I have no experience with "fish shows" - do we just
pick a "number" or do we set out the classes and descriptions of those
classes now? Some people might like or expect to see the possible classes
they could enter their entries into listed either in the literature or on
the web-site. I have no idea of what might work best and am open to
suggestions from those with more familiarity with these sorts of events.

>I have several times said that you
>shouldn't feel like I was (I think your term was ) "jumping on you" when I
>make a comment.

Sorry Karen, in my original comment I forgot the <g> - it was a joke! I
welcome your comments - they tend to bring me back to earth. But while I do
welcome them, they sometimes confuse me - at times you seem to advocate a
loose event and then you come back later with a much more structured version
of your suggestion. I guess e-mail conversations are difficult for all
concerned.

Regarding the awarding or not awarding of "places" in certain categories
being left to the judges, I re-iterate my initial feelings - you had
suggested that we NOT tie the judges hands, so when I wrote the "rules" the
way I did, I gave the judges the discretion to withold awards. If that's not
what you meant, fine. If you mean something else, fine as well, but please
don't tell us to be gentle and open in one breath and then come back and
tell the judges to fish or cut bait in the next. As I have stated before -
YOU have been a judge in these sorts of things, I haven't been. I'm doing
the best I can do to read between the lines of your posts, and obviously not
doing such a good job of it. If you HAVE a scheme of judging which in YOUR
experience will work better than my "impression" of what I thought you
meant, please commit it to words and post it. I am open to your experience
in this, as I have none. But it is frustrating sometimes to try to interpret
what you mean.

Regarding the posting of the raw judges scores - that was suggested, and I
agree that we should do it. Unfortunately, I forgot to include that point in
the lastest post I made to the web-site (Proposal).

Regarding "Certificates of Participation" and the cost and effort involved -
well, I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one. It is my opinion
that, especially if there is an "entrance fee", we should at least
acknowledge their participation. But without wider support for the idea and
people willing to do it, I acknowledge that it won't get done. They will at
least get acknowledged and thanked en-mass via the web-site.

While on the subject of effort and costs - it has been mentioned or
suggested that the "brochure" I suggested earlier be placed on the web-site
and people could print it out themselves and distribute it. While this is a
great idea, I am not suggesting that we foist the cost of printing and
mailing of materials for this event off on the members of this list as part
of their "contribution". Especially if this gets approved with Entrance Fees
attached for non-AGA members, I would expect that any "costs" someone
encounters in promoting or conducting this event would be covered by those
fees.

The prime purpose of any printed material was for the convenience of those
AGA members who are not Internet savy. As far as I am concerned, personally,
I would be just as happy to limit this whole thing to the Internet aware and
reachable. That way we would cut out all the worry about mailings and
postage. But I am realistic enough to know that not everyone in the world
has cheap, affordable access to computers and the Internet as those of us
who live in the United States and Canada. And I am hopeful that we might be
able to reach some hobbyists who are not as *well connected* as we all are
and share our experience of this hobby with them.

On judges:
>Was there a preliminary list?  I saw some names thrown out, and I saw some
>discussion on whether a few of the names were suitable.  I also saw a lot
>of discussion over whether many of the potential names submitted were
>"artists" enough to be chosen as judges. I don't think I ever saw a list.
>Maybe I missed it.

The "list" such as it is, is on the prototype web-site. No one is suggesting
any longer that judges need to be "artists", or even experts. Isn't that why
we worked out Judging Criteria, Judging Guidelines and Scoring Guidelines?

If you (or anyone else) have people you think would be suitable cantidates
to act as judges, send me their names and I will add them to the "list". We
won't be contacting anybody anyway until we have a definate "go" on the
event, so I see no real need to sweat this right now.

If this is not the way other shows are organized, I'm sorry - but if
_anyone_ has a better suggestion, work it out in detail and submit it now,
please. I can only re-state that I'm trying to do this as efficiently as I
can - if I miss something or get something wrong - correct me with a
detailed alternative, don't just say it's wrong and expect me to figure out
how to fix it, I might have no idea of how to do so.

On the scope of our potential "entrant pool"
>Non-Internet _AGA MEMBERS_, which is a _much_ smaller subset.  You're now
>talking about plastering the whole country (maybe the world) with
flyers.<g>

I notice the <g>, and am aware of the joke - but I am not suggesting that we
blanket the world with useless junk mail. I AM suggesting that we widen our
scope of possibilities regarding where we look for entrants beyond the
borders of North America. I realize that it is going to be difficult, if not
impossible to give more than lip service to being truly "International"
without more people from more countries involved with organizing the event
and helping to ferret out hobbyists from Europe, Asia, Australia, etc. But
the contest name DOES have International in it, and the genesis of the idea
was a discussion of how aquascaping varies from country to country. If I can
find hobbyists in Australia interested enough in aquascaping to make the
effort to submit images, I for one am very interested in seeing them
included here.

I am doing this for the hobby, not specifically for the AGA and it's
members. I can see a direct benefit for the AGA, and that is why I think
that the AGA is the perfect sponsor. I feel that a properly set up and
maintained planted aquarium is MUCH more beautiful than even a reef tank
(and harder to maintain on an even keel as well). I think that the AGA has a
lot to teach aquarists who might still be using plastic plants and this
event is a perfect way to reach out to them. Some of them may actually wish
to join the organization. The membership of the AGA has some of the most
knowledgable aquarists within it's ranks, but that knowledge and ability is
certainly not exclusive to the AGA.

>>Any monies
>>realized from the sale of the CD-ROM go to the AGA for use against contest
>>expenses. Any surplus should be earmarked for this event in future years.

>I don't think they will guarantee the last part.  That presupposes that
>there will _be_ an event in future years, and ties up the money if there is
>not.

That wording was merely a _suggestion_. How about if there IS a surplus, and
the contest IS held again, that the money would be made available for the
contest in future years? Please remember that if this DOES go ahead, many of
the organizers and volunteers are not AGA members. If they choose to put
their time and effort into this and if it realizes a profit (I do say IF), I
think it would be unreasonable of the AGA to say "Sorry, but we spent the
money you raised on other things. Care to get kicked again?

I'd hate to think that the AGA MC is going to come back at us with a "We'd
love for you to organize, plan and execute this event. You do the work, you
charge everyone not a member of our organization a fee to participate, you
pay for any costs associated with publicizing it, you give us all of the
monies raised and we give your our "good housekeeping" seal of approval. Oh,
and by the way, if there is a surplus, we get to keep it and decide how it
will be spent. If you want to do this again next year, you will be back at
square one, financially speaking.".

Unless of course, the "plan" is to have US organize it, and for the AGA to
actually IMPLEMENT it - with exclusively AGA volunteers. If that is the
case, that's fine - in that event the AGA would be entitled to spend any
possible surplus as they see fit.

I don't know if there will be a surplus - that depends on a lot of factors -
the ratio and number of AGA vs non-AGA entrants, the per entrant cost
associated with the event, the number of CD-ROM's sold (I doubt that there
will be very many). It is more likely that if we DO charge a nominal fee of
say $5.00/entry it will only serve to do two things, prevent the AGA from
having a huge deficit at the end of the affair and prevent _some_ people
from entering. But if 300 AGA members enter the event and we get 100 non-AGA
members each paying $5.00, and the contest ends up costing $800.00, I don't
think the AGA MC would have much cause to complain at having spent $300.00.
That would be $1.00 per member. If there IS going to be an entry fee, then
it is to everyone's benefit to maximixe the participation of paying
customers in order to cut the cost to the organization.

>We need to spend some time taking a serious look at the "what ifs" involved
>in the mechanics.  I just got back from a horse show that got so many
>entries that they decided to add an extra ring at the last minute.  There
>were _NO_ positive comments from the competitors who were not turned away
>because of the addition of the extra ring.  There was _LOTS_ of criticism
>of the logistical problems that were caused by the (volunteer) managers
>_trying_ to do their best to please everyone.  Be forewarned.

I hear you loud and clear on this - and I concur that we have to think about
some of the extremes of what we might be faced with. I can't help
remembering though, that comments were recently made about getting bogged
down in too _much_ what-if detail and there were suggestions made that
seemed to me to be a "let's jump in and be flexible - we'll work out the
problems as they crop up" sort of attitude. We can't have it both ways,
either this gets planned properly or it will end up a fiasco.

And to be perfectly honest - I'm worried more about MY reputation than I am
about that of the AGA. <g> I _may_ be hard to work with, but I _am_
thorough.

James Purchase
Toronto







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