Re: Categories

["David A. Youngker" <nestor10@mindspring.com>]

From: James Purchase
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 1:19 PM


> ...I don't think that we want to, or need to, set up a whole raft of
> specialized categories - maybe if this goes over really well and
> we are swamped with all kinds of aquascapes they will guide
> us in setting new categories for future years. But for THIS year,
> the basic structure should be as simple and as flexible
> as possible.

My opinion along those lines has already been presented, so I can only voice
concurrence with you here.

To James personally - I don't think your original use of miscellaneous was
"inappropriate". Someone had to make the initial suggestions...

[briefly jump to]
> ...Could we just drop it altogether, and use the "Artificial
> Aquascape" category for those tanks which do not obviously
> fall into one of the others? This would have the benefit of
> reducing the total number of categories to an even dozen,
> making it a slightly less expensive event (less expensive is
> not the same thing as cheaper...)

Again, for this "trial run", this would appear to be the "saner" option. I
think that we have to have something we KNOW we can work with, both in
man-hours and expense, in order to make this a palatable event for the
judges and sponsors, be they AGA or manufacturers.

Once popularity for the event is *proven*, expansion will be easy. We have
to show we're *worth* sponsoring before we tackle the all-inclusive.

>
> ...It was my initial impression that aquascapes would be
> judged on their own merits, regardless of the category they
> were in and the other aquascapes in the same ...From
> what Karen has written concerning contests however, it
> would appear that the OTHER entrants in a particular
> category could have an influence on the scoring for an
> aquascape...

This is partially what I had in mind when making the comment on the
designer's intended goal. It would also appear to be a factor in having made
the decision for the judges to "fish or cut bait" in choosing clear-cut
winners and eliminating tied standings.

>    I think that if we are going to the trouble of setting up
> "Categories" now, and will have a web-site prepared before
> we "go public", it should be a simple matter to write short
> descritive sentences letting the potential entrant know the
> types of aquascapes we expect in each "category", and allow
> them to choose where they wish to have their entry placed
> (sorry Erik, looks like another check box on the entry form...).
> But I think that we have to reserve the right to change a
> category if an obvious mistake has been made...

Yes !

> ...(Should anyone wonder where we get the right to change
> something like that, well.... it's OUR contest....).

Bingo !

Let's definitely keep this thing manageable for all involved. Again, I'm all
for stressing the *prestige* and importance of this event - not in seeing
that every contestant goes home with a "prize"...

-Y-

David A. Youngker
nestor10@mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~nestor10


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