RE: Proposal

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

Hi everyone,

> Looks great!  I'm glad you have such a way with words, James!  I wish I
> could write as well as you.

Thanks Dave, it isn't as easy as it looks.

> I have just one question on content:  On page 22 of the .pdf file(I didn't
> even look at the other...), #7 of the scoring guidelines talks
> about judges
> consulting with one another.  We probably discussed this, but what would
> they consult about?  Just technical stuff, right?  Like if a judge wasn't
> familier with a particular plant or fish or something?  They wouldn't talk
> about how they were planning on judging anything?  We might want
> to clarify
> this a little...

The use of "may" instead of "will" or "shall" comes from two sources - the
first is my background dealing with government "legalese" (I worked for
years as a Manager within the Canadian Civil Service). In THAT context, when
dealing with, for example, a section of a government Bill (which becomes a
law once passed by Parliament), the word "may" indicates that some
discretion is possible - i.e. it "may" or "may not" happen. The use of the
word "will" or shall" leaves ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT - it WILL happen, without
any possibility of the contrary.

In our context here, I'm using pretty much the same definition for the
terms - when I used the word "may" in the Proposal I am allowing for
discretion - if something is felt desirable then it can be done, if it is
deemed superfluous it doesn't have to be done. Either way, our backsides are
covered and future flexibility is provided for. When I use the word "shall"
or "will", it is intended to indicate that this is going to be a
REQUIREMENT, come hell or high water.

We had a discussion, following my posting of some material earlier, about
this - Karen advised that I should, in effect (these are my words, not
her's) tell the judges to either fish or cut bait (or, in the vernacular,
shit or get off the pot) when doing their judging. In my initial take on the
judging, I have used the word "may" practically exclusively. This could lead
to a wide variation in possible outcomes of how the judging could take
place.

The current wording gives the judges discretion where possible but lays out
where they are to be closely guided.

The use of a majordomo list to allow the judges to communicate with one
another and with the contest organizers is merely a way to make their jobs
easier and to get quicker feedback on possible issues which might come up. I
would ASSUME that the conversations would be technical rather than
aesthetic, but don't feel that it is necessary to put any limit on WHAT they
can discuss on the list. Hopefully, the individuals we get as judges will be
independent enough to not be overly influenced by someone else's opinions

Mike G. also gave some feedback:

> And I found what appears to be a typo on page 20, under
> "composition, use of
> color,etc" there are some iii's left in there.  :-)

I just checked my copy of the PDF file, and I don't see this. However, it
DOES appear on my copy of the MS Word doc. I have corrected the problem and
it won't be in the final Proposal.

> The suggestion is concerning the end of Section 14 where it is listed that
> the event has high potential to become an annual event.  It is my belief
> that this deserves a little more ink other than a quick mention here.

I may agree with you that this could be expanded, but whether or not this
becomes a repeating event depends ENTIRELY on how well it goes over in this,
the first year. There is nothing in the Proposal (or in all of our
discussions) which is SPECIFIC to a "one off" event. When we were deciding
upon the event's name, we specifically did not use "2000" or "Millennium"
for this very reason. If this event gets pulled off well, and the AGA
doesn't lose money on it, i'm pretty sure that it WILL become an annual
event - and get bigger in the future (as in the removal of the artificial
limit of 300 entries). But thise things remain to be seen and really have no
place in the Proposal for the initial event.

> Section 3, #6 -  It says, "The judges may be provided with CD ROMS
> containing all of the images and supporting documentation covering each
> entry."  My concern with the wording is, is this a (may) thing or is it a
> (will) thing?

See my comments to Dave E., above. They WILL get the CD-ROMS, but if
conditions change at some time in the future (i.e. if all the judges had
high speed internet connections, for example) then it might not be necessary
for us to give them CD-ROMS. The provision of CD-ROMS to the judges is being
done because of the length of time it takes to get large graphic images
through a dial up internet connection.

> Section 13, #4 - I believe the last line shall state, "It is the event
> organizers goal that all entrants are winners, and that everyone will be
> able to learn something through sharing."

That line reads as follows: "It is the event organizers' goal that all [in
italics, for emphasis] entrants are winners, and everyone has something to
learn through sharing."

Essentially, my version and your version are the same. This sentence grew
out of Karen's suggesiton that this be made (again, MY impression of what
she said) "touchy feely" and "user friendly". I'm trying to stress the
friendliness of the event and bending over backward to not scare off
newbies.

> Section 16, #7 - Third word estimate should be estimated.

You are quite correct in this - I will make the correction. Thanks. A "spell
check" is unable to catch mistakes like this - and I could read it 100 times
without catching it - it takes a 3rd party to proof read a document to catch
such things.

> That is it.  Please don't take the ticky tacky stuff the wrong way.  I am
> in no way trying to tear down your exhilirating work, James.

The issues you have raised are EXACTLY the issues which I WANT raised at
this point in time. This is part of the "polishing" phase, and is very
important. Don't worry about hurting MY feelings - this is OUR Proposal, I'm
just the parrot. <g>


Thanks guys - this is GREAT. I want more comments from everyone. Let's get
this done RIGHT.

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