Post Event Quibbles

["James Purchase" <jppurchase@rogers.com>]

"And I think we all agree that the pond/art categories were a bust."

In that they didn't attract a lot of entries or that they were inappropriate
in an event of this type? I suggested including them in the first place to
bring in more people. This hobby attracts all sorts and different people
will approach it from a different angle. There is nothing inherent in the
word "aquascaping" which requires that it be conducted in a glass box. A
garden pond can every bit as "aquascaped" as a 55 gallon aquarium. Its still
"aquatic gardening".

I'll admit that illustration is a stretch, and we did say at the beginning
that this should not be a photo contest. But again, its a way of providing a
forum for people who approach this from a different angle to share their
work. You'll have to admit "scotch tape" was a bit of a hoot, at least it
elicited a chuckle from me. I don't see how either category diluted or took
anything away from the planted aquascapes which were the main focus of the
event.

"As far as the cichlid tank is concerned, I can justify that either way.  In
a way, it IS an AGA contest, so I wouldn't have a huge problem if there was
a caveat that all tanks had to include plants.  OTOH, I kind of think that
biotope aquariums are an important sub-category that should be supported
just because they are a worthy goal, just like paludariums."
...
"If you asked me MY opinion, (oh, you didn't... well here it is anyway!<g>)
I'd get rid of the "natural" part of the designation, and judge them AS
biotope tanks, without apology."

I tend to get really tired of this "no plants, no entry" way of thinking.
Its an aquascape - whether it has plants or not. Not ALL aquatic
environments look like an English perennial border.

Allowing for the inclusion of other points of view (non planted tanks) in no
way detracts from the beauty of the fully planted aquascapes. The argument
that those hobbyists interested in other aspects of the hobby (non planted
tanks, ponds, etc.) have other forums to display their work doesn't wash
with me. This ought to be more about bringing people together to share
common interests, WHATEVER those interests might be. The "blue blood"
approach, where planted tank enthusiasts look askance at non planted
aquascapes as being somehow "less worthy" is, in my view, a little short
sighted and "precious". I don't think that this end of the hobby has matured
to the point where it can afford that level of snobbery.

I'm pretty sure that the average person constructing a rock-scape for
African Cichlids spends a good deal of time and effort selecting the rocks
to use and in arranging them in the most effective and visually pleasing
manner. That's "aquascaping".

If Robert H. wants to limit HIS event to planted tanks, that is his right.
But I don't see why THIS event ought to be so narrow minded.

The inclusion or separation of "Natural" and "Biotope" aquascapes is (I
believe) purely one of convenience based upon the number of entries received
in those categories. A beautifully aquascaped tank can still make quite an
impression if it isn't 100% accurate to a specific biotope. Lumping them
together runs the risk of failing to do justice to either. As well, I wonder
how many hobbyists REALLY know what a lot of "natural biotopes" actually
look like? How many have actually been there to see for themselves,
first-hand? Is it not more a case of people attempting to create their own
personal "impression" of an aquascape or a particular biotope?

"I think the AGA should take a lesson learned that you have tried to
broaden the scope of the event too far off base.  The new categories added
this year by James is proof of that."

So shoot me for trying something new. If the general consensus is that the
new categories didn't work, for whatever reason, they can be easily dropped.
See my comments above.

"I also believe a statement saying this event was never about being a
contest is naive. While true the motives behind it may be pure, there is
competition involved in something like this."

Where is the nearest wall, so that I may bang my head for a few minutes?
Call me naive. I totally understand the "greed factor" and realize how much
anticipation a rich prize pool can elicit. I also understand the enormous
amount of effort that is required to solicit, store, divvy up and trans-ship
such a cache of goodies. And, to my shagrin, I know only too well how
mistakes can happen when prizes get mixed up or go astray in the mails. If
Robert H. (or anyone else) wishes to step up to the box and offer to
coordinate and undertake this colossal task, fine, but it ain't no piece of
cake. During Year #1, I spent many, many hours, over many, many months
putting the prizes together. Unfortunately, this past summer saw me spending
more time flat on my back, ill in bed. Its a colossal job that takes a
healthy person to carry out properly.

"Only when you are
confident that this has been done can you simply dismiss people's comments
as being sour grapes."

I don't think that anyone is viewing Robert's input as "sour grapes".
Indeed, it is valuable to read and consider alternative points of view. It
can cause you to look at the real reasons why things have been done a
particular way in the past and hopefully can make the event better and
stronger in the future.

But I still maintain that strength is more likely to be found in inclusion
than in exclusivity.

Well, anyway, that's my $9.95 on the matter......

James Purchase
Toronto

  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
  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
  When asked, log in as username is "aga-contest", and password "second".