This is what I thought went on (of course, I had the advantage of reading the mail recently ;-) ). But I can't imagine how all this subjective stuff could be codified much less then the code appropriately altered to address biotopical judges. Maybe purported biotope entries should have to pass a screen -- someone that decides merely if the entry is reasonably representative of a specific biotope. If so, it goes into the biotope cat, if not then the contestant can opt to enter it in a size cat or withdraw. But that sounds complicated, especially for only a half dozen entries. And the rules for all the other cats aren't any more formal, are they? I guess I appreciate the underlying issue, that there is a technical issue of accuracy in addition to aesthetic evaluation, but I don't see enough reason to drop biotopes or handle them significantly diff -- at least not yet. If we had a few hundred entries, it might make sense to divide up into specific kinds of biotopes (Rio Negro, Rio Grande, Lake Malawi, etc). But the looser general term "Biotope" seems fitting enough at present. sh --- Erik Olson <erik@thekrib.com> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, S. Hieber wrote: > > > How do we qualify judges for any aspects of the > contest? > > Excellent question. Here's what *I* use to qualify a > judge. . . ===== - - - - - - - - Erik Olson annouces AGA 2004 Annual Aquascaping Awards at the annual Convention Nov 12, 13 & 14; Details & Registration at www.aquatic-gardeners.org & www.gwapa.org __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢ http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash ------------------ 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".