Re: [AGA-mcm] AGA2K4 Feedback Summary

["S. Hieber" <shieber@yahoo.com>]

I thought the comments were better this year than
previously -- not so much the kind of comments but that
there were more of them and slightly more detailed.

I heard as much positive and negative, which all good
critiques should comprise, imo.

sh
--- Karen Randall <krandall@rdrcpa.biz> wrote:

> > >From the few comments I heard back about the
> aquascaping awards, what
> > most people did not like was the 'rush' to go through
> them, and the
> perceived
> > 'negativeness' of the comments. There was no option but
> to go through
> > the awards quickly due to the schedule changes. If we'd
> taken our time
> there,
> > we'd have even more people complaining about how late
> Amano's demo was.
> 
> I think we all understand the "rush" part, and the
> reasons behind it.  But
> I'm surprised that people thought the comments were
> excessively negative.
> I'd like to hear what some of you thought.  I thought we
> tried to give
> constructive criticizm.  I know I was not the only one
> who mentioned several
> times that a case could be made for many of the tanks
> being "the winner".
> But if you don't get nit-picky, there is no way to
> justify picking one tank
> over another.

_______________________________________________
AGA-mcm mailing list
AGA-mcm@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-mcm