S. Hieber wrote:
My point wasn't that the AGA issue isn't relevent -- if that's how some are reading it -- but that it's a reason likely to engender ill will. And that we had enough reasons without mentioning that one.
Ok, I get that. My apologies to Erik, but something about the way his last paragraph was worded sounded wrong:
Vicki was a good friend to the AB Forums, but never a member of the AGA or involved in our area of the hobby at all.
The e-mail from Lana specifically said that she helped a lot of people with their planted aquariums. So evidently she was involved in our area of the hobby, she just wasn't part of our AGA-world.
It would seem fitting
that AB would be the place where she is honored rather than a bunch of folks here who never really knew her to begin with.
While I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment, if I was Lana I wouldn't care much for this wording. It seems a little to off-the-cuff.
I mean, isn't that a major driving force behind thiswhole discussion? Why on earth would anyone ask us to do this when she had no connection to AGA? Makes no sense.I thought it had more to do with what the person's done forthe hobby.
Ok, so maybe that was just me... :-)
While, I don't think Vicki deserves special recognition by AGA, others might think she does and consider the Not-AGA reason as somewhat parochial
You keep using this word. What the heck does it mean? It's hard to stand on a principle
and have it support you if it's already been bent.
Yah, but we don't have to stand on other people's principles. We can have our own and stick by them.
Well. Since my prob is semantics and your prob is content, we seem to be at a Mexican standoff here. Fun!
-- Cheryl Rogers, Membership Aquatic Gardeners Association http://www.aquatic-gardeners.org ------------------ To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message. Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "incorp".