[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 16:01:04 -1000
From: "Bill Bergstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [OGD] AOS
To: "Orchid"
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sorry folks..I have been with the AOS for 32 years..and while I see some
changes..none are as bad as I am hearing..I go back there and talk with them
from time to time..I have not always loved some of the magazine editors..names
withheld..but lately I am in constant touch with Lee and have received in the
mail (I get my issue early) a two page request for my ideas for a better
mag..as will all of you who are members...Sorry to be such a bright eyed person
on the subject..it takes YOU to make it better..not a bunch of naysayers who
quit...sorry again if you fit that mold...but I have seen what they have done
and what they are doing..and I find no fault in their trying...support..support
and STATE to them..not me or this site..THEM...compain if you must..nothing
gets done unless people complain...but quitting is not the answer...If you need
to know who to write to..I have the name of the gal...Bill
Sorry to disagree here (and I was in the AOS for many years myself), but
in the face of /*years*/ of them not listening and us (including me)
telling them, the only thing left /*is*/ quitting...money talks! On the
'sunny' side, perhaps an acute financial crisis and hemmorhaging
membership decline will be the things that have at least the
/*possibility***/ of bringing change and making the deaf leadership
finally able to hear. So quitting isn't necessarily entirely negative.
And, on the other hand, no one should even suggest I should throw money
(dues) at something I don't approve of, especially/**/ the
*/exorbitant/* amount it now costs (for less and less product - a fluff,
worthless mag, tiny conservation and education budgets [compared to the
whole], and a self-absorbed, imperial leadership). Oh, and as for the
'Taj Mahal', I really squeezed my schedule two years ago when I was last
in FL to carve out an hour to visit it. I went. I read the posted hours,
tried the locked door, looked at my watch and saw it was still 45
minutes til closing time, and noted the empty parking lot, and that it
was not a holiday. Then I left - that was another nail in the coffin of
my now-dropped AOS membership. Personally I hope they enjoy their cushy
Taj Mahal and their self-righteous, holier-than-thou attitides - right
up to the very day it closes for good and becomes condos or a minimall.
I'm almost /*sure */the minimall will be accessible during posted hours.
And don't even get me started on the concept of paying for an
'*/award'/* (oops! too late!). Awards are something */given/*, not
/*purchased*/. And can someone tell me please how an awarded plant's
quality (not $ value) is diminished by the owner not affording the
attached fees. Is it not still the same plant? Did it not still actually
'win' (or should that be 'earn' ?) the award? How is it any less just
because the owner refused the requisite extortion (and make no mistake -
that's */exactly/* what it is)? So the awards process isn't really about
flower or plant quality but about the depth of the pockets of
exhibitors? Why don't they then just dispense with the judging process
(a rant for another time) and just sell the 'awards' outright like the
medieval Catholic church? Just send us $60 and the name of a plant, and
you, too can have an FCC plant!! Or maybe, $50 for an AM, $75 for an
HCC, and $100 for an FCC? That sound fair?
Another sunny thought - maybe if the AOS dies, another orchid
organization will take it's place that's /*better*/. Not all change is bad.
Tennis Maynard
___
the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD)
orchids@orchidguide.com
http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
