Extra AIS teleconference Tues Sept 29 5 PM

[Claire S]

Hi Everyone:

This will be a continuation of the discussion of the hybridizer's manifesto.

If you need a copy of the manifesto, I think Michelle has it and I have it.

See you there,

Claire S

The American Iris Society is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: Extra AIS teleconference THIS is a TUESDAY

Time: Sep 29, 2020 05:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/4358570936

Meeting ID: 435 857 0936

One tap mobile

+16699009128,,4358570936# US (San Jose)

+12532158782,,4358570936# US (Tacoma)

Dial by your location

        +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)

        +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)

        +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)

        +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)

        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)

        +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)

Meeting ID: 435 857 0936

Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kAFYlTOwq

[Jody Nolin]

This is a single-topic Board meeting.  We will be discussing the 2020/2021 awards only.

Please attend if you can.

Thanks

Jody Nolin

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AISTalk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to aistalk+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/c63daf70-4f94-43d6-b119-acc77ded7321n%40googlegroups.com.

[Claire S]

Oops, sorry about the confusion.  The special meeting is about the awards.

Claire S

p.s.  on a humorous note.  A friend asked me tonight if I would be available for a bridge game Tuesday night.

I said, sorry, but no, I will be attending an emergency iris society meeting.  My friend gave me an odd look and said

"What's an emergency about an iris?  Are irises going extinct?"   Hmmm, guess you had to be there.

[Ima...@irises.org]

The Presedential debate is at 6 pm PDT, 9 EDT.  I, for one, want to see that. I hope we can keep the meeting to 45-50 mins.

If any ideas beyond Wednesday’s meeting can be shared before then, I think that would be helpful in keeping the meeting concise.

At this point I support an ballot for major awards this fall if a time schedule allows.

Neil

Neil Houghton, AIS Image Coordinator

AIS Digital Program Coordinator

Greater Rochester IRIS Society

3873 Rush Mendon Rd

Mendon, NY 14506

585-301-8256

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 25, 2020, at 9:22 AM, Jody Nolin <jody....@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CALRDHAm6TKVxz%3DuTHf-y%3DPGVZuOjtZChLZttd5GR87U%3Dqy0ReQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[howi...@aol.com]

I have a couple of concerns.

First, we made the decision to suspend the ballot at a time of great uncertainty and with the concern for the safety of our judges.  We then revisited our decision and confirmed what we originally voted for.

Now we are looking at revisiting at least part of the decision again.

I see a couple of problems with the proposal to vote on just the medals.

First, we need to contact all our judges and be sure they all vote.  I think if we require a judge to vote on the full ballot, we would have to require them to vote on the mini ballot.

Second, voting on just the medals would reduce the number of candidates for medals for 2022 (2021 would have candidates that won AM’s in 2019 added) as no AM’s would be voted on in 2020.

This would not be an issue with classes such as TB’s where there would be plenty of candidates.  However, others, such as the Mohr and White medals that the Aril Society are responsible for have limited candidates and thus may not have enough eligible for medals in 2022.  Its possible other classes of iris could suffer the same problem.

Third, a decision to have a mini ballot voted on at the October Board meeting would mean voting over the holidays, which I’m not sure is a good idea.

My first instinct is to stand by the decision we made and the plans we have for the ballots for 2021 forward and not vote this year.  However, if we do decide to have a ballot this year, I think it needs to be the AM’s and medals for the reasons I mentioned above.

I’m uncertain at this point how I actually will vote.

Howie Dash

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CECFB4C7-6A19-4AA3-9032-A9280B48C40F%40irises.org

.

[Phyllis Wilburn]

I agree with Howie that it is problematic at this stage to change directions.  I think that time is too short to actually carry it off, and not get it confused with the 2021 voting.  Contacting all the judges, and making sure that they know that they have to vote the 2020 ballot could be done in News and Notes, and  Bonnie could get the word out via the JT chairs, but I am sure that some would miss out.  Missing the vote for one year will not disqualify a judge, but missing two years does. 

I also heard (or mis-heard) at the Board meeting that Jerry would only have to lop off the top half of the ballot that was already in the works for 2021.  This is not correct, as he will have to go through and remove all the 2019 AMs, and  leave the 2018 AMs for the 2020 ballot.  Keeping the original plan of voting in 2021 does give irises that are eligible for medals  more competition, as both 2019 and 2018 AMs will be added in the same year.  I can see why the hybridizers would object to this.

Howie is correct that not voting in 2020 will make the medal voting have fewer candidates in 2022.  However, since iris stay on the list for 3 years, unless they win,  there should still be enough to consider for most medals.

I  would like to point out that hybridizers were asked for input on this issue, and as I recall Paul Black and Riley Probst were the only ones who made the effort, and we gave careful consideration to their remarks in making our decision.  Where were these 20 hybridizers then?

I am not sure how I will vote, but I wanted to say a few things now, to get the discussion done in a timely manner, so we can all have the chance to watch the presidential debate if we so choose. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/1061808567.1131126.1601144147785%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Gerry Snyder]

Attached is a PDF with my thoughts.

Although I admit that I am not eager to do the extra work the additional ballot would entail, I am certainly willing to if that is what the Board decides. 

I am much more concerned about the risk. Doing non-standard things in a schedule that has little wiggle room is scary.

Gerry Snyder

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CECFB4C7-6A19-4AA3-9032-A9280B48C40F%40irises.org.

[Wayne Messer]

I agree with Howie and Phyllis that carrying out the 2020 voting at this point would be difficult.  Not only difficult, it would also conflict with another decision the Board made at the same time:  We decided that judges were not required to meet their usual responsibilities in 2020.  Meaning, in this context, judges are not required to vote the 2020 ballot. 

Having a meaningful ballot, one where most of the judges vote, would require partially reversing two decisions.  Otherwise, if we have awards voting, there will be an asterisk beside the winners' names.

I think the discussions can still be useful in preparing us for possible 2021 complications with awards and judging.  They did spark a couple of questions:

1. Judges were the ones whose safety we considered initially.  What do we know about judges' opinions on the changes made this year?  Do they have suggestions for going forward?
   
2. What is the difference between what we are hearing now and what we heard earlier when reconsidering the ballot?  Has anything changed?

Wayne Messer

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CAGow0euSrzQi49Viso8NgTrN3ysayzn1Br4y3mfpePdNer2%2BaA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ima...@irises.org]

I am not sure how I will vote.

It has been stated the Board meeting at which the decision to forgo awards was advertised. That is true, but unless I am mistaken the potential item was not. The meeting at which The objection was discussed was after the decision was made. We just decided not to revisit it at that meeting. No matter the outcome here, I think we all wish we had more time to evaluate the impact, however our decision came down.  I still believe it was the correct one at the time.

We are not going to negate that decision, but we are looking at the possibility of a truncated set of Awards for 2020.  Much input has been offered to inform this consideration.

Gerry’s schedule is helpful. If we were decide to go ahead, would we need another consideration by the board?

I am glad we are putting in the effort to consider this and hope that those affected disappointed by the Board’s original decisions appreciate the that and the seriousness with which we had to.take COVID restrictions.

The health and safety of all our members was, and should continue to be, our first concern.

Neil Houghton, AIS Image Coordinator

AIS Digital Program Coordinator

Greater Rochester IRIS Society

3873 Rush Mendon Rd

Mendon, NY 14506

585-301-8256

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 27, 2020, at 6:08 PM, Wayne Messer <wrme...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CAHYUt5Pfpw7jZPtV_1C96PRcDtZ3Zi2D9Gf%2BKYGL4TSo030RQQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Wayne Messer]

Do we know if there will be hybridizers attending our teleconference?  Kevin or others.  I think it would be useful to learn more if we can.

Also, do the hybridizers have the Zoom details for the meeting?

Wayne Messer

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CACcPonY-xwFhU35psQgUTB7TV3STx4dQPUiKoUZC7kmzdxOzWw%40mail.gmail.com.

[howi...@aol.com]

I thought this was just for the board to discuss at this point and to invite hybridizers (other than myself) to the next board meeting.

Howie Dash

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Messer <wrme...@gmail.com>
To: ais...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2020 2:58 pm
Subject: Re: Extra AIS teleconference Tues Sept 29 5 PM

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CAHYUt5P0%2BhybZLN9mNfkniZfMkWLiTLEvM6qVj99MGJimVQH%3Dg%40mail.gmail.com.

[@ymail.com]

Why would we not invite them?  They are already pretty upset with no voting in 2020.  I believe it should be an open forum.

 

Jim Morris

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/2003953404.1785506.1601327452912%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Ima...@irises.org]

A little late, but I thought it was an open forum. 

Neil Houghton, AIS Image Coordinator

AIS Digital Program Coordinator

Greater Rochester IRIS Society

3873 Rush Mendon Rd

Mendon, NY 14506

585-301-8256

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 28, 2020, at 6:08 PM, '@ymail.com' via AISTalk <ais...@googlegroups.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/1218024797.16050.1601330840042%40mail.yahoo.com.

[andi rivarola]

Re: AIS judges' ballot, AIS judges votes, and the schedule.

As AIS Board members, we have a responsibility to make sure the organization not only survives but also thrives during challenging times. 

We need to look at the full picture and have an understanding of what's good for all groups of people/members that make up AIS. 

Because of this broad understanding and vision, some decisions made by the Board are looked as narrow by one group while widely accepted by another. 

Regardless, the Board needs to keep focused on what's good for all. 

Communication is the key to make sure everyone understands the Board's point of view and why some decisions are made the way they are.

It is of most importance that every year as many judges as possible get to vote .

Why? Because we spend an incredible amount of time and effort training and developing good judges. 

We set up rules with the judges' help, we communicate the rules, and we oversee the voting process as much as possible . 

When as many judges as possible get to vote, then we can be sure that any vote taken "really" represents their wishes.
If a low number of judges get to vote because of whatever impediments then to me that is not representative of the judges' vote.

Having said that... and also having read and heard the hybridizers' comments in their Manifesto, which were mainly focused on the registration process and are being addressed fully... my personal conclusion is that:

1. There were good, justified reasons to cancel the 2020 awards, so I would rather look forward to doing processes more effectively in the future.
2. A vote in the fall/winter and then again in the spring impacts the ability of judges to do so effectively; and it also impacts Gerry Snyder's workload.
3. Due to everything explained, specially by Gerry, I believe it would be more effective for AIS to have only one ballot, and that the ballot should be published in the spring of 2021; and that AIS should take any necessary steps, in the 2021 ballot, to ameliorate any negative impact produced by the cancellation of the 2020 Awards.

I'm still open to listen to any ideas that may be expressed at tonight's meeting.

Hope this helps.

Thank you.

Andi Rivarola

[gary white]

I really appreciate Jerry's comments and possible schedule. It puts things in perspective, and visually displays the steps in the process. 

And I appreciate all the thought and effort Jerry has put into this schedule and the rest of it. 

In considering that and the comments of others, it seems that a possible ballot this winter would be fraught with complications, and it would back up to and delay the normal spring ballot.

Doubling the number of Special Medals awarded and even for the Dykes in the 2021 ballot is an interesting possibility, and one that might be considered.  That would result in the same numbers of medals awarded had there been a 2020 ballot or a special winter ballot.

I have no qualms about the board cancelling the 2020 ballot, considering the pandemic and its impact on all our lives.  I firmly believe it was the right thing to do.  There are multiple reasons for my views on that opinion that I won't enumerate here, but that I have previously expressed.

I'm looking forward to the views and opinions of others this evening.

Gary White

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CACcPonY-xwFhU35psQgUTB7TV3STx4dQPUiKoUZC7kmzdxOzWw%40mail.gmail.com.

[gary white]

Sorry, this should be referring to Gerry's comments, not Jerry's...duh!

Gary

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/1288348848.2031153.1601405255175%40mail.yahoo.com.