- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
- Messages
- 10,879
- Reaction score
- 339
Apparently these threads are making the OSSEA's head hurt too…what a bunch of BS going on there. Just my opinion of course.
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
A
AquaGem
Guest
Yes... This plant no longer has the award because I refuse to retract my opinion.
SlipperFan
Addicted
Well, that makes no sense at all. Either the plant is awardable or it is not. Nothing you say should have anything to do with it. Politics!
A
AquaGem
Guest
Here are the emails from the very beginning till my reply yesterday.
On 4/25/11 4:26 PM, "John Elliott" <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Jason,
You submitted two plants recently to the OSSEA judges, one of which (Paph Spiderman) was judged, and one of which (Masdevallia Redshine) was not.
Subsequently some comments appeared on Slippertalk, posted by AquaGem on 20/Feb/2011, which created some concern among the judges and the OSSEA General Committee, and which appear to be your comments. http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19435
AquaGem indicates disappointment that the judging process is not open to the public, and makes other remarks indicating a lack of confidence in the Judges. AquaGem also asks, if OSSEA Judges would not judge masdevallias, being unfamiliar with them, it raised an issue of how judging could be carried out at the coming World Orchid Conference.
Can I confirm with you that these remarks are posted by you?
The Judging process is confidential exactly as in other societies, and exhibitors should not submit plants unless they have confidence in the judges, otherwise the whole exercise is pointless. I am sure you would not wish to receive an award that you think is given by non-competent judges.
On the matter of masdevallia judging at the WOC, judging at the WOC is done by judges from all over the world, only a tiny proportion of whom are OSSEA judges. All judges from any country will judge only in their area of expertise. To think that judging of masdevallias (or any genus) at the WOC would somehow depend on the expertise of OSSEA judges is a complete misconception, and it is pity that such a view got stated on Slippertalk.
If you made these comments, I must ask you to retract them.
Look forward to hearing from you,
John
___________
Dr John Elliott
President,
Orchid Society of SE Asia
1E Cluny Road #01-02
Singapore 259601
Tel/fax +65 6762 4966
Hi John,
Yes, I made those comments. It is my person views derived from the feedback given to me as to why my plants were rejected from two different occasions.
Re: The Judging process is confidential exactly as in other societies, and exhibitors should not submit plants unless they have confidence in the judges, otherwise the whole exercise is pointless. I am sure you would not wish to receive an award that you think is given by non-competent judges.
Our government has been promoting transparency in our society. For a ‘reputable’ society such as OSSEA who will be hosting the WOC at the end of the year to still conduct a closed judging session will only seem to me as something that is non-transparent.
The AOS has abolished closed judging sessions many years ago. The reason being that it should be an educational process to let people learn more about orchids through the remarks made by knowledgeable judges who have to go through at least 7 years of training before becoming an a credited orchid judge. The open session also tend to deter judges from making random remarks without first thinking if it was appropriate. As a society that wants to promote the popularity of orchid growing and attract more people to join the society, one should move forward and progress instead of staying stagnant.
In my 16 years of being involved in the orchid world, it is a first I have every encountered that a plant was being rejected by a judging centre, not only once but twice with the explanation that they have never judge the genera before or not familiar about that particular species. When I mentioned this to some of my friends who are not just judges but also chairs of judging centre, owners and famous hybridizers around the world, their reaction and comments were all unanimous: They and their centre would be more than happy to have new genera and hybrids brought in to be judge. With the technologies, all the necessary information can be gotten over the web within minutes. That is what judging is about! Looking, research, recording and awarding and setting a standard for new species and hybrids. This will allow other plants of the same hybrids and species brought in to be judge to have something to be compared to. By rejecting a plant, there will be no records or references for future comparison.
A plant I brought in last year was Paph. barbigerum var. coccineum. This plant was discovered and published over ten years ago and yet it was rejected for judging because no one had any idea what they are looking and and didn’t even bother doing any research about it or gave it a botanical award to set a standard for future references. Is this something a society who wants to move forward?
It I because I have confidence in the society and wish for it to move forward that propels me to bring in high quality plants to be judged hoping that it will be a educational processing for the judges to further their knowledge not only to local species and hybrids but to other orchids form other parts of the world. Instead of embracing this opportunity to learn more about these new plants, it was turned away bluntly.
Re: On the matter of masdevallia judging at the WOC, judging at the WOC is done by judges from all over the world, only a tiny proportion of whom are OSSEA judges. All judges from any country will judge only in their area of expertise. To think that judging of masdevallias (or any genus) at the WOC would somehow depend on the expertise of OSSEA judges is a complete misconception, and it is pity that such a view got stated on Slippertalk.
Are you saying that if I have any Masdevillia or any genera that OSSEA has not been exposed to that I wish to have judged, I can only wait for an opportunity like WOC or bring it to another country so that it can be judged? If every society has such rules, then what would Taiwan, Australia or Japan do for their monthly meeting when someone brings in a Masdevillia, Pleurothalis, Lycaste, etc? A far as I know, many of these have been judged and awarded instead of being rejected. Maybe the judging program is highly flawed or the person(s) who is/are running the program is not competent? How do you explain about the very first species or hybrid of any genera being awarded? It must be the fist time any judges have encountered them and if they were to adopt the mentality of rejecting any plants that they are not familiar with, no plants would have been awarded at all to date.
I have stated my point of view very clearly and I hope that an intelligent and well respected individual like you will do something to help OSSEA move forward and that this will be a boost for the society to rethink it’s policy about close judging sessions and rejecting a plant brought in for judging in the future. If you still think that the comments made by me on the Slipper talk forum were unfair and untrue, I encourage the society to post on there to defend yourself rather than asking me to remove the posts. It will give everyone the opportunities to understand your policies.
Is the removal of the posts on Slippertalk a condition for the award of my Paph. Spiderman to be confirmed and also the approval to put up my exhibits at the WOC? When I asked Shen Chin about the certificate and details of the Paph. Spiderman, he mentioned that you wanted to clarify some issues with me and that after clarifying those issues will he be able to release the information to me.
I look forward to your reply soon.
Is
Regards,
Jason Ong
On 4/25/11 4:26 PM, "John Elliott" <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Jason,
You submitted two plants recently to the OSSEA judges, one of which (Paph Spiderman) was judged, and one of which (Masdevallia Redshine) was not.
Subsequently some comments appeared on Slippertalk, posted by AquaGem on 20/Feb/2011, which created some concern among the judges and the OSSEA General Committee, and which appear to be your comments. http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19435
AquaGem indicates disappointment that the judging process is not open to the public, and makes other remarks indicating a lack of confidence in the Judges. AquaGem also asks, if OSSEA Judges would not judge masdevallias, being unfamiliar with them, it raised an issue of how judging could be carried out at the coming World Orchid Conference.
Can I confirm with you that these remarks are posted by you?
The Judging process is confidential exactly as in other societies, and exhibitors should not submit plants unless they have confidence in the judges, otherwise the whole exercise is pointless. I am sure you would not wish to receive an award that you think is given by non-competent judges.
On the matter of masdevallia judging at the WOC, judging at the WOC is done by judges from all over the world, only a tiny proportion of whom are OSSEA judges. All judges from any country will judge only in their area of expertise. To think that judging of masdevallias (or any genus) at the WOC would somehow depend on the expertise of OSSEA judges is a complete misconception, and it is pity that such a view got stated on Slippertalk.
If you made these comments, I must ask you to retract them.
Look forward to hearing from you,
John
___________
Dr John Elliott
President,
Orchid Society of SE Asia
1E Cluny Road #01-02
Singapore 259601
Tel/fax +65 6762 4966
Hi John,
Yes, I made those comments. It is my person views derived from the feedback given to me as to why my plants were rejected from two different occasions.
Re: The Judging process is confidential exactly as in other societies, and exhibitors should not submit plants unless they have confidence in the judges, otherwise the whole exercise is pointless. I am sure you would not wish to receive an award that you think is given by non-competent judges.
Our government has been promoting transparency in our society. For a ‘reputable’ society such as OSSEA who will be hosting the WOC at the end of the year to still conduct a closed judging session will only seem to me as something that is non-transparent.
The AOS has abolished closed judging sessions many years ago. The reason being that it should be an educational process to let people learn more about orchids through the remarks made by knowledgeable judges who have to go through at least 7 years of training before becoming an a credited orchid judge. The open session also tend to deter judges from making random remarks without first thinking if it was appropriate. As a society that wants to promote the popularity of orchid growing and attract more people to join the society, one should move forward and progress instead of staying stagnant.
In my 16 years of being involved in the orchid world, it is a first I have every encountered that a plant was being rejected by a judging centre, not only once but twice with the explanation that they have never judge the genera before or not familiar about that particular species. When I mentioned this to some of my friends who are not just judges but also chairs of judging centre, owners and famous hybridizers around the world, their reaction and comments were all unanimous: They and their centre would be more than happy to have new genera and hybrids brought in to be judge. With the technologies, all the necessary information can be gotten over the web within minutes. That is what judging is about! Looking, research, recording and awarding and setting a standard for new species and hybrids. This will allow other plants of the same hybrids and species brought in to be judge to have something to be compared to. By rejecting a plant, there will be no records or references for future comparison.
A plant I brought in last year was Paph. barbigerum var. coccineum. This plant was discovered and published over ten years ago and yet it was rejected for judging because no one had any idea what they are looking and and didn’t even bother doing any research about it or gave it a botanical award to set a standard for future references. Is this something a society who wants to move forward?
It I because I have confidence in the society and wish for it to move forward that propels me to bring in high quality plants to be judged hoping that it will be a educational processing for the judges to further their knowledge not only to local species and hybrids but to other orchids form other parts of the world. Instead of embracing this opportunity to learn more about these new plants, it was turned away bluntly.
Re: On the matter of masdevallia judging at the WOC, judging at the WOC is done by judges from all over the world, only a tiny proportion of whom are OSSEA judges. All judges from any country will judge only in their area of expertise. To think that judging of masdevallias (or any genus) at the WOC would somehow depend on the expertise of OSSEA judges is a complete misconception, and it is pity that such a view got stated on Slippertalk.
Are you saying that if I have any Masdevillia or any genera that OSSEA has not been exposed to that I wish to have judged, I can only wait for an opportunity like WOC or bring it to another country so that it can be judged? If every society has such rules, then what would Taiwan, Australia or Japan do for their monthly meeting when someone brings in a Masdevillia, Pleurothalis, Lycaste, etc? A far as I know, many of these have been judged and awarded instead of being rejected. Maybe the judging program is highly flawed or the person(s) who is/are running the program is not competent? How do you explain about the very first species or hybrid of any genera being awarded? It must be the fist time any judges have encountered them and if they were to adopt the mentality of rejecting any plants that they are not familiar with, no plants would have been awarded at all to date.
I have stated my point of view very clearly and I hope that an intelligent and well respected individual like you will do something to help OSSEA move forward and that this will be a boost for the society to rethink it’s policy about close judging sessions and rejecting a plant brought in for judging in the future. If you still think that the comments made by me on the Slipper talk forum were unfair and untrue, I encourage the society to post on there to defend yourself rather than asking me to remove the posts. It will give everyone the opportunities to understand your policies.
Is the removal of the posts on Slippertalk a condition for the award of my Paph. Spiderman to be confirmed and also the approval to put up my exhibits at the WOC? When I asked Shen Chin about the certificate and details of the Paph. Spiderman, he mentioned that you wanted to clarify some issues with me and that after clarifying those issues will he be able to release the information to me.
I look forward to your reply soon.
Is
Regards,
Jason Ong
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
- Messages
- 10,879
- Reaction score
- 339
I hope your going to post the rest. Like the part where they say yes, you have to retract your comments here. I've been trying to figure out something constructive to say here that won't make things worse but I'm afraid I cannot think of anything. The whole thing stinks of....yeaah, not constructive.
A
AquaGem
Guest
On 5/4/11 3:33 PM, "John Elliott" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Jason,
Its true AOS has open Judging in some centres, but it is not open in others; AOS judges in Taiwan at their shows do not have open judging (not even to other society judges, never mind the public). Japan, Taiwan, and RHS all do not have open judging. One can make a case either way, but the thing is, the way to make the case is to write to us. What is not acceptable is to submit a plant but then complain and attack the system in public. We still do not see why you would want an award if you have no confidence in the judges or the system of judging.
Over the years judges do changed and learn and extend their expertise. It is not that judges are uninterested in new genera. Nonetheless, it would really not have been appropriate to judge – on the spot – a very unfamiliar genus. I have had sufficient experience of seeing judges from overseas struggle with local plants they are unfamiliar with at shows, to be convinced that we should ensure the same does not apply to ourselves.
Sorry, I do not know why your Paph barbigerum was not judged – possibly simply because at the time we did not have the judges on hand, or because the judges decided the standard was below what they expect in order to judge. But in any case it could not have received an ABM, as it is a horticulturally well established species.
Jason, I am not about to enter a public debate in a blog on this. It’s not appropriate. Correspondence and friendly discussions are the way to get things changed. Publicly attacking the system and the judges is not. The committee have made it clear to me that they will not confirm your award unless you retract your comments, so I hope you will reconsider, and accept that it’s not in order to ask for a plant to be judged, and then state publicly and in detail why you are dissatisfied with the standard of expertise (while at the same time accepting the award!)
Regards,
John
On 5/5/11 4:07 AM, "Jason Ong" <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear John,
I do not believe in being a follower. I am trained by the Gentle Warrior Farmer aka Ivy Singh-Lim to be a person who has the intelligence, which allows me to think like a human, not a cloned donkey. Since your judging committee has made their decision to retract the award, I will remove the HCC award given to the Paph. Spiderman ‘Shippo’. Do note that I will share and post all the correspondence about this matter to all my fellow orchid friends and on the forum to explain the reason why I have to remove the award.
You ask me why I would want an award if I have no confidence in the judges or the system of judging? My answer to your question is simple. The results and reasons for why a plant was awarded or not being awarded says a lot about the judges’ integrity and commitments to promote the society’s main objectives; sharing and exchanging of knowledge and to educate the public about these amazing plants. The biggest difficulty for me to understand this given situation was not the closed door policy but the unwillingness of the judges treasure such an opportunity to expand their knowledge by researching and gathering information. It is a well-known fact that the memberships of many orchids societies have drastically dropped over the past few years due to different reasons. Insisting on this decrepit policy will only dampened the future of this wonderful hobby.
With regards to the Paph. barbigerum var. coccineum not being judged, the judge who told me he knows nothing about this species there cannot judge it was non other than Peter O’Byrne, author of A to Z of South East Asian Orchid Species. The variety coccineum is a different variety of barbigerum and may even be classified to be a different species from barbigerum by some taxonomists. This plant was discovered over ten years ago and its hybrids have already been registered with the RHS. The plant was not being rejected due to its inferior flower quality but because Peter O'Byrne said to me he does not know anything about this species, therefore he is not confident enough to judge it. I have attached a photo of the flower taken the night before the flower was brought in for judging.
Just because other orchid societies do not have open judging sessions does not make it a wise policy to adhere to. We are now living in the 21st century. This elitist system of judging policy is outdated and in my opinion somewhat discriminatory to those who are not in the judging system. I for one will not be part of a society who promotes such primitive practices. Until such practices have been abolished, I will not have anything to do with this society. As an educator in the National University of Singapore, what would you have done if you were to give your students an open topic assignment and one of your students submitted the essay about a subject you have absolutely no knowledge of? Would you find out what it was about before grading it? Would you give it an F or would you return the assignment to that student without giving it a grade with an excuse that you have no knowledge of the topic and therefore you are not confident in grading it.
Lastly, will I be able to participate in the WOC and put up the two proposed displays (20 sq meters and wardian case) and my plants being rejected to be judged at the show if I stand by my beliefs and not retract my posts on Slipper Talk forum? If that were to be the case, I would be very grateful if you would let me know by the end of this week before I start trying to recondition my collection of over 4000 orchid plants to flower in time for the WOC in November.
Regards,
Jason Ong
Hi Jason,
Its true AOS has open Judging in some centres, but it is not open in others; AOS judges in Taiwan at their shows do not have open judging (not even to other society judges, never mind the public). Japan, Taiwan, and RHS all do not have open judging. One can make a case either way, but the thing is, the way to make the case is to write to us. What is not acceptable is to submit a plant but then complain and attack the system in public. We still do not see why you would want an award if you have no confidence in the judges or the system of judging.
Over the years judges do changed and learn and extend their expertise. It is not that judges are uninterested in new genera. Nonetheless, it would really not have been appropriate to judge – on the spot – a very unfamiliar genus. I have had sufficient experience of seeing judges from overseas struggle with local plants they are unfamiliar with at shows, to be convinced that we should ensure the same does not apply to ourselves.
Sorry, I do not know why your Paph barbigerum was not judged – possibly simply because at the time we did not have the judges on hand, or because the judges decided the standard was below what they expect in order to judge. But in any case it could not have received an ABM, as it is a horticulturally well established species.
Jason, I am not about to enter a public debate in a blog on this. It’s not appropriate. Correspondence and friendly discussions are the way to get things changed. Publicly attacking the system and the judges is not. The committee have made it clear to me that they will not confirm your award unless you retract your comments, so I hope you will reconsider, and accept that it’s not in order to ask for a plant to be judged, and then state publicly and in detail why you are dissatisfied with the standard of expertise (while at the same time accepting the award!)
Regards,
John
On 5/5/11 4:07 AM, "Jason Ong" <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear John,
I do not believe in being a follower. I am trained by the Gentle Warrior Farmer aka Ivy Singh-Lim to be a person who has the intelligence, which allows me to think like a human, not a cloned donkey. Since your judging committee has made their decision to retract the award, I will remove the HCC award given to the Paph. Spiderman ‘Shippo’. Do note that I will share and post all the correspondence about this matter to all my fellow orchid friends and on the forum to explain the reason why I have to remove the award.
You ask me why I would want an award if I have no confidence in the judges or the system of judging? My answer to your question is simple. The results and reasons for why a plant was awarded or not being awarded says a lot about the judges’ integrity and commitments to promote the society’s main objectives; sharing and exchanging of knowledge and to educate the public about these amazing plants. The biggest difficulty for me to understand this given situation was not the closed door policy but the unwillingness of the judges treasure such an opportunity to expand their knowledge by researching and gathering information. It is a well-known fact that the memberships of many orchids societies have drastically dropped over the past few years due to different reasons. Insisting on this decrepit policy will only dampened the future of this wonderful hobby.
With regards to the Paph. barbigerum var. coccineum not being judged, the judge who told me he knows nothing about this species there cannot judge it was non other than Peter O’Byrne, author of A to Z of South East Asian Orchid Species. The variety coccineum is a different variety of barbigerum and may even be classified to be a different species from barbigerum by some taxonomists. This plant was discovered over ten years ago and its hybrids have already been registered with the RHS. The plant was not being rejected due to its inferior flower quality but because Peter O'Byrne said to me he does not know anything about this species, therefore he is not confident enough to judge it. I have attached a photo of the flower taken the night before the flower was brought in for judging.
Just because other orchid societies do not have open judging sessions does not make it a wise policy to adhere to. We are now living in the 21st century. This elitist system of judging policy is outdated and in my opinion somewhat discriminatory to those who are not in the judging system. I for one will not be part of a society who promotes such primitive practices. Until such practices have been abolished, I will not have anything to do with this society. As an educator in the National University of Singapore, what would you have done if you were to give your students an open topic assignment and one of your students submitted the essay about a subject you have absolutely no knowledge of? Would you find out what it was about before grading it? Would you give it an F or would you return the assignment to that student without giving it a grade with an excuse that you have no knowledge of the topic and therefore you are not confident in grading it.
Lastly, will I be able to participate in the WOC and put up the two proposed displays (20 sq meters and wardian case) and my plants being rejected to be judged at the show if I stand by my beliefs and not retract my posts on Slipper Talk forum? If that were to be the case, I would be very grateful if you would let me know by the end of this week before I start trying to recondition my collection of over 4000 orchid plants to flower in time for the WOC in November.
Regards,
Jason Ong
You are only rendered speechless?
Strange! he seems to know so much about suzukii as a hybrid named Peng Seng (cruentum x tobaense),even sanderianum who lives in Vietnam & other vietnamese orchidist confirm that dendrobium suzukii exists in Vietnam .
M
Marc
Guest
Aquagem,
I thnk you have done the right thing by standing up to them. It truly shows the colour of the people / society your dealing with here.
I think it's rediculous that they are trying to blackmail you to remove your opinion which is posted here on this forum. I can't tell if it was a hard thing for you to take the path that you did but I must congratulate you on your decision.
I hope that this nice showing of "politics" has no impact on your love for orchids in general.
I thnk you have done the right thing by standing up to them. It truly shows the colour of the people / society your dealing with here.
I think it's rediculous that they are trying to blackmail you to remove your opinion which is posted here on this forum. I can't tell if it was a hard thing for you to take the path that you did but I must congratulate you on your decision.
I hope that this nice showing of "politics" has no impact on your love for orchids in general.
A
AquaGem
Guest
Marc, Thank you for using the word that i have been waiting for someone to post here, "BLACKMAIL". Doing the right thing has never been difficult for me because I believe in integrity. Nothing can make an impact on my love for orchids except for the discoveries of new and wonderful species.
This cowardly act of desperation by the judges only makes me want to try to change the society to make it a politics free organization. Many tells me that it is near impossible to do so but near impossible is not impossible. Someone on the board has to be accountable for this act of blackmailing and I for one do not take lightly to being blackmail.
I have cc those emails to many people including the President of AOS, and the secretariat of WOC in Singapore. I alone can only make a little impact but it is the right thing and I stand by my principles.
SlipperFan
Addicted
Good luck, Jason. I don't see how it is possible to change entrenched politics, unless the people involved are replaced. And who will do that?
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
- Messages
- 10,879
- Reaction score
- 339
I read Marc's post and thought "that's it!!" blackmail is the word that sums this whole fiasco up. Is that not illegal in Singapore?
M
Marc
Guest
I'm curious how this story wil develop, I hope you will keep us updated.
SlipperKing
Madd Virologist
It sounds like they, the judges, already know they have issues and too embarrassed to open their doors. Coming up with weak excuses for what they do including blackmail. I say screw their award and please except ours. The SlipperTalk Gang is a much more prestigious organization anyway. Jason you may now add to your tag; AM/STG!
A
AquaGem
Guest
Haha.... thanks for all your support. I will humbly accept this award. :clap::clap::clap:
C
Clark
Guest
:clap:
SlipperKing
Madd Virologist
GOOD! It's a done deal then!
G
goldenrose
Guest
Good for you!
SlipperFan
Addicted
I love it!!! :clap:
J
John Elliott
Guest
As the corrrespondence between AquaGem (Jason Ong) and OSSEA was publishd here, I add below my response for completeness,and to give Peter O'Byrne his say:
_________
Dear Jason,
Thank you for this clarification.
You mention your training. Mine was that it is discourteous to make correspondence public without the agreement of the correspondent. Accordingly, I will confine myself to the following remarks.
Your objections OSSEA judging procedure are noted, and will be considered further, but have nothing to do with the WOC. The OSSEA awards committee does not manage the WOC judging. If you have any concerns about exhibiting or judging at WOC they may be directed to the WOC judging committee: [email protected] It would be considerate to alert them that, if not satisfied, you reserve the right to disseminate any correspondence.
I will recuse myself from Judging any orchid or display offered by you at the WOC
Peter O'Byrne, whom you mention, is annoyed that you made your remarks about him in a forum from which he is barred, and without informing him, which rather undermines your plea for transparency. I attach his email on the subject (it's below).
Your resignation from OSSEA is noted with regret.
Regards
John
(President, OSSEA)
_______________________
Peter’s email:
Hi John.
I have just read the whole Paph. Spiderman 'Shippo' HCC/OSSEA thread on Slippertalk.com, and I'm really quite annoyed at the way Jason Ong (aka "AquaGem") has portrayed me and my expertise. On the 20th Feb, AquaGem made the following statements about me:
I brought a Paph. coccineum to be judged, and I was told by one of the judge, also a taxanomist and a published author, Peter O'Byrne, that he has no idea about Paph. coccineum. I would have accepted his excuse if that was a recently discovered plant, but that plant has been around for over 10 years which makes his excuse quite.... (speechless).
I am particularly pissed-off at the cowardly way Jason Ong has posted personal comments about me on a forum where I am barred from responding. He didn't even 'cc the comments to me so I could see what he was saying. I really would like to set the record straight on a few issues:
a) I am not a taxonomist, and I have never claimed to be one. Other people might have described me as a taxonomist, but that doesn't make it true. After years of working with orchids I've picked up a good deal of info about taxomony, but that doesn't make me anything more than an amateur. I challenge Jason Ong to cite one instance where I have described myself as a taxonomist.
b) I am not a regular judge, and I have never claimed to be one. I have absolutely no interest in judging. As you know, my involvement in judging is entirely reluctant (meaning I usually get dragged in at the last minute when the panel is desperate to make a quorum) and is subject to certain conditions, one of which is that I WILL NEVER BE ASKED TO JUDGE A SLIPPER ORCHID. If Jason Ong had done his homework, he would have known this. Check my record: I have never been on a panel that judged a Paph, and I never will. My stance on Paphiopedilums is extremely well-known; I am simply not interested in them.
c) At the OSSEA meeting in question, Jason Ong approached me directly about judging his plant. Such an approach is ethically unacceptable; the exhibitor should deal with the Secretary of the Judging Panel and not go hassling individual Panel members (especially reluctant ones who have zero interest or knowledge of the genus in question). In order to maintain a degree of objectivity, Panel members are not even told who the owner of the plant is, so for an award-seeking exhibitor to try to discuss his plant with the members of the judging panel beforehand is a clear subversion of the Judging process.
d) I did not tell Jason Ong that his plant should not be judged. In fairness, he hasn't made this claim .... although just about everything else he wrote is a distortion of fact. I told him that I could not judge his plant because I was not familiar with Paphiopedilum coccineum. My statement was 100% true when I made it, and it remains 100% true today. My total experience of this taxon is: I have seen P. barbigerum once (in October 2007), I have seen photos of P. barbigerum var. sulivongii in-situ (Sept 2008), but before Jason Ong approached me at the OSSEA meeting, I had never seen P. coccineum. This is not enough experience to formally judge a plant, and I said so. I do not understand why Jason Ong thinks I deserve a public flaming simply because I was honest with him. He certainly hasn't been honest in his portrayal of me !
e) According to the Kew website (accessed today, 5.5.2011 at 6:40 pm), P. coccineum. is a syn. of P. barbigerum var. barbigerum. OSSEA would have been in error to judge it (let alone award it) as either P. coccineum. or P. barbigerum var. coccineum.
f) Jason Ong thinks that just because a plant has been around for 10 years, someone who doesn't give a toss about Paphiopedilums should know all about it. Let's put the boot on the other foot. I would like to give Jason Ong 4 weeks notice (far more than the few minutes he gave me) that I will ask him to judge a plant to the next OSSEA meeting (Sunday 5th June, ie in 4 weeks time). The species I'll bring in has been around for more than 100 years, but I won't tell him the accepted name; rather, I'll refer to it by a fairly recent synonym. Let's see how Jason Ong copes under the same conditions he thinks I should operate under.
John, I'd be obliged if you could post this email on the Paph. Spiderman 'Shippo' HCC/OSSEA thread on Slippertalk.com.
Thanks,
Peter O'Byrne
_________
Dear Jason,
Thank you for this clarification.
You mention your training. Mine was that it is discourteous to make correspondence public without the agreement of the correspondent. Accordingly, I will confine myself to the following remarks.
Your objections OSSEA judging procedure are noted, and will be considered further, but have nothing to do with the WOC. The OSSEA awards committee does not manage the WOC judging. If you have any concerns about exhibiting or judging at WOC they may be directed to the WOC judging committee: [email protected] It would be considerate to alert them that, if not satisfied, you reserve the right to disseminate any correspondence.
I will recuse myself from Judging any orchid or display offered by you at the WOC
Peter O'Byrne, whom you mention, is annoyed that you made your remarks about him in a forum from which he is barred, and without informing him, which rather undermines your plea for transparency. I attach his email on the subject (it's below).
Your resignation from OSSEA is noted with regret.
Regards
John
(President, OSSEA)
_______________________
Peter’s email:
Hi John.
I have just read the whole Paph. Spiderman 'Shippo' HCC/OSSEA thread on Slippertalk.com, and I'm really quite annoyed at the way Jason Ong (aka "AquaGem") has portrayed me and my expertise. On the 20th Feb, AquaGem made the following statements about me:
I brought a Paph. coccineum to be judged, and I was told by one of the judge, also a taxanomist and a published author, Peter O'Byrne, that he has no idea about Paph. coccineum. I would have accepted his excuse if that was a recently discovered plant, but that plant has been around for over 10 years which makes his excuse quite.... (speechless).
I am particularly pissed-off at the cowardly way Jason Ong has posted personal comments about me on a forum where I am barred from responding. He didn't even 'cc the comments to me so I could see what he was saying. I really would like to set the record straight on a few issues:
a) I am not a taxonomist, and I have never claimed to be one. Other people might have described me as a taxonomist, but that doesn't make it true. After years of working with orchids I've picked up a good deal of info about taxomony, but that doesn't make me anything more than an amateur. I challenge Jason Ong to cite one instance where I have described myself as a taxonomist.
b) I am not a regular judge, and I have never claimed to be one. I have absolutely no interest in judging. As you know, my involvement in judging is entirely reluctant (meaning I usually get dragged in at the last minute when the panel is desperate to make a quorum) and is subject to certain conditions, one of which is that I WILL NEVER BE ASKED TO JUDGE A SLIPPER ORCHID. If Jason Ong had done his homework, he would have known this. Check my record: I have never been on a panel that judged a Paph, and I never will. My stance on Paphiopedilums is extremely well-known; I am simply not interested in them.
c) At the OSSEA meeting in question, Jason Ong approached me directly about judging his plant. Such an approach is ethically unacceptable; the exhibitor should deal with the Secretary of the Judging Panel and not go hassling individual Panel members (especially reluctant ones who have zero interest or knowledge of the genus in question). In order to maintain a degree of objectivity, Panel members are not even told who the owner of the plant is, so for an award-seeking exhibitor to try to discuss his plant with the members of the judging panel beforehand is a clear subversion of the Judging process.
d) I did not tell Jason Ong that his plant should not be judged. In fairness, he hasn't made this claim .... although just about everything else he wrote is a distortion of fact. I told him that I could not judge his plant because I was not familiar with Paphiopedilum coccineum. My statement was 100% true when I made it, and it remains 100% true today. My total experience of this taxon is: I have seen P. barbigerum once (in October 2007), I have seen photos of P. barbigerum var. sulivongii in-situ (Sept 2008), but before Jason Ong approached me at the OSSEA meeting, I had never seen P. coccineum. This is not enough experience to formally judge a plant, and I said so. I do not understand why Jason Ong thinks I deserve a public flaming simply because I was honest with him. He certainly hasn't been honest in his portrayal of me !
e) According to the Kew website (accessed today, 5.5.2011 at 6:40 pm), P. coccineum. is a syn. of P. barbigerum var. barbigerum. OSSEA would have been in error to judge it (let alone award it) as either P. coccineum. or P. barbigerum var. coccineum.
f) Jason Ong thinks that just because a plant has been around for 10 years, someone who doesn't give a toss about Paphiopedilums should know all about it. Let's put the boot on the other foot. I would like to give Jason Ong 4 weeks notice (far more than the few minutes he gave me) that I will ask him to judge a plant to the next OSSEA meeting (Sunday 5th June, ie in 4 weeks time). The species I'll bring in has been around for more than 100 years, but I won't tell him the accepted name; rather, I'll refer to it by a fairly recent synonym. Let's see how Jason Ong copes under the same conditions he thinks I should operate under.
John, I'd be obliged if you could post this email on the Paph. Spiderman 'Shippo' HCC/OSSEA thread on Slippertalk.com.
Thanks,
Peter O'Byrne
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
- Messages
- 10,879
- Reaction score
- 339
Peter O'Byrne, is not and has never been banned from this forum. Feel free to register and post. We welcome it!
Similar threads
