Renaming Figs

[Shaft]

Okay, so bear with me, I sometimes go around the world to get to my point, but ultimately we do get there. I have the feeling this might be one of those times.

So, we all know that there are synonyms of various figs. There are many names for the same fig, based on region, etc. But a question might be posed--WHAT IS THE SAME FIG? So, here are some different examples, thought experiments I'm running in my head, aimed at arriving at one ultimate conclusion.

Let's say you're a seller. Let's say you have Violette de Bordeaux. Would you feel ethical to rename some of your stock THAT YOU KNOW TO BE VDB, rename it to Beer's Black, which is genetically confirmed to be the same? Why or why not? How about Negronne, which is suspected but not confirmed to be VdB as well? Why or why not?

So this kind of establishes a line of if we know something to GENETICALLY be the same, is it okay to appeal to the different markets (specifically, probably, neophytes who don't realize that certain figs have multiple names... one might call this taking advantage. I'm inclined to agree, but I've recently been persuaded that renaming figs might not always be a bad thing.) Take Genovese Nero AF and Italian 258 as another example. I understand there's still some debate about this one, so I invite that discussion here as well. I would love to be party to that. But AFAIK these two figs produce exactly the same fig, even if one maybe produces a week or two earlier than the other under certain conditions. Would you feel okay renaming your I-258 as Genovese Nero AF under these conditions?

I also have to wonder if it's a bad thing to rename your VDB to Negronne or Beer's Black because that's taking advantage of new figgers, is it equally bad to go buy Negronne AND Beer's Black so you can have them in your inventory? Are you still taking advantage of a new person's ignorance, or are you satisfying market demand? I'm really mixed on this one. It seems like that that last thing should be okay, having each one from trusted sellers. But if that's okay, and we know VDB to be the same as these other types, then why would renaming VDB as the other types not be okay? Or maybe it's all wrong and we should just have one agreed upon name in the fig community but then it begs the question: what should that name be and how do we eliminate the market for synonyms of this agreed-upon name?

Now, my final question, which is actually the point. The rest is just building up certain methods of approaching this problem. If I would do it with this next example, why would I not do it with them? I'm running into a problem with ethical consistency. I'm VERY inclined and persuaded to change the name of the White Marseilles I sell to Tena. I've been convinced by jmrtsus us that the cultivar I sell as White Marseilles is not correct. Would it be more ethical to change the name to Tena, which I take jmrstus at his word that that is what it is, or to continue to sell it as the now-diluted White Marseilles? (See this discussion for more information. https://www.ourfigs.com/forum/figs-h...-tena-possibly). Let's assume now that I do rename the White Marseilles to Tena. I also have a variety called Lattarula, which I am told is the REAL White Marseilles. Suggestions float around of whether a seller should continue using the diluted brand White Marseilles, and instead switch to another name: jmrstus recommends the name "Blanche." I'm inclined to follow his lead on this, but I really wanted community discussion and/or approval. Would renaming fig varieties in this way be unethical? Why or why not?

Part of the hesitancy is my natural inclination to do things perfect. I didn't mind buying the same fig by different names because, to my understanding, Genovese Nero AF and I-258 are the same fig but ripen at different times, same with Black Madeira KK and BM UCD and Figo Preto. I've bought one of all of those because of the different harvest time (supposedly) but also so that I could sell plants with each label. It has been my practice up til now to only use the labels that were given to me, with the assumption that trusted sellers and nurseries would be better informed than I. With this recent information about distributors like AgriStarts and their retailers, that core belief has been shaken. My greatest fear is there be another thread like this one https://www.ourfigs.com/forum/figs-h...487-reseller-s with someone contesting whether or not X fig or Y fig I'm selling is true to type because I renamed it Blanche or whatever else. I'm fairly new to this community and I want to play by all the rules, make everyone happy, and be someone to look up to in the community. I'm looking for guidance as I navigate these turbulent waters that are our figdom. Thanks.

Kind regards.

[Rudypayraise]

If it were to be done, it would have to be done by a trusted veteran with an extensive collection and a DNA testing company which would work together. The results would be valuable and used within the forum. However as you mentioned there are outside nurseries which have no interest in renaming as it would narrow down their number of varieties. Not to mention independent growers and scam artists on eBay, Etsy, etc. Now if a book were to be published with concrete synonyms based off DNA testing then it could go a long way. For most a website would suffice as the world had moved away from books.

Side note, I am also one who knows better but collects many similar varieties in hopes that I see different characteristics. I have learned that environment and the age of the tree can make judging by eye and taste for a couple seasons does not help you make final decisions if suspected synonym varieties are entirely unique. It would take years, many which plenty of veteran members have spent and cataloged and shared their findings with the forum.

I think proper etiquette would be to not rename your fig trees but to preface in any sale or listing of the possible synonyms. I personally like when a seller states as much info of the variety as well as links to discussions because it allows me take the final decision. I dont feel anyone would fault you for that. Renaming the fig trees without your own concrete evidence would only add to the pool of renaming which happened in the first place by others. Just my opinion. I love reading anything Jmrstus posts and I do trust his judgment on the White Marseilles topic. I have a tree which I purchased from a Botanic Garden which was sourced Brazos Nursery in Texas. The label says White Marseilles and has an image of what looks like the real White Marseilles. However it has short broad leaves and long finger like leaves. It has yet to fruit. I will not rename but will keep to facts that he outlined in his write up. If I were ever to sell any of it I would refer to his thread. I didn't want to go on a tangent but found the topic interesting.

[Shaft]

Rudypayraise yeah buddy no offense taken. Allow me to be more precise, with a more specific question. I actually agree with you about veterans, and I don't take it as a sleight in any way -- I am a novice BY ALL ACCOUNTS INCLUDING MY OWN.

But my question specifically is about White Marseilles/Tena and the relationship to veterans. I think what I am hearing you say is that even if a tried and true veteran said it's a Tena, you would still ask for DNA, even if DNA was unobtainable? I want to make sure that I'm hearing you right: you think that an semi-unobtainable standard (genetic testing is slow and expensive) with 100% certainty is more valuable than a less certain but more obtainable standard? This isn't a trick question or me playing with words -- although I know it sounds like I could be -- but rather me trying to figure out what to do in my specific situation. You mentioned the vets, and as far as I'm concerned jmrtsus is one of the best. I almost feel like his word is MORE valid than dna testing but maybe that's just me. I tend to be rather naive sometimes.

[Rudypayraise]

I was simply presenting the best solution to the now tired debate of narrowing down synonym varieties in a scientific way. Expense and attainability of testing is of course an obstacle. Could some University pick up the task and help facilitate it? Sure. Will someone be passionate enough to make it happen? I hope so. For the time being I rely heavily on this forum members noobs to vets to confirm variety types as my trees mature and ripen fruit. This is for my own personal pleasure of the hobby as I'm confident that all of the growers I deal with are providing varieties that they know to be true to type. I wouldn't change a name because someone suggests it especially if I'm going to trade or sell it. It will keep the original name which I obtained as and I will add disclaimers regarding any possible synonyms if applicable. I have a Vista that's ripened for me this year and it was delicious. Harvey posted on his video that he feels Vista is a synonym for VDB. I will keep it as Vista since that's how I obtained it from a member here. I also grow VDB for my personal interests to compare.

From the buyers standpoint if I have a Black Madeira and I want to buy a Figo Preto to grow and compare for my own comparison I would be upset if I found that the seller had a Balck Madera and changed the name to Figo Preto to appear to whats more popular at the time. This would in turn give me two possible Black Madeiras and my trouble would be all for not. I leave it at that. Best of luck brother. Blessings.

[Shaft]

yeah that's an interesting flip side, Rudy, and that was the reason for my previous position. Thanks for the great conversation!

[acerpictum]

I would follow Occam's rule of not multiplying names / entities unnecessarily.

[Shaft]

Sure, but in the case of White Marseilles, would we say it's necessary? How about in the case of VDB, say you have Negronne AND VDB, should you rename both to VDB and sell it as that or should you sell one as one and the other as the other? I've heard arguments both ways, and I'm hoping to either find a consensus among the greater group, or discover that there is no consensus and maybe that's its own kind of lesson. There's been a lot of moral dogpiling lately, but if we as a community cannot figure out what morals are best, well that speaks for itself. I'm open to whatever happens, I just want to know that I'm following the will of the community, with no unforeseen technicalities resulting in a "Gotcha!" moment.

[acerpictum]

Shaft I try to use the name that appeared earlier or more informative. For example, Violette de Bordeaux instead of Moissone or Krymskij chernyj. It is impossible to always follow a certain rule. It seems to me that there is no need to use synonyms, it is enough to know them and understand what kind of variety they are talking about.

[Shaft]

acerpictum okay, gotcha. But there will still be a market for things like White Marseilles or Lattarula so unless we educate new people, we're increasing (not decreasing) the power of scammers. But I hear you and I agree.

[don_sanders]

I don’t rename varieties whether recommended by a veteran or not. Figs can look very similar especially in pictures.

If I were to sell trees, I would make sure that the trees match the name that they were bought as to the best of my knowledge or not sell them at all. Maybe sell them or trade them as an unknown.

My VDB and Negronne seem to be different varieties for what that is worth.

[Shaft]

So how would you deal with the White Marseilles-Tena situation if you were a seller?

I've been bouncing this around in my head for weeks now and I'm getting exactly nowhere. Every time I think I've made a decision, a thousand questions pop up to expose it as a faulty solution.

[don_sanders]

I wouldn’t even sell them. It’s not worth a seller’s time and effort.

If for some reason I needed to sell them, I’d keep the original name and maybe source. And then you could mention that you think it’sTena or whatever in the description.

[Shaft]

don_sanders I have a couple I could plant and not worry about, or could sell. But my plan really is to have all the best-storied figs. I want the White Marseilles fig, but I want to follow the best practices recommended in this forum to do it. I agree with jmrtsus that the W.M market is diluted, and you don't want to be associated with that name. He recommends blanche, which was the name given to W.M prior to it being W.M. Another forum-goer here suggested using the oldest known name might be the way to go, and this would fit that as well.

W.M has a great story, but now I think the AgriStarts mix up is an inseperable part of that story, for better or worse. Probably worse. I do a fancy write-up of every fig I sell. I'm going to have to reference W.M in my Tena article and Tena in my W.M article -- that seems unavoidable now. But I for sure want to sell the story of the Thomas Jefferson fig, so that's why I'd be committed to selling that despite all of this.

[Kid Fig]

Most if not all seem like this wouldn't sit right with them.

I say why not. You are using figs that are synonymous with each other.
And if you were to rename it; you could follow it with an "a.k.a." as to soften the blow as well as to let your buyers know that your.figs are in fact synonymous and make it more palatable.

Plus it let's them know you have no intentions to fool them.

If say you renamed a "Figo Preto" to "Black Madeira"; but titled it "Black Madeira a.k.a. Figo Preto", buyers should have no problem accepting that fact.

It lets them know that they are synonymous and that you are being upfront with the info. Oh and price as well
.
Most could be turned off if say Figo Pretos generally are cheaper than BM, and you went ahead and you renamed a cheaper Figo Preto to a BM, for greater profit.

Ironically the BM I currently own was easier to obtain than a Figo Preto.

[Shaft]

Poll (Is renaming figs okay?): http://www.strawpoll.me/45583897
Poll (how do we protect newbies from scammers using outdated names?): https://www.strawpoll.me/45583910
Poll (Can you trust synonyms?): https://www.strawpoll.me/45583913

[Shaft]

"I'm confused by what you mean by "trust synonyms". I "trust" that if I have a healthy I-258, I won't need to also pick up a GNAF, or vice versa. But I would never mix the names or relabel my trees to a syn, under any circumstances. Is that last part what you mean by "trust"?"

Consider each of the poll questions to be shorter versions of the questions posed in the OP. In this case, "I also have to wonder if it's a bad thing to rename your VDB to Negronne or Beer's Black because that's taking advantage of new figgers, is it equally bad to go buy Negronne AND Beer's Black so you can have them in your inventory? Are you still taking advantage of a new person's ignorance, or are you satisfying market demand? I'm really mixed on this one. It seems like that that last thing should be okay, having each one from trusted sellers. But if that's okay, and we know VDB to be the same as these other types, then why would renaming VDB as the other types not be okay? Or maybe it's all wrong and we should just have one agreed upon name in the fig community but then it begs the question: what should that name be and how do we eliminate the market for synonyms of this agreed-upon name?"

Notice we already have one reply of "I would follow Occam's rule of not multiplying names / entities unnecessarily" which I take to mean that things that are considered synonyms should be compressed into one label, so that Lattarula / Italian Honey Fig / White Marseilles just becomes Blanche (jmrtsus' proposal). This would be an example.

[DerekWatts]

Just pointing out that if your straw poll questions aren't clear, you won't get the results you're looking for. There is more than one way to "trust" or make use of a synonym.

[Shaft]

DerekWatts fair point, I'm hoping they read the original post but it's long and... well, you're right. Full stop.

[DerekWatts]

In my opinion, trees should stay labeled with the name given by your source. A few exceptions might be fixing a typo, e.g. "Black Madeira" vs "Black Madiera", or in some circumstances, adding an accession or noting a mistaken identity, e.g. "Adriatic JH" or "Mission (not)". I would say it's absolutely unethical to change a VdB to a Negronne, or a Figo Preto to a BM.

Assuming and mixing synonyms only adds confusion to naming conventions and uncertainty to selection of actual desired varieties. Consider the possibility that some strains within a group of 'synonyms' may have more differences than just name alone. Bud sports and disease exposure both play a role in clonal propagation, and we should do our part to make identification and selection for these traits easier, not harder by mixing names and muddying the chain of title. Now, you mentioned the genetics testing earlier, but it's not even clear that the loci currently sampled for genetic synonyms could detect differences between bud sports, let alone disease.

So, I'd find it just as unethical to sell a Martinenca as "Martinenca Rimada", or a CdD Blanc as "CdD Rimada", as I would selling a Figo Preto as "BMKK". There's no communally beneficial reason for taking such a step, and imo it should be avoided.

In your case, sell your mislabeled fig as an unknown and reference the similarities to Tena in the description. Searches for Tena will still bring up your listing, but you won't be contributing to misinformation.

[Shaft]

DerekWatts Right. Okay. Fair points all of them.

Rewton Sounds good to me.

Here's a question. Let's say I wanted to wait -- I'm in no hurry to sell these trees. Are there processes short of genetic testing I could go through to confirm it was in fact Tena? Obviously I check the leaves and the fruit, but is that enough? Assume I've got a 10 year time frame. What's the play?

Right now I'm leaning towards just selling them as-is as W.M-Not and throw something in the description. Or I might just keep them for myself, who cares? But let's say ten years from now I've got 9 years of production on my W.M-Not and I've tasted the fruit, seen the leaves, compared it to a Tena planted RIGHT BESIDE IT. Could I then confirm it and its scion wood as Tena?

[Red_Sun]

@Shaft

In your WM/Tena case. There are several things that you could have done:

1. Pretend you did not know anything. I keep selling those as WM, just like some other sellers at FigBid. You may get buyers who know nothing about the WM/Tena thing.
2. You disclose all you about it. You state that it was sold to you as WM, but it is probably a Tena.
3. You do not sell since the variety is a question mark. There is no huge commercial value with it.

Personally I won't sell it is "WM NOT". That really says nothing, but more negative. It shows that you are selling something you do not really know.

[Shaft]

Red_Sun I agree wholeheartedly. I don't want to sell a "NOT" either.

Pretending as in the case of #1 is a thing I can't do. I'd rather earn the respect of this community, and sticking your head in the sand like AgriStarts did doesn't seem the way to do it.

#3 also doesn't seem like a viable option for me. #2 seems like the only moral option listed.

[ginamcd]

Until we have access to DNA testing, none of us should be renaming figs based on what they appear to be. Best practice is to either not share/sell a variety you suspect may be mislabeled, or when you do so, add "(Not)" to the name, provide the reason to the recipient/buyer, and impress upon them the importance of keeping the "(Not)" as part of the name if they in turn choose to share/sell it.

This is the same practice we should all be using with any variety carrying the "Unk" designation when the variety may or may not already be in circulation under another name. Too often the "Unk" gets dropped, or never even gets added before a new name is attached to a "found" variety. Without easy access to DNA testing, ettiquette accepted among reputable fig growers is that the only time a variety can rightly be distributed under a new name is if it is a confirmed seed grown tree.

This practice of using "(Not)" is not unique to figs. In fact, among tomato growers the accepted practice was to never save seeds to share/sell from a mislabeled variety. It used to be adhered to fairly strictly and enforced among the tomato growing community with the help of several nationally known experts. Though unlike figs, with tomatoes you know in 5-6 months you're not growing what you thought you were, and you can start over the following year with correct seeds. I wish it were that simple with figs...

[Shaft]

"Not stirring any pot. Renaming wreaks havoc without evidence."

ginamcd you keep saying these things but it becomes apparent you haven't read. I linked to AMPLE amounts of evidence and jmrtsus has even come here and explained the evidence. We're not talking about renaming WITHOUT evidence, we're talking about renaming WITH evidence. Stop trying to cause trouble, please, for once in your life.

[ginamcd]

Shaft I am not singling you out in any way, yet you seem to be bent on attacking me. I've said nothing different than what Pete, Don and the others have said, yet they earn your thanks and I'm treated with rudeness. Why is that?

[Shaft]

"I am not singling you out in any way, yet you seem to be bent on attacking me. I've said nothing different than what Pete, Don and the others have said, yet they earn your thanks and I'm treated with rudeness. Why is that?"

ginamcd an honest question deserves an honest answer.

Honestly, ASCPete earned my respect before this. His comment didn't make much sense, and while I didn't call him out by name like I did you, I did call out the comment he made. The problem with both of your comments is it didn't even come close to answering the question that was asked. I haven't had a chance to read his link yet, so maybe there's more context there, but he gave me something to go on. You keep mentioning this "consensus" that I for the life of me do not see. I see a lot of people posting their opinions, and some of those opinions are mutually exclusive. The net result of you discussing this consensus has, at least in discussions with me, been that I feel little, and small, and like I'm a student who didn't turn his homework in. Well, I've done my homework, and I'm consulting others as well for a group study session. I want to challenge your consensus, and I want to qualify it, and, if it's not serving its purpose, I want to eliminate it.

That's the nuts and bolts of the argument, but one other issue you and I run into is how you will talk out both sides of your mouth. For example "I guess this consensus can be very inconvenient when one's only objective is to market a fig that they believe is mislabeled."

You're kind of a master at this sort of thing. You packed so much wrong, bad information into one sentence it's hard for me to deal with.

First of all, the consensus isn't a consensus. I've made my argument against that VERY clear but apparently you're not interested in explaining why this thing you insist exists has value, or defending its existence. Second of all, you imply that my only objective is to market a fig to make money. My actual objective is to figure out how best to market the THOMAS JEFFERSON FIG, which I have as lattarula. My overall question is do I attach the history of W. Marseilles to Lattarula, a name that is erroneous, was made up in 1940 something, and a name Thomas Jefferson never knew or used? Or do I leave lattarula to do its own thing, drop the name w. marseilles, and use blanche? You actually are taking the information and getting it EXACTLY BACKWARDS as usual.

You did this same thing when I asked about how to get on ebay's trusted sellers list, and you said I belong on the other list.

You've been doing this to me since my literal FIRST DAY HERE. You were one of the first forum members I remember speaking to. The other was Pete. He was helpful, you've been nothing but a word I'm not allowed to say here. If you want we can start a clean slate. We can shake hands, hug, and make up. I'll even go first. Hi. I'm Malcolm. I want to be the most reputable fig seller in the game. I want to have the coolest stories of the coolest figs to tell my kid, because I'm not very good at telling ghost stories around the campfire and stuff like that. I'm not very creative. I want to tell true stories, non-fiction, in an entertaining way, about a fruit my kid actually gets to eat. So what do I tell him the name of this bitter-sweet fruit is that Thomas Jefferson loved so much? Is it W. Marseilles? Is it Blanche? Is it Lattarula? Right now, I don't know, and I'm looking to the fig community for guidance.

[Red_Sun]

Although this is something really lacking with the fig community, here are the principles that I follow:

1. If I trade or swap with friends and other members, I'm more relaxed knowing that some people may not be fig fanatics. I get time to know what they really are. I do not hold them responsible.
2. If I open my wallet to pay $100 or more for a couple cuttings, then I hold the seller responsible for what they sell. I would only buy from the seller(s) who are more trustworthy. The sellers are expected to back up the sales to make sure they are true to their names. Or that would ruin their reputation (if they get any).

The question is what we do with some sellers who knowingly sell fig materials not true to their names. I've seen at least one big fig seller. He is very knowledgeable and posts (promotes) often at several websites and social media. But I spotted several of his fig varieties not true to the names. White Marseilles is one of them. He sold tons of WM materials. Of course personally I won't deal with this seller and I won't recommend him to anyone else. But I'm not going out of my way to bother him. He is not really a crook yet. But certainly he takes advantages of some buyers who do not do their own research.

I do not want to get much into this. For someone to continue to be a respected seller, the seller needs to learn all about the fig varieties he/she sells. The fig cultivars should be verified. The fig materials should also be free of serious diseases. Seller also needs to back the fig varieties true to their names. Otherwise, words will eventually come out about this seller's reputation. Then this seller can't stay so long.

[Shaft]

Yeah I agree with that. In some of the threads I referenced, I was a seller being condemned. I sold a W.M-not as a W.M because that's how it was sold to me. I think it all comes down to this part of what you said and nothing else: "The sellers are expected to back up the sales to make sure they are true to their names. Or that would ruin their reputation (if they get any)."

It would probably be unwise for someone new to the game to take on selling, but if they're willing to take on that risk (and honor their sales as you point out) then that should be left up to them. I am one of those unwise people doing this game with less than perfect knowledge. I'd rather learn in the process, and fix any mistakes I make along the way. My customers so far are ecstatic, even the two who lost their trees in USPS care. I learned not to use USPS, and they learned I will replace a product with good customer service and a smile. I look after my folks, and I think that ultimately is what matters. But there appear to be A LOT OF LANDMINES laid for the unaware, and some forum-goers who enjoy the chaos of watching newbies dance the field. After being made to dance to their tune, I'd rather just make this thread and get consensus -- if there is any -- from the community on best-practices.

[Red_Sun]

Yes, I agree with what you just said.

As we all know, fig is really easy to propagate. Before, I always like to save any fig plants I can. Then I accumulated a lot of fig plants. I could have sold those. But I just do not feel good to sell $10 or $20 to sell at eBay or FigBid. Same with my grape and other plants. Not worth my efforts. So I just gave them away and trade with others. If I want to sell anything, they will have to be top quality that has commercial value. I do not treat fig as a "business". If so, it is a hazard business to play. It is a wild West. Unregulated.....

[Shaft]

Red_Sun yes that's exactly what attracts me to the business. I prefer the wild west. I ABHOR regulation. Hell, don't even get me started on IP laws and censorship. I know this community is big fan of that stuff but I DETEST it. I only play by the rules because it was made clear to me it's important to the community. I think the market (the community) self-regulates, and if I don't respond accordingly, that's it. But... that wild west atmosphere is what I love.

That said, I gift just as many plants as I sell. I prefer to trade, but if someone can't afford it, like in the case of a senior citizen I spoke to on a facebook fig group, I sent him like four trees as my gift. He had added me on FB, and had been trying to place an order with me for about two months but his pension check was always short or late or whatever. Well his birthday came around and I already had his address, so now there's a happy old man with four trees. If he pays me, cool, but honestly I'm not expecting anything and that's fine with me. But I am broke, IRL. I consider fig money "fake money" and I use it to help others, or to put myself in a better position in this business (more 4x9 treepots or trays, more containers, better soil amendments, that sort of thing) so that I can make more money to then use to help others as well. We all know some people have more money than they need and are willing to pay larger prices. We all also know that poor people exist who want commodities but can't have them. Well... the free market gives us the opportunity to right that mismatch, and perhaps still make a profit along the way.

[Kid Fig]

Would anyone have trouble with:

Tena (aka White Marseilles/Lattarula/Blanche/Italian Honey/Lemon) as the Label (online description)?

[Sod]

Tena is a different variety altogether than any of those listed.

[ginamcd]

aka implies they are all one in the same, something we don't have hard evidence of yet. The better terminology is "possible synonyms."

[Shaft]

What about Blanche (aka Lattarula/Italian Honey/Lemon/White Marseilles)

I care more about selling the "Thomas Jefferson fig" than I do about offloading these Tena. I have two Lattarula from different sources already, so once I taste the fruit -- I'm looking for a bitter skin with a sweet interior -- I'm seriously considering just renaming it to Blanche like jmrtsus recommends, and attaching the AKAs like that. As far as Tena... I don't see why selling the listing as "Tena - or at least a White Marseilles-not" with a good and thorough description would be bad.

[batty]

Echoing some others here: no re-naming.

No matter the intent it's likely to just cause more confusion. Once a fig is mis-labeled I don't think it's possible to fully recover the name, there's just no way to be 100% sure it's exactly X without positively identifying provenance: where it comes from e.g. the true "mother tree." Looks, fruit etc just aren't enough, it becomes a judgement call and others will definitely judge differently. Some varieties are considered close to synonyms but that is different than being exactly the same!

I think the only way you can sell these is with the whole story attached - name as bought, who purchased from, possible corrected name, link to evidence etc all there. Might be a pain but that's the only way a buyer can understand what they're actually getting.

[Shaft]

Yeah I always attach the whole story, which is actually one of the reasons this thread exists. I want to sell the W. Marseilles variety that Thomas Jefferson sold. The fig community appears to agree that Lattarula is that fig. One question I'm asking here is would it be okay to attach that story to that fig erroneously -- Lattarula isn't a real fig, it's a made-up story by a dishonest seller, attached to Blanche -- to Lattarula? Afterall, Jefferson never ate a fig called Lattarula. He ate the White Marseilles, the fig from Marseilles, the Marseilleaise, the Blanche. He knew it by many names, but Lattarula wasn't one of them.

I actually care more about the story than the fig. Let me link you to a word document real quick. It's a work in progress for sure but I want you to see just how much I value the story. Your responses, and everyone else's in this thread, will determine how I choose to write the entries for White Marseilles and Tena, both of which need work to update it with all of this information. It's coming at me too fast to write anywhere other than my notes, but once I feel I'm on top of this thing, I will ammend those write-ups.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...ONI_ucfilCB0Ak

[AscPete]

It would be WM Not TC (White Marseilles Not Tissue Cultured), it should never have Tena in its name...

There is no excuse for Renaming a Fig Cultivar to an already used and established cultivar name. It can be classified as a similar type, for example Unknown Bryant Dark is an Mount Etna Type or Hardy Chicago Type

[Shaft]

WM Not TC? I think it is a TC though. At least that's how I understand the Agristarts fiasco? IDK man. A lot of this is going over my head. Why would I call it not a TC?

Oh wait... I think I read that sentence wrong. You're saying WM Not, TC. Not WM, Not TC. Jesus Christ I'm dumb. Could you confirm this for me?

[AscPete]

Shaft ,

TC is the “Source” and part of the name as spelled out in the parentheses, the suffix / initials are ‘typical’... https://www.ourfigs.com/forum/figs-h...any-other-name

White Marseilles-Not TC

This discussion has been had.

[Shaft]

I appreciate it Pete. Thanks for the link I'll read through it!

[Red_Sun]

Would anyone have trouble with:

Tena (aka White Marseilles/Lattarula/Blanche/Italian Honey/Lemon) as the Label (online description)?

No.

If someone knowingly sells Tena and marks it as White Marseilles, it is deceiving new buyers.

If someone unknowingly sells Tena and marks it as White Marseilles, then any good figgers would know it and know this seller can't be trusted.

If you want to label Verte as Green Ischia since that name is more popular, there is nothing wrong with it. It is not renaming since they are the same variety.

I think it is a bad idea to label anything like Green Ischia "NOT". Seller has to say what they are selling. If they do not know it, then say it is an unknown. It is never a good idea to sell something has been mis-labeled.

It is all about disclosure. Even for unknowns, if you fully disclose it, with the real photos of the plants and figs. Add the potential candidates for the fig, then buyers make a decision as to what this unknown could be. I do not see anything wrong with that either.

[Red_Sun]

@Shaft

I do not care what the consensus others tell you. Here are the names I can choose whichever I LIKE to use:

Black Mission/Mission/Beers Black
King/Desert King
Genoa/White Genoa
Kadota/Dottato/White Kodota
Panachee/Striped Tiger
White Ischia/Verte
Lattarula/Italian Honey
Celeste/Blue Celeste

Brunswick and Magnolia are inter-used.

Those are not just synonym names. But they are identical names. Free to use any of them....

[Shaft]

Thank you Red_Sun I will do that.

[venturabananas]

Red_Sun 's post here illustrates the problem of supposed synonyms: he stated Verte and Green Ischia are different names for the same plant. Indeed, Condit said so himself. But Condit couldn't compare their DNA, which are not the same (see Aradhya et al. 2010). Even experts are wrong sometimes.

I think this illustrates the importance of not changing the name you obtained a plant under, unless you know it to be wrong. Just because someone said to varieties are the same, how do you know they are right? I (and many others) say that Golden Rainbow and Yellow Long Neck are the same, but what if I'm wrong?

[Figland]

This is an interesting question and I saw a post today where someone claimed that figs with syrup were doctored so it's kind of the same vein. I think as we all learn and try to update ourselves to be as accurate as possible, we will make mistakes, and when we do we have to try to make amends. Recently someone let us know that a plant he was selling cuttings of as a CdD Roja was a mislabeled "Gegantina". Since I am still pretty new to this I want to make sure I label that plant correctly and I appreciate his honesty and help with doing that.

I have what was supposed to be a "Tena" and what was supposed to be a White Marseilles and I am going to do my best to figure out from their characteristics what they really are. In the meantime, I won't share cuttings till I am more certain. One I got from a nursery, one from a newer grower like myself, maybe who knows even less than I do. The labeled Tena has as much flavor as the Panache so I'm happy to have it whatever it is. Some have cautioned that going off characteristics is not accurate and that may also be a hurdle for ID. Until I have more direct experience with the varieties named as synonyms, I won't be comfortable lumping them altogether. Best practice for me would be to use the closest I could figure out and then add the "Not" or "Unk" if I was selling cuttings. Of course asking more knowledgable friends first. before listing is a good idea, so you can be as accurate as possible. Adding your justifications leads to discussions and further clarifications by others with more experience. Always helpful. There are differences due to climate that will change a fig in different places along with the influence of the wasp. I am learning. Those little boogers were on one of my Olympians the other day, not sure why when there are caprifigs galore for them to play with here.

After reading Red Sun's response above I agree , if you are selling, you should have pictures to share and others can see from those if you are correct or if you need help clarifying, that should be able to happen respectfully and could lead to making better, more reliable sellers for everyone. That should be one outcome of the community. Better figs for everyone!

Jmrtsus suggested downloading the Conduit monograph and learning more about the varieties which I will happily do. https://ucanr.edu/datastoreFiles/391-296.pdf
I'm sure more questions will come up, but I guess for most of us learning more is a way to a solution. Now we have the internet, we have more international sources which are really welcome!

[Shaft]

Thanks, just want to ask about one of your points, the rest I'm fully on board with.

You said talk to more experienced people, similar to what I did with jmrtsus. When I found out I had sold the wrong product, that infuriated me. I don't want to do that again, but I still want to be able to sell that story. You seem to suggest that if you found out from a veteran member that your X was actually a Y you'd feel comfortable distributing it as Y, short of genetic testing? I 100% agree with this, but we have other forum-goers who don't agree with this. I want to make sure I'm not hearing what I want to hear so if you will confirm or correct this, I would greatly appreciate it.

[Figland]

Shaft, no, if someone I trusted gave me reasons that I felt were convincing to prove that the "X" was a "Y", I would change my naming and tell those that I had distributed it to. Sometimes they are wrong, or not as careful as I think you want to be. I keep mentioning Dragon fruit because I am a commercial farmer as well and since I grow these and have to represent them to customers I have to be fairly confident that I know what I am growing. So I go to workshops by the University experts and constantly research to make sure I am at least somewhat competent. This is where I find all of the errors in the community and I try not to be too mean in helping others correct what i think are their mistakes, but I see this a lot and it hurts others who are less experienced so it is important and I commend you for wanting to be accurate. I see a lot of drama, too, as people get angry at those they feel have misled or ripped them off. I would feel the same way if I found out I made a mistake in giving someone something different from what I represented it as. Like you, I want to avoid that.

[Shaft]

Figland okay cool I'm getting what you're saying. TBH not a single one of my customers have been angry, for any reason other than a steep shipping learning curve, but I made those right. Like you said, I want to be confident in what I'm growing. TBH if someone corrects me I don't get offended. I only got offended because I had to find the thread myself, no one came to me directly.

I have a friend growing pitaya as well. It's been fun watching it grow up in the greenhouse.

[Kid Fig]

How about naming it exactly what is was sold to you as, with the following info/example.

Lemon Fig

- Compares with the folliwing types: White Marseilles/Lattarula/Blanche/Italian Honey.

[Red_Sun]

How about naming it exactly what is was sold to you as, with the following info/example.

Lemon Fig

- Compares with the folliwing types: White Marseilles/Lattarula/Blanche/Italian Honey.

It is a "safe" idea to label what it was sent to you. Also add the source where you get it. I always want to know where the seller or giver acquires the fig materials.

It is not a good idea to lump names together. Even for the recent WM mess, I still think Blache/White Marseilles and Lattarula/Italian Honey are two different fig varieties with different leaf shapes and hardiness. That is debatable.

Full disclosure is always the best. I do not like the sellers who like to hide things.

[Kid Fig]

Fair enough.

[Shaft]

Fair. So what I'm hearing you say is the debate is still on, which is why the clumping together might not be good. But if the debate is off, it's fine to clump (Beer's Black/VDB). You also seem to be saying that a seller who has both a VDB for sell and a Beer's Black while knowing they are the same isn't a bad dude, he's just satisfying market demand.

You also seem to be saying that any mistakes in a title can be amended by full disclosure in the description.

[Kid Fig]

Things are starting to get a little warm round here Shaft.

But if I gotta play the advocate to the devil's advocate, in the end you'll be criticized by those who insist that your method is unacceptable and point it out.

Which at the end of the day, can and will affect your business, even if only slightly and your reputation as well, amongst the veteran figsters at least.

But I do get it.

[goodfriendmike]

Shaft Like I said in private. If you have questions I can answer I will. whether or not I agree with you. But I will due my best to point you in the right direction. Even if you think its a holish.

[Shaft]

goodfriendmike Well I do mean this question sincerely: " In your mind the marker is genetic testing or condit-like traits? That was the second part of the question we're trying to figure out. Like... what is the bar you use to determine synonyms?"

To further elaborate, I'm trying to find what is the minimum bar we as a community want people to meet.

So in jmrtsus' case it seems he, and a lot of other people, are okay with the Condit-bar, for lack of a better phrase. He's using the Condit database, and matching it against leaves and fruit. For the purposes of this discussion let's assume the seller is opting for FULL DISCLOSURE of his methodology. Do you think this would be acceptable? Why or why not?

If the Condit bar isn't enough, would genetic testing be enough? It seems like some people dispute even that. To the best of my knowledge, Beer's Black and VDB are the same. You said earlier they weren't. That implies that maybe the genetic testing has faults and could be disputed as well.

Ultimately I'm trying to figure out a few things, that are maybe unrelated but I've somehow tangled in this noggin of mine.

#1- What is the minimum bar, as we just discussed
#2- What is the process that I need to initiate in order to sell the THOMAS JEFFERSON FIG -- whatever we want to call it, blanche, W.M, Lattarula, IDGAF. I care far mroe about the story than I do the individual fig. I want to obtain that fig, and I was told I should buy a lattarula. My policy up til now has been DO NOT RENAME, and that would include renaming Lattarula to Blanche or W. Marseilles. So it leaves me feeling like, morally, I should attach the story of W.M to Lattarula and be done with it. But a different part of me says "Jefferson never ate a fig named Lattarula" because I was aware of the story of how Lattarula came to be. It's an American only synonym. It's a complete fraud. I don't want to appear ignorant, by selling a fig known to be a fraud. I also don't want to attach the Jefferson story to the Lattarula and have people upset about that. That's my starting point, so when jmrtsus talks about narrowing down the figs list, and going back to older names, that speaks to me. Simpler is better. From what I can see there are two camps. One camp thinks things are overcomplicated and want to simplify things, find ways of confirmation, to narrow down the list. In this camp, there appears to be a sentiment that all these new names are just so people can sell an old fig to a new audience with a new name, like Lattarula instead of Blanche. The other camp seems to think more names is better, because it's more specific. Because I always OVEREXPLAIN in my description, this camp confuses me, because I don't understand why it has to be in the name and the title if it's made explicitly clear in the description, but I'm open to hearing all sides. That said... there will always be a market for these figs, even if we renamed Lattarula to Blanche. People would still seek out lattarula, particularly newer people. Jmrtsus said something I disagree with here, he said that fig sellers who use those names are taking advantage of new people to the hobby. I think they're satisfying market demand. But I want to sell that story, I want to be able to tell my son the story of Jefferson's favorite fig, as he's sitting there eating it. I think narrative is EXTREMELY important in human affairs. And I want to know how to do that in good conscience with the approval of this forum.

[goodfriendmike]

Shaft if genetic testing proves they are the the same then they are. At that point I would call it by it oldest name. The VDB and beers black. I will have to check out that link you posted. If they are the same then it should be VDB only and the /beers black so people know they are the same. Blanche and WM are the same that is the Jefferson fig you want to sell. I would put WM/Blanche since most people have heard of the WM.

[Red_Sun]

Just like to make it super clear. It is great that @Shaft raised this topics. I think this is very honest. All I said has nothing to do with @Shaft. I do not really deal with any of the big fig names.

But I do like to chat and learn something from Big Bill, Bass and Aaron D. I trust those people IMO.

[Shaft]

lol thanks guys. I was just getting too much anxiety trying to navigate this on my own. After the resllers fiasco I really did almost leave the community. It was rough for a little bit there, because people weren't just saying "oh he did a bad sell" or something... NONE of my customers have shown up complaining. That really got to me, but I didn't wanna give up the game. I am not a quitter (that's why I never stopped smoking). I had to figure out a way to relieve the anxiety without leaving and I figured full disclosure, let's find consensus where we can. That was motivated by people like ginamcd who keep talking about this consensus that exists in the community... I haven't found it yet. Seems like we all have different ideas of what is moral and what isn't, and that's entirely the way it should be. When people start talking about "The best sellers all agree" it becomes VERY INTIMIDATING. I wanted to know... do people agree? On what? And I'll follow that. But the reality seems to be we are all different people with different perspectives.

[Evdurtschi]

Who is Aaron D.? I want to check him out and see what he has.

[ginamcd]

Aaron D. The person behind NJFigfarm. He sells Unknown varieties he found in local neighborhoods. He follows convention and always attached "Unk" to his finds, one of which is Unk Prosciutto.

[jmrtsus]

Long post but I think people are going in circles over my opinion of calling the White Mareille/Lattarulla/Italian Honey/lemon fig by its historical name and the ID of the White Marseille NOT and some clarification is in order.

The only fig I have suggested to follow its more common name is the the Blanche. That is due to the Tena debacle and the fact here in America we have added 3 new names for Blanche. Blanche is the historical name with many, many different variations in names. As to whether the White Marseille NOT fig is a Tena the proof is on the Forum, look at it and make your own conclusions please.

We need to stop this silliness of having multiple names for the same fig. DNA testing is fine and dandy but who can afford to have all their figs tested and until there is a massive database of all known figs any DNA test can only be compared to the existing DNA database. Unless Lowe's has a machine to do the testing for a couple of bucks DNA testing is of limited use to the home gardener right now. The "database" of Condit's' 30 years of work consists of all known and documented figs as of 1955. And compared to that the number of common figs developed since has been small and well documented. LSU figs for example. Fig plants have three characteristics that has been used for many hundreds of years to ID fig plants and any other plant. Leaf, fruit and growing habits, add flowers for other plants. The Tena has a very distinct leaf that instantly says it is not a White Marseille. A little research will show it is a Tena. Again no need to take my word, you are free to do the research yourself and I encourage people to do so to learn more about figs. We all know the internet is a great place to find incorrect info. You don't know me and have no reason to trust my judgement but you can believe the photographic evidence posted on the Forum and make your own conclusions as to the White Marseille NOT being a Tena. I would welcome another opinion as the Tena was the only fig I could find as a match but does not mean it could not be some unknown Adriatic type grown on a small island off Croatia and sold to Agristarts under the table, LOL!


What needs to be done is to stop the foolishness of creating new names but it will find little support from sellers. I'm sure an online nursery sells more "Fantasia" figs than the Scott's Black fig they really are.The White Marseille story shows the confusion caused by one guy renaming a Blanche fig to "Lattarula" in 1942 to have a new fig type to sell in his catalog in my opinion and we are still being taken to the cleaners by other sellers with this stupidity today. Before enlightenment I bought both a White Mareille and a Lattarula.

Blanche was first named in the 1700's so we as a Forum can at least put the USA only monikers to bed, the Lattarula, Lemon and Italian Honey need to be retired and the name should correspond with the known correct data. I suggest Blanche as used by Condit and hope the Tena debacle dies down some day. But the truth is many, many Tena's are growing and the owners know nothing of this forum or that their plant is not the White Marseilles as labeled and if they share cutting it just keeps going. I have even see WM1 and WM2 on the Forum.....Nooooooooooo.

The attitude I have seen on multiple posts that a fig has to be called whatever name some worker put a tag on the plant says is silly. Using that twisted logic would mean my Blanche would still be tagged Brown Turkey, my Chicago Hardy would be an Olympian, my Brown Turkey would still be labeled an LSU Tiger and my Celeste would be tagged LSU Purple, LOL. And I still have 2 more NOT'S yet to be ID'ed.

In this example ID'ing the White Marseille NOT as Tena was not difficult at all, I quickly determined it was not a fig listed by Condit so it had to be a new one, it came from Agristarts and they sold the Tena which I had never heard of, I knew it was not LSU or Texas A&M but with looking at Condit's own developed figs the one called Tena was one that Agristarts sold. The odds were the White Marseille NOT came from the same supplier. The Tena leaf is a total 180 degree opposite to a Blanche leaf. The fruits again are obviously different as one is a tan interior and the other pink. And the growth habits of Blanche as slow and Tena a vigorous grower made things pretty simple. So make you own conclusions but if you believe that a fig should be tagged with what it is labeled you must have missed the hundreds of posts of T/C figs being mislabeled on this Forum, 50% were wrong in my case.

FYI......Here is a quote from Condit's work about synonyms as of 1907.

"As to variety names, Starnes and Monroe wrote, in 1907, that “no fruit comprising as in this case but a single species, is so badly mixed as is the fig in its nomenclature.” Reference to the text shows that the Brunswick has had at least twelve different names attached to it, and the Brown Turkey has at least fourteen synonyms. This confusion in nomenclature is emphasized by a comment from a correspondent in Algeria, “.....but the names change from one village to another for the same variety, and it would need a volume to establish complete synonyms.” Such varieties as Brown Turkey, Brunswick, and the Ischia figs are undoubtedly identical with varieties grown over a long period in some Mediterranean districts."

The Brown Turkey is 1907 had at least 14 names and we can add probably 5 more now.............does the Blanche with over 22 names need 3 more in the USA? Uhhhhhhh....NO.

Below is the history and data on the Blanche fig from Condit's work. If you have never seen an example of the data on the history of figs taking 30 years compiling it you will be amazed at the depth his research documented. Looks like 75% deals with just synonyms. Look at the references by the score provided and remember this was pre- computer days.Take the time to read just this entry and I think you will agree we need to do what we can to stop using all these new synonyms to reduce confusion. The Lattarula "tale" is underlined and Italics. Condit interjected the part of the Lattarola as there was no Lattarula fig known in Italy or anywhere else.


So I will call my 2 trees Blanche and will stick with it, everyone is free to call theirs what they want. As to the Tena the proof was simple and documented. All opinions are important to a properly functioning Forum, these are mine and how I arrived there. I welcome yours. Fig On!




From Condit's Monograph of 1955, Pages 372-375


" Blanche (syns. Blanche d’Argenteuil, Blanche Ronde, Grosse Blanche Ronde, Blanche Hâtive, Blanquo, Argentine, Blanche Fleur, Royale, Versailles, Blanquette and Madeleine of some authors, Marseilles, White Marseilles, Marseillaise White, White Naples, [email protected]@@@, Ford’s Seedling, Raby Castle, White Standard, White Smyrna, Quarteria, Vigasotte Bianco). In 1700, Tournefort described a fig variety as La Grosse Blanche Ronde. Garidel (1715) quoted this account, but expressed doubt that it was the same as the one called Blanquo Communo, grown in some parts of France. Duhamel (1755) also quoted Tournefort, and designated the variety as Figue Blanche. In his “Nouveau” work of 1809, Duhamel again quoted Tournefort, as well as Garidel, and stated that the fig known at Paris as Figue d’Argenteuil was only a subvariety of Figue Blanche of Provence, the differences between the two being minor, and due to February, 1955] Condit: Fig Varieties 373 climatic influences. The fig described and illustrated in color by Carbon (1865a) as Figue Blanche à Peau Verte may be the same variety. Other accounts of this fig as Blanche, Blanche d’Argenteuil, Blanche Ronde, or Grosse Blanche Ronde are by Merlet (1667), Liger (1702), Weston (1770), Knoop (1771), La Brousse (1774), Rozier (1781—1805); Mirbel (1802—1806), Lamarck (1783—1817), Bory de Saint Vincent (1824), Noisette (1821, 1829), Couverchel (1839), Poiteau (1838—1846), Dochnahl (1855), Duchartre (1857), Forney (1863), Lhérault (1872), Simon-Louis (1895), Schneider (1902), Juignet (1909), Nomblot (1913), Mazières (1920), Leclerc (1925), Société Nationale d'Horticulture de France (1928), A. Rivière (1928), G. Rivière (1930), Delplace (1933), Delbard (1947), and Simonet et al. (1945). Figue Royale was described by Bernard (1787), Duhamel (1809), Bory de Saint Vincent (1824), and Noisette (1829), with Versailles as a synonym. On the other hand, it was described as Versailles, with or without the synonym Royale, by Couverchel (1839), Duchartre (1857), Du Breuil (1876), Hogg (1866), Soc. Pomol. de France (1887, 1947), Barron (1891), Eisen (1901), Bois (1928), Blin (1942), and Evreinoff (1947). Eisen regarded Blanche and Versailles as distinct, but later authors, such as Nomblot, Soc. Nat. d’Hort. de France (1928), and Simonet et al., treat them as the same variety. See Rolland (1914) for synonymy. Descriptions of this variety as White Marseilles are given by Brookshaw (1812), Baxter (1820), Sawyer (1824), Lindley (1831), Rogers (1834), Holley (1854), M’Intosh (1855), Thompson (1859), Hogg (1866), G. S. (1867, 1869), Barron (1868c, 1891), Rivers (1873), Coleman (1887b), Lelong (1890), Wythes (1890a), Massey (1893), Burnette (1894), Wright (1895), Forrer (1894), Eisen (1885, 1897, 1901), Thomas (1902), Ward (1904), Starnes (1903, 1907), Royal Hort. Society (1916), B. A. Bunyard (1925, 1934), Cook (1925), Arnold (1926), Fruit-Grower (1936), Condit (1947), and Preston (1951). Illustrations in color are by Duhamel (1809), Brookshaw (1812), Noisette (1821), and Wright (1895). Illustrations in black and white are by Poiteau, Eisen (1901, fig. 75), Bois, Société’ Nationale d’Horticulture de France, Starnes, Bunyard (1934), Simonet, and Condit (1941a, fig. 2, E).

The name White Marseilles became attached to a fig that Brookshaw described and illustrated in color in 1812 of fruit gathered by himself from the original tree at the Archbishop of Canterbury’s palace at Lambeth. This tree was generally believed to have been planted by Cardinal Pole during the reign of Henry the Eighth. Another account, that of Baxter (1820), stated that a fig tree at Oxford was introduced by a Mr. [email protected]@@@, hence the name [email protected]@@@’s fig; fruit exhibited on August 17, 1819, proved to be that of the White Marseilles. John Wright (1895) referred to a large tree of White Marseilles with a trunk 6 feet 9 inches in circumference 2 feet above the ground. Sawyer, in 1824, reported that the fig he named Ford’s Seedling was sometimes called the [email protected]@@@, but was more properly designated White Marseilles. Various authors, including Lindley, Thompson, and Hogg, described White Marseilles, with Figue Blanche as a synonym. The description and illustration by Eisen in 1901 of Marseillaise White are regarded here as properly referring to Blanche. White Genoa, as pointed 374 Hilgardia [Vol. 23, No. 11 out by Eisen, is distinct from White Marseilles. According to Bunyard, Marseilles is a well established favorite in England, thriving both indoors and on walls outside. Cape White, described by Davis (1928), Burger and De Wet (1931), and Gayner (1949), as a “well-known fig” of South Africa, appears to be very similar to, if not identical with, Blanche. In southern India the Marseilles is said by Naik (1949) to “crop well on the hills over about 5,000 feet elevation.” Blanche is extensively cultivated in Provence, mostly as a drying fig. Near Paris, where Blanche d’Argenteuil has been cultivated for many centuries, elaborate methods of culture as described by Lhérault, Juignet, and others, have been followed for the production of the first crop. A famous tree of this variety at Roscoff, France, planted by the Capuchins in 1621, has been described by Lambertye (1874), Blanchard (1878, 1879), and by Martinet and Lesourd (1924). In 1924, the branches covered an area of 600 square meters; they were supported by 80 pillars, many of granite. The annual crop was reported to be 400 dozen figs. The variety designated “Lemon” in most of the southeastern United States is identical with Blanche. See descriptions of Lemon by Starnes and Monroe (1907) and by Gould (1923). At Crisfield, Maryland, and at Cape Charles, Virginia, trees of Marseilles are neither vigorous nor productive.

Near Portland, Oregon, this variety ranks first among the figs tested for home and orchard planting. A Portland nurseryman, B. R. Amend, in his catalogue for the season of 1942, describes this variety as Lattarula (Italian honey fig), a name suggested by some visitors from Italy. As described elsewhere, however, the Italian variety Lattarola has red, not white, pulp. This variety has long been grown in California, mostly under the name White Marseilles. According to Shinn (1915), White Marseilles was growing at Santa Clara and Santa Barbara before the discovery of gold. As determined by Saunders (1889), White Smyrna proved to be the same variety. It was apparently this fig which Lelong (1890, 1892) reported as found growing at Downey, Los Angeles County, where there was a “very large fig orchard, devoted to the Marseillaise, a small, white, sweet fruit.” But Eisen (1901) mentioned that an orchard, probably the same one as above, had been dug up on account of the figs souring so badly. No other commercial plantings have been found, but dooryard trees are common, especially in southern California. It was grown and tested at the various California stations between 1893 and 1903, and an analysis of fruit grown at Fresno was recorded by Colby in 1894. According to Eisen, Versailles was once grown extensively by Felix Gillet, Nevada City; no records, however, have been found of its distribution or planting under that name. Three varieties introduced into California in the Chiswick collection all proved to be identical with Marseilles; they are P.I. Nos. 18,864, Vigasotte Bianco; 18,866, Quarteria; and 18,904, Figue Blanche. Eisen appears to be the only author who has described the first two, and he has listed them as distinct varieties. Except for minor characters, his account of the fruit coincides closely with that of Blanche given here.


Trees of Blanche are slow-growing, fairly dense, with green terminal buds. Leaves medium, 3- to 5-lobed; surface glossy above; upper sinuses of medium depth, narrow, lower sinuses shallow; base subcordate, sometimes auricled; margins crenate; mature blades often affected by necrotic spots (plate 13). The following description of fruit is from specimens grown at Riverside since 1930. Breba crop fair; figs medium or above, up to 2 inches in length and 1-7/8 inches in diameter, turbinate, with broad, rounded apex; neck thick and short, or absent; stalk slightly curved, 1/4 inch long; ribs few, inconspicuous eye medium, open, scales chaffy, erect at maturity; flecks very small and inconspicuous, green rather than white; bloom delicate; color light green; pulp and meat white; seeds large, conspicuous; quality fair to good. Second-crop figs much the same as brebas, except for smaller size; average weight 30 grams; shape spherical to oblate, mostly without neck; stalk up to 1/2 inch long. Flavor fairly rich and sweet; quality fair as a fresh fruit, of light weight and poor quality when dried; susceptible to fruit spoilage. (Plates 8; 26, A.) Caprification has little effect upon size and color, either of skin or pulp. Figs produced at Portland, Oregon, and in coastal districts of California, are usually larger in size and more oblate in shape than those just described. Near Paris the second crop of Blanche matures in warm seasons only."

[Red_Sun]

@jmrtsus

Good thoughts. But I do not think anyone can stop people from re-naming fig varieties. I looked at Ira Condi'ts 500+ common fig names. Probably <10% are still in circulation. Not sure how many of those are still at UCD/UCR fig repository. Most of them are gone, for good.

If Bass and Aaron found some new figs in PA or NJ, they would not be able to spend weeks or month to go through all the historical documents to find the original names from 100 or 200 years ago. They would not be able to do any DNA tests if they get nothing to compare to.

A lot of common fig varieties, even the most popular Hardy Chicago, receive new names. HC was probably called Bensonhurst purple. But no one cares about the "real" name any longer. The other most famous fig is the Mission. Its real name is Franciscana. No one calls Kadota as Dottato any longer.

And we get new names like YLN, White Madeira #1, Robert's Rainbow etc. I just do not know how and who can stop people from re-naming figs. Fig is just a very loose community. There is no central policing unit that regulates fig varieties. A lot of the fig materials at eBay and even Figbid.com are not true to their names. But I do not see what can be done.....

[Kid Fig]

Shaft I like this idea.

We set up a commission, and we all put in our thoughts about the situation and set up a guideline.

This is excellent. As this can make it so we can shop with better confidence from fellow fig heads that adhere to the guideline.

The Figsa Nostra


Okay so the commission must be made up of the top 5 Fig families.....

[Shaft]

lol Kid Fig I love it. I'm joining the ASCPete family!

[Kid Fig]

@Shaft

As far back as I could rememba - I always wanted to be a FIGsta....

(Trumpet music plays) I know I've gone from rags to richesss....

[Californiacuban]

I feel like you are overcomplicating things. Let's just take the common mantra of "do no harm."

• The best thing you can do, is sell it exactly as you got it and tell people what your exact source is. And if you have evidence that it is mis-labeled, then you STOP selling it.

• If you're aiding to the confusion in any way, you're are doing harm. Changing names, trying to clean things up, etc, just muddies the waters more.

[don_sanders]

If you bought a mislabeled White Marseilles at Home Depot, you can bet there are thousands more out there and some probably with the correct name so all would not be lost. None of the commercially sold figs are one of a kind.

And if Home Depot is your source for named varieties, you are already off to a bad start as a seller.

[Californiacuban]

Shaft, The funny thing about this, is I have literally done this before. I will explain more, BUT, let me humor you first.

First, the likelihood that you have "the best fig in the world" with this back story is extremely low. The best fig in the world is not at Home Depot and or at some nursery. If a hobbyist or collector sent you something that was mislabeled, then you can talk to them and they can sometimes figure out their mistake or remedy it.

This unlabeled fig is usually marginally better or very similar to most other figs out there. Or with investigation you realize that it must be one of 3-5 figs from the source and none of them need to be shared new name. So stopping the distribution is easy. You're not keeping some "gem" from the world, you are simply stopping confusion from getting passed around. And even if it was an amazing fig, it's likely already being distributed somewhere under the correct name. So you investigate the source as much as possible.

BUT, if you have the "best fig in the world," then sure. That's what happened with Unk Pastilliere. It was mislabeled and is now one of the "gems" in the fig world. We have a few others like that. Usually called "not" or something like that. But the reputation of the person distributing it also mattered. And they likely did not sell it at first. They gave it to friends, waited a few seasons for people to try the fig, talked to others, and then eventually it became something with a new name. It took time and consideration and, yes, some reputation of that person (like it or not, that's how the world works). So let's say this exact same thing happened to me. I found "the best fig in the world" as a mislabeled fruit. I would absolutely stop selling it, and then send it to several trusted people from here (for free) and ask them to not share it at all. I can think of which 3-5 without sharing names. I would tell them the story, ask them to grow it and try it. If the consensus was "wow, this is amazing....we have to share this" then that is a different story. From what I understand, that is what happened with several of the recent finds/mislabeled. But I would not start selling it immediately to the world without that.

Now back to what I have done. Here is the thread: https://www.ourfigs.com/forum/figs-h...another-fig-id
I have given it away for free. No one sells it. Now, if 2-3 years from now people start raving about it and it becomes it's own fig, then sure, I could sell it then. But if I did, I would include the entire back story and strongly enforce the "unk." But that likely won't happen. If the fig was "crazy special" then I likely would have given it to only 3-5 trusted people as I said before. But in this case, it did not seem worth it.

I'm not trying to dog you here. You are trying to learn and asking a fair question. But I strongly believe this question has an answer. ginamcd and AscPete gave great answers (as did others, but I mention them as two well-known active members here with more experience than most others that are posting, including myself). And I believe most people have said some version of "don't sell" / "don't rename" or "add Unk of Not with the story" , and no one believes you should call it Tena besides one member. And that member is focused on a broader question that while it applies to your fig here, it's not the topic you are focused on. Their's is a question of combining cultivar names (in no way am I saying I agree or disagree with them, but it's not the exact same topic.)

[Shaft]

@californiacuban

don_sanders they don't even have home depot within 2 hours of where I live, but that's not the point.

"If you bought a mislabeled White Marseilles at Home Depot, you can bet there are thousands more out there and some probably with the correct name so all would not be lost"

With all due respect it's becoming clear you haven't read the source documents to this discussion, specifically the Tena-White Marseilles thing. AgriStarts isn't MISLABELING them as in they start with the correct label then they mix it up somewhere along the way. They have no idea what fig they're propagating, so yes, all IS lost.

Home Depot is just one of hundreds of AgriStarts retailers. I really think you're missing the forest for the trees here, with all due respect.

"First, the likelihood that you have "the best fig in the world" with this back story is extremely low. The best fig in the world is not at Home Depot and or at some nursery. If a hobbyist or collector sent you something that was mislabeled, then you can talk to them and they can sometimes figure out their mistake or remedy it."

Thomas Jefferson described the White Marseilles as the best fig he had ever tasted. Some quotations put it as "the best fig in the world" but perhaps those are errant. I put forward that thought experiment not because I thought it was likely but to illustrate that we are setting up two competing principles. On the one hand, it is said that you should NEVER sell something that is mis-labeled. On the other hand, trying to change the name to something else confuses things because it adds one more name to the pot. These are contradictory principles, they work against one another, because it means that a really good fig might be forced to sit in a private collection unknown to everyone simply because of some dumb rules. If that's the route we want to go as a community then cool, I'll respect that, but I think it's pretty silly.

"BUT, if you have the "best fig in the world," then sure. That's what happened with Unk Pastilliere. It was mislabeled and is now one of the "gems" in the fig world. We have a few others like that."

Right, that was my point. I'm glad we made it here. Cool, let's say it's something like that. Now what? If I follow the principles we just discussed -- #1 if you have evidence that it is mis-labeled, then you STOP selling it.
#2 If you're aiding to the confusion in any way, you're are doing harm. Changing names, trying to clean things up, etc, just muddies the waters more -- then selling it is out of the question. No more gems. No more Unk Pastillieres. THAT was my point. If we're going to establish principles, we have to think them out thoroughly. Is this what we want? I don't think so but maybe I'm wrong.

"But the reputation of the person distributing it also mattered. And they likely did not sell it at first. They gave it to friends, waited a few seasons for people to try the fig, talked to others, and then eventually it became something with a new name. "

This is the process I was asking about. I'm not sure why people keep inserting this artificial timeline. I was simply asking about the process that would need to be undertaken to associate the THOMAS JEFFERSON STORY to something other than AgriStarts' royal eff up. I assumed there was a process, then a ton of people came on here saying there isn't a process, you shouldn't do it, yada yada. I really wish more people would take the time to fully understand what is being discussed, as you did. Thank you very much for that, I appreciate it wholly.

" It took time and consideration and, yes, some reputation of that person (like it or not, that's how the world works). So let's say this exact same thing happened to me. I found "the best fig in the world" as a mislabeled fruit. I would absolutely stop selling it, and then send it to several trusted people from here (for free) and ask them to not share it at all. I can think of which 3-5 without sharing names. I would tell them the story, ask them to grow it and try it. If the consensus was "wow, this is amazing....we have to share this" then that is a different story. From what I understand, that is what happened with several of the recent finds/mislabeled. But I would not start selling it immediately to the world without that."

Yeah I agree. Okay, so let's take everything you just said and apply it to the AgriStarts situation. We know W.M isn't W.M. We know Lattarula probably is. It seems kinda foolish for me to start sending my lattarula to figgers who've been doing this longer than me. I think jmrstus made his case. I think most people accept his case. So in this specific instance, would we say that that trialing period you just described is necessary? Why or why not? In the case of my Israeli 7 fig, that's exactly what I did -- send it to people, for free, to find out how well it does. I contacted someone in Palestine to get a possible fig ID match, which I believe I have done now, but confirmation is still a little ways away. I still send free cuttings to forum-goers here when people ask for it. I think that that trialing period is 100% required, because I get asked all the time "How does this do in the North?" and I'm forced to tell people I don't know. I can't seem to get a northerner to take the fig, specifically in the Pac-NW. But I finally got a school in New York that does an edible garden to take some as a donation and they're keeping me in the loop regarding cold hardiness. Trialing is everything.

"I'm not trying to dog you here. You are trying to learn and asking a fair question. But I strongly believe this question has an answer. ginamcd and AscPete gave great answers (as did others, but I mention them as two well-known active members here with more experience than most others that are posting, including myself). And I believe most people have said some version of "don't sell" / "don't rename" or "add Unk of Not with the story" , and no one believes you should call it Tena besides one member. And that member is focused on a broader question that while it applies to your fig here, it's not the topic you are focused on. Their's is a question of combining cultivar names (in no way am I saying I agree or disagree with them, but it's not the exact same topic.)
"

Yeah I know you're not dogging me, you're one of the people who've fully embraced my question. I disagree about ginamcd having anything of value to say here -- she's literally one of the people who've been extremely nasty, and I think is here only to cause trouble. Nothing anyone says to me can change my perspective of her and her comments. She lies too much for me to take her seriously. Pete, on the other hand, I look up to immensely. That said, people have made clear it's not just the veterans we're supposed to look to. It's broader than that. Ginamcd herself is the one who keeps talking about consensus in the broader fig community, then she tried to change it to consensus in the best sellers of the community. The goal posts change, so that's why we need broader input.

The people who say don't sell are disagreeing with those say sell but don't rename/sell it with unk or NOT. It's becoming readily apparent that @ginamcd's broad consensus doesn't exist. I've counted a few people saying I could/should call it Tena, I'm not sure where you got your count from, but it's cool, I get your overall point. Ultimately, this is a discussion to help me flesh out the poll when I post it, and to make it clear what my intention is: I will be following the results of the poll in my broader business practices. I don't want just veteran input... my experience with many of them is a little slippery. There are those who I hold in much higher esteem than others but... ultimately, I will follow the wisdom of the crowd. I think that's the best way to go.

And while it may not be the exact same topic, that is the question he asked which inspired me to ask my own. In his very thread I said I am terrified to follow his advice because of people like ginamcd. I think his advice makes a whole lot of sense, but it appears that others disagree. If I just followed his advice, six weeks from now there'd be someone saying I'm a scammer for it. If I sold the White Marseilles without renaming, which is what others have suggested I do, then six weeks from now I'd be called a scammer as well. I think, to veterans like yourself, the rules seem clearer than they actually are. I think this thread will be healthy for newbies and veterans alike: all the best practices consolidated in one place.

[Shaft]

Can we get a list of 5 or 10 items that you think are a seller's best practices? Rank them in order of most important to least important. We'll get the ones with the most repetition and put them into a straw poll to vote on. We'll select the 5 top choices from that poll and try to create a list of best practices, and a hierarchy within them

[Red_Sun]

Sure you can have all the guidelines or even rules. But none of those are enforceable. If only 5% of the sellers do not follow rules, then they take advantage of others. There is no level playing field.

[Shaft]

I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying. In no way, shape, form or fashion am I talking about ENFORCING rules unless you count self-enforcement.

I'm talking about sellers voluntarily choosing to comply with these rules for the best interests of their business AND the broader community.

It is obvious how best practices might protect the community, but how would it also protect the seller?

Well... it clears up a lot of confusion. If differing opinions exist, they can be expressed. A seller might say I followed ALL of the best practices in an effort to clear his name, specifically if he's being criticized for a practice that is RECOMMENDED by those best practices. An example of this might be me changing the name of my W. Marseilles to Blanche thinking jmrtsus' advice is best. If the best practices say "use the oldest name" as someone recommended, then that would be okay. If the best practices say renaming is bad, always, for any reason except UNKs and NOTs, then it would not be okay. It gives sellers a reference point for some of the more uncommon situations we face. If a seller disagree with a rule, he could follow say 4 out of the 5, and point to the broader discussion that we're having now for the reasons why he believes in X instead of Y. It gives one consolidated reference point without having to cross reference different people's different opinions, or even worse, having the PM certain veterans for answers to common situations like renaming.

5% might not follow the rules. It will probably be more than 5%. But they hurt themselves in the end. I have no interest in trying to punish sellers... I think the market does that aplenty to bad sellers. Bad sellers hurt themselves more than they hurt their customers, and allow me to illustrate how.

If I sell you a tree for $20 and send you nothing, I made $20 off of you in my lifetime. You'll never be back.

If I sell you a tree for $1 profit and you think this tree is the best ever so you buy all the rest of your trees from me, and lets say you buy 4 trees a year, then within 6 years I'm better off than if I ripped you off from the word go. If I do that once, no big deal, I don't win that much by being a nice guy. But if I do it to every customer I ever have... well... that's how fortunes are made, $1 at a time. I want to be a GOOD SELLER because I think it's more profitable than being a scam artist. A scam artist can never stay in the same place for very long.

[Red_Sun]

@Shaft

You need to understand that Ourfigs.com is only a small part of the fig community. A lot of people have nothing to do with this community. So you can make your own guidelines. But those people do not know and won't want to know. They do things their ways. Same thing at eBay. If two years after you bought some cuttings at eBay, you can't even contact eBay for your own protection if the fig cuttings do not come true to their names.

Think, what happens if there is no police on the roads and highways? You want some cowboy and his deputy to make sure people follow your rules?

[Shaft]

Red_Sun without getting too deep into the weeds, yeah, that's exactly what I prefer. Look up anarcho-capitalism.

"You want some cowboy and his deputy to make sure people follow your rules?"

No, I want a gun, and I have plenty. I'm also not too worried about the USDA coming to visit me over the Israeli 7 fig thing. Just saying. They have a habit of raiding people. My house won't be one of them. I'm not too sure this is the place to have such a political discussion, shoot me a PM if you want to continue it.

I do know that OurFigs is a small part of the community, but honestly, it's the one I hold in highest esteem at present. It has its flaws, certainly, and maybe something better is in the works right now as we speak, but for right now this is what we have. I find it valuable *shrug* I want rules I can follow, then if someone complains like they have on me in the past, I can show in black and white why I did what I did. Other sellers can do what they wish.

[ginamcd]

Shaft Despite the fact that you've chosen to repeatedly single me out, I did not make up this naming convention. I learned of it by reading posts from people like Pete and Don when I showed up here with two family heirloom figs thinking I had something unique. It's why my two family trees are not in circulation -- I feel the community has enough " Unk" varieties out there, and I agree with the many respected members that attaching a new name is the wrong thing to do. This is despite the fact that both originated from a part of the world inhabited by fig wasps and could be seedling grown for all I know..

I also have a tree that is mislabeled and is most certainly some other known fig. And while I could go on a quest to identify it and attach what I decide its real name is, I'm tossing it. I've also personally notified the small number of people I shared it with that should they keep or share it, it needs to carry "Not" as part of its name. Again, this is what I learned was the right thing to do from the forum "elders."

This isn't the first thread dealing with the messiness of naming/renaming. Spend a bit more time on here or and you'll see that unfortunately, it won't be the last.

[Shaft]

As usual ginamcd you don't address any point I made. I never singled you out for your position on the naming convention. I singled you out because of your arrogant comments about the "consensus." There isn't any. It's obvious now. You've done it to me more than once, on more than just this topic. You keep referencing a consensus that can CLEARLY BE DEMONSTRATED to not exist. When you have respected "elders" as you called them disagreeing, and not in small ways, then consensus is a thing you don't have. When it came to renaming, I asked clear questions that you and some of these so-called elders have entirely avoided.

#1 is it moral to rename X to Y when Y has been DNA test confirmed to be the same as X? Why or why not?

#2 Is it moral to rename X to Y when Y has been confirmed by other means, such as the means jmrtsus outlined for us, to be the same as X? Why or why not?

The majority of elders have said "Renaming is bad, herp derp" and not addressed ANY of the nuance of the question. Instead of creating principles that will be followed such as "renaming is always bad... we get answers like renaming is bad unless it's to NOT or UNK but you should never sell a renamed fig and if you do the description should have all the information but you can't call it the name you bought it and you can't give it a new name either." You can't establish CONTRADICTORY PRINCIPLES. That's bad for EVERYONE, and it's veterans who are creating this level of confusion. You have rules you don't want to write down, haven't pinned up, and expect everyone to know without being told. You pretend there's this widespread agreement when so many people are saying different things. If you follow advice #1, then you're precluded from following advice #2 and vice versa. You "veterans" are so quick to be curt, "go look it up, it's been asked before" that you miss the most important part of the question: some of you thought I was talking about taking a known variety and renaming it, others thought I was talking about taking this W.M-not and selling it in a hurry. NONE OF THAT WAS STATED. You guys ignored the questions asked for questions you invented inside of your own head. It's ridiculous. It's why I've pretty much started discounting EVERY SINGLE EXPERT ON THIS FORUM who doesn't bother to explain, in detail, like jmrtsus did. If you want to be so short with me, I can do the same with you. I'm following jmrtsus' protocol, and screw anyone who doesn't like it. Case closed.

If anyone thinks establishing a plan for best practices is a good idea, I'll continue this, but at this point, I've got my answer.

[ginamcd]

Shaft the "consensus" exists among longer term members who have tried over the years to educate newcomers and reduce the number "new" or mislabeled figs that are traded around and/or sold. I guess this consensus can be very inconvenient when one's only objective is to market a fig that they believe is mislabeled.

I'm done with this thread and with you, Mr. Shaft/theonlyshaft/foe7734/Malcolm Heath. I have no room in my life for rudeness and that seems to be what I always get from you. In the end I'm guessing you'll do what you want regardless of what others say, so I'm not going to waste any more of my time here.

[Shaft]

ginamcd "Shaft the "consensus" exists among longer term members who have tried over the years to educate newcomers and reduce the number "new" or mislabeled figs that are traded around and/or sold. I guess this consensus can be very inconvenient when one's only objective is to market a fig that they believe is mislabeled."

More of your BS huh? I should expect no less. If you think that's my only objective, you're as clueless as I've always suspected. Again, your consensus is shown to be a paper tiger. Do you not believe jmrtsus is a "longer term member?" It becomes very obvious that when you speak of "consensus" what you mean is "people who agree with me."

If you only consult experts, you're going to be wrong every time. Look up the wisdom of crowds. To be as accurate as possible, you NEED to consult the village idiot. This is one of the very first lessons you learn in economics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHCe...l=ShaneKillian

"I'm done with this thread and with you, Mr. Shaft/theonlyshaft/foe7734/Malcolm Heath. I have no room in my life for rudeness and that seems to be what I always get from you. In the end I'm guessing you'll do what you want regardless of what others say, so I'm not going to waste any more of my time here."

You've been NOTHING BUT RUDE to me, but now you want to spin that on me? LOL! I'm just more open with mine. I have little patience for liars or connivers. Like it or not, your antics are why I created this thread. I'm tired of your backhanded comments.

[Rudypayraise]

There is no need to insult anyone, please. The topic is getting a bit out of hand.

[Shaft]

I'll do my best. My last comment was toned down. I just have little patience for the games some people here play. In my OP when I mentioned "turbulent waters" this is PRECISELY what I was referring to. I don't have it in me to be civil to people like this. Let's just say it doesn't surprise me to see people who benefit from these games, who enjoy these games, showing up here trying to murky the waters, because I for one know they do not want a best practices list. It takes away the power of their everchanging "consensus"

Read this line from the OP carefully, and realize that ginamcd, goodfriendmike, a few others... these are the people I was talking about, I just didn't want to mention them by name.

"My greatest fear is there be another thread like this one https://www.ourfigs.com/forum/figs-h...487-reseller-s with someone contesting whether or not X fig or Y fig I'm selling is true to type because I renamed it Blanche or whatever else. I'm fairly new to this community and I want to play by all the rules, make everyone happy, and be someone to look up to in the community. I'm looking for guidance as I navigate these turbulent waters that are our figdom. Thanks.

Kind regards."

Contrast this idea of a monolithic consensus that all the "best" forumers agree on to a different person, another longstanding forum veteran, an "elder" as gina said, jmrtsus, who told me the exact opposite: "Blanche, White Marseilles, Lattarula, Italian Honey and Lemon are synonyms, all the same plant. Lattarula was a name erroneously given to the Blanche by a seller as the name of a fig in Italy. There was no such fig in Italy named "Lattarulla". Lattarula, Italian Honey and Lemon are monikers added in the USA. We as a forum need to drop all the other names and any nursery selling more than one name should be shunned as either ignorant or just running a scam to sell newbies more figs. As to the White Marseille the market is polluted with the Tena called a White Marseille. I have relabeled my White Marseille and Lattarula to Blanche. And would suggest to all to do them same."

If I follow gina's consensus, jmrtsus argument would suggest I'm a scammer. I actually agree with jmrtsus, so that lends a lot of weight, too. But if I follow jmrtsus, whose argument appeals to me, so following my gut, gina would say "I guess this consensus can be very inconvenient when one's only objective is to market a fig that they believe is mislabeled."

Either way I'm listening to a forum veteran, and either way another faction might call me a scammer. Either way I'll be called a scammer. That doesn't seem like a good thing, so hence I created this best practices list. You have to understand how anxiety-provoking this is for a seller who ACTUALLY GIVES A DAMN ABOUT DOING A GOOD JOB. Add into this her little jabs about the "consensus" made to make a person feel stupid and... well... it couldn't be DESIGNED to be more provocative. There's no consensus. We have at least two factions on this issue... jmrtsus vs ginamcd. Different veterans have said different things that both agree AND disagree with either position. Even the people who side on the same side of the position disagree on the details. The consensus... I don't see it and gina doesn't seem interested in displaying it to us, either. Maybe it would be better for everybody if one of us just blocked the other, but then how would I know what this person is saying about me behind my back? That's the issue here. Way too much drama. I'm here trying to solve the drama by coming up with a best practices list, and it's become apparent that gina wants to hijack even that with her ephemeral "consensus."

I'd be far more inclined to listen to her if she said which members were part of that consensus, and what their actual opinions were, and specifically what they agree on and DISAGREE on. Consensus only goes so far

[goodfriendmike]

Ok Shaft since your talking about me. 25.1 Tell me how I benefit from anything on here. Besides chatting with people. I did get a few cuttings from people. And I have sent people free cuttings as well. But I to this day have not sold a cutting or plant. So my benefits is enjoying chatting and learning that is all. Yes I outed you for bad practices. But still tried to help you after the fact. As I see you think I am out to get you. When I was trying to help you. No more.

[Shaft]

goodfriendmike do what you will. There's no changing the past. You made that post. I can forgive you for it, but it doesn't change the fact it happened. You came here WAY after I made that quote and showed you can be good. You pmed me AFTER that post saying why you did it. But it doesn't change the fact you did it, or that I'm terrified of it happening again, or that I'm doing everything in my power to prevent it

That was turnabout. It sucks when others attribute motive doesn't it? That's what gina, and now Pete, keeps doing to me. It sucks. My apologies for that, I was making a point

Of all the people on that list you've done the most to redeem yourself imho