This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Seller's Best Practices [Poll: Make Your Voices Heard!]

    POLL IS INACTIVE -- STRAWPOLL GLITCH -- WILL REPAIR by 9/1/2021 WITH A RESET POLL


    In order to provide a set of guidelines for those who seek to be ethical distributors, I hoped to create a set of community-approved best practices. These best practices were rigorously debated here. If you wish to contribute to the debate, please do so there and leave this for discussions as to how to best implement these practices, and questions from sellers to that effect.

    I will close the polls officially on 9/11/2021, two weeks from today, and screenshot the results for posterity. Fig on!




    What is the proper naming convention for a seller (or distributor)?






    Is it okay to correct a mislabeled fig?






    Is using UNK to mark an unknown a requirement?






    Is using the "NOT" convention better than tracking down the true name of a fig?






    If a fig gets a bad reputation from a bad seller (like the White Marseilles-Agristarts fiasco), is it okay to revert to a different known synonym to distinguish your listing from the tainted market?






    If a fig like Lattarula is a known fraud, should we continue to use the fraudulent name?






    If a fig has a known synonym, is it okay to distribute it as the other fig? (e.g., selling Violette de Bordeaux as Beer's Black [DNA match] or Negronne [morphology match]).



    What are our thoughts on re-selling?






    Are tissue cultures bad?
    Last edited by Shaft; 08-29-2021, 01:50 AM.
    My CollectionFor TradeWish ListMy Listings
    Zone 8A •
    Greenville, NC

  • #2
    Asking if T/C is good or bad is not enough choices in the answers. Some are OK, some are bad. If Agristarts did it right which they sometimes do they are a cheap source of fig plants. If bad you may have 5-6 years to correctly ID and fruit. T/C mismarked plants is a very common thing. ID'ing them is generally easy as the possibilities are narrowed down by what Agristarts sells. An answer of "yes they are good as long as you understand their issues." I would also change name choices from oldest name to the most common name like Blanche for the "polluted" White Marseille and the made up names of Lattarula, Lemon and Honey Fig. Same with Brown Turkey and Adriatic must be 6-8 claimed types of each that are different LOL!

    Comment


    • Shaft
      Shaft commented
      Editing a comment
      jmrtsus john can you flesh out this response a little bit? Tomorrow I'm going to be re-doing the poll, it looks like strawpoll is glitching hard. Would love to include your ideas!

  • #3
    Too late to change unfortunately If I try to edit, it'll erase all answers.
    My CollectionFor TradeWish ListMy Listings
    Zone 8A •
    Greenville, NC

    Comment


    • #4
      I voted twice but neither vote was recorded. I stopped.
      Joe, Z6B, RI.

      Comment


      • Shaft
        Shaft commented
        Editing a comment
        There's a delay in recording it seems. I had the same issue, then it showed up later. If it doesn't, I'll find out a new way to do the poll, but AFAIK this is the go-to polling software atm

      • jrdewhirst
        jrdewhirst commented
        Editing a comment
        Any idea how long a delay? The app knows that I voted -- it won't let me vote again. But it still does not display. I'll complete.

      • Shaft
        Shaft commented
        Editing a comment
        Not sure. Some of mine have come through and some haven't. How many results are you getting from the third question? I'm wondering if clearing cache would help

    • #5
      One comment: You describe Lattarula as a "known fraud." My memory may be flawed but I remember Lattarula to be a new name applied to an old variety (Italian Honey) for marketing purposes. While I oppose renaming, I'm reluctant to label this behavior as "fraud." I'd save the term "fraud" for renaming to a different extant name. For example, renaming and selling Italian Honey as "Smith" would be fraud.

      FWIW, I bought Lattarula from a very meticulous seller as "Lattarula / Italian Honey" with a full explanation. That seems a good approach. I would never distribute cuttings or air layers of this tree as merely "Italian Honey." It's not up to me to reverse the re-naming, which would only compound the confusion. Two wrongs don't make it right.
      Joe, Z6B, RI.

      Comment


      • jmrtsus
        jmrtsus commented
        Editing a comment
        From the Oxford dictionary

        Fraud; "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."

        Most people would agree that this is by definition fraud. He changed the name intentionally for the purpose of profit. Committing the act of "wrongful deception intended to result in financial gain" based on the common meaning of the word as per the definition.

        The name Lattarula is used only in the USA and came about if you believe the nursery owners' story or fairytale below, I don't and Condit's work exposed the issue. Mr. Amend sold fig trees, he like most sellers provided printed catalogs for sales. He had sold Blanche figs for years. His story is Italian visitors told him the name of the Blanche fig in Italy was Lattarulla and "suggested" (why?) he use it. (BS). We must either assume he was dumb as dirt or just doing the shady act of creating a "new" fig. Problem is in history that a Lattarula fig had never existed. The Lattarola was a fig in Italy but in no way matched a Blanche.


        The USA owns the "Lattarula", "Lemon" and "Italian Honey" names for Blanche. The debate is not so much is the name correct but do we need it. We don't need more names for Blanche, we have a ruined name of "White Marseille" with the Agristarts fiasco without dealing with the "Lattarula" joke! Do the fig growers in the USA NEED five names for the Blanche fig? No, but the people selling plants sure need it to increase profits and stick buyers with multiple plants of the same type. Why would a person want to continue using bogus names adding to the large number of Synonyms? One word, profit. Just because a false name is perpetuated for a time period does not legitimize the fake name. Lattarula was shown to be bogus in 1955 and the nurseries continue to perpetuate the myth. Why assist them? We need to retire some illegitimate synonyms NOT keep making new ones. When people dream up new names there is no law that says we must be a lemming and blindly follow. We as a Forum need to settle on a preferred name for the old established figs.

        Below is the entire Lattarula story from Condit referring to the Blanche fig.

        " 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."


        How long will we as consumers let people knowingly con us by selling figs under different names like they are different plants? We enable this shady practice by NOT consolidating names and actually buying from these people. I have never and will never buy from places that do the Fantasia thing or sells multiple same type fig trees under different names as it shows intentional deception.

      • AscPete
        AscPete commented
        Editing a comment
        jmrtsus ,
        A simple way of addressing the "Blanche" issue on this Forum may be to group fig cultivars with similar phytomorphology...
        The Blanche types (instead of Italian Honey types) would be White Marseilles, Italian Honey, Lattarula, Lemon, Etc.

        You could do the same with Brown Turkey types (English), Brunswick types, Celeste types, Etc.

      • jrdewhirst
        jrdewhirst commented
        Editing a comment
        Right, what Pete said. Elsewhere I suggested the maintenance of a simple database with suspected synonyms or family relatives. If you search the archives, you will find that much of this has been done.

        To me, the fact that one fig may have different names is not generally "a con."

    • #6
      Yeah I'm thinking there's some kind of bug with the poll software. Consider this a trial run, and we can get really anal about the answers and questions too. If you don't like what I wrote, think you can write something better, or are just a creative type who wants to feel important, please attach suggestions to this post.
      My CollectionFor TradeWish ListMy Listings
      Zone 8A •
      Greenville, NC

      Comment


      • #7
        Many of these questions need more explanation. Like what in the world does “thoughts about re-selling” mean?
        Zea
        Watsonville, CA. zone 9

        Comment


      • #8
        Last day to clean up the poll / edit the poll questions before I go live. I've already found a new poll hosting software so TODAY IS THE LAST DAY for poll edits. Tomorrow we go live, and 2 weeks from that day I will close the poll. Here are the questions and answers, for discussion and cleanup.

        What is the proper naming convention for a seller (or distributor)?
        • Use the oldest known name
        • Use the most common name (except where polluted) - NEEDS CLEANUP!
        • Use the name you were sold
        • Use any known synonym
        • Use any name you like
        • Use the newest name







        Is it okay to correct a mislabeled fig?
        • No, not under any circumstances
        • Yes, but only with DNA evidence (even if DNA sequencing is incomplete)
        • Yes, but you need to use morphology in conjunction with tracking down distribution catalogs to compare to
        • Yes, morphology is enough
        • Yes, but you must use the "NOT" convention
        • Yes, but you must use the "UNK" convention







        Is using UNK to mark an unknown a requirement?
        • Yes
        • No







        Is using the "NOT" convention better than tracking down the true name of a fig?
        • Yes
        • Only if you can't find evidence to support a better name
        • No







        If a fig gets a bad reputation from a bad seller (like the White Marseilles-Agristarts fiasco), is it okay to revert to a different known synonym to distinguish your listing from the tainted market?
        • Yes
        • Yes, but this is a rare exception
        • No







        If a fig like Lattarula is a known fraud, should we continue to use the fraudulent name? - NEEDS CLEANUP!
        • Yes, always
        • Yes, if you want
        • No, we should revert to the most recent known name
        • No, we should revert to the oldest known name
        • No, we should create a new name







        If a fig has a known synonym, is it okay to distribute it as the other fig? (e.g., selling Violette de Bordeaux as Beer's Black [DNA match] or Negronne [morphology match]).
        • No, never
        • DNA only
        • DNA or Morphology




        What are our thoughts on re-selling?
        • It's fine
        • It's fine as long as the product is substantially changed (grown much larger or been rejuvenated somehow)
        • It's fine as long as the product is materially changed (you bought a pack of 10 cuttings but only needed 5)
        • It's never allowed







        Are tissue cultures bad?
        • Yes
        • They are good as long as the seller informs you it is a TC and you understand the issues associated with TC
        • No
        My CollectionFor TradeWish ListMy Listings
        Zone 8A •
        Greenville, NC

        Comment


        • #9
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS you would like me to add, or practices you think make a seller more trusted than others? NOW IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO ADD IT TO THE POLL. Speak now or forever hold your peace.
          My CollectionFor TradeWish ListMy Listings
          Zone 8A •
          Greenville, NC

          Comment


          • #10
            Originally posted by Shaft View Post
            What is the proper naming convention for a seller (or distributor)?

            Is it okay to correct a mislabeled fig?

            Is using UNK to mark an unknown a requirement?

            Is using the "NOT" convention better than tracking down the true name of a fig?

            If a fig gets a bad reputation from a bad seller (like the White Marseilles-Agristarts fiasco), is it okay to revert to a different known synonym to distinguish your listing from the tainted market?

            If a fig like Lattarula is a known fraud, should we continue to use the fraudulent name?

            If a fig has a known synonym, is it okay to distribute it as the other fig? (e.g., selling Violette de Bordeaux as Beer's Black [DNA match] or Negronne [morphology match]).

            What are our thoughts on re-selling?

            Are tissue cultures bad?
            The same name by which it was acquired.

            Yes, when the mislabeling is once removed and can be verified with the seller or trader, absolutely different from mis-naming a fig cultivar...

            Yes, but not absolutely necessary just as long as an already established name is not used...

            Yes, tracking down the "True name' is rarely possible for many unknowns and circulating incorrectly named, "NOT" is a simple way of differentiating.

            No, if there is no way to get the name of donor cultivar then "NOT" convention should be used.

            Yes, Lattarula is an already established name and the fig cultivar should maintain the same name by which it was acquired.

            NO, the fig cultivar should maintain the same name by which it was acquired. Current DNA and or Phytomorphology do not completely account for close familial relationship or FMV infection(s).

            The fig cultivars should be grown out and fruited by the Seller to confirm or at least document the "named' cultivar. Many times re-selling cuttings or young plants results in putting mis-named figs into circulation.

            No, they are simply another way of propagating figs.
            Pete R - Hudson Valley, NY - zone 5b

            Comment


            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              "Pete is generally pretty spot on with most things here"

              Certainly which is why I'm saddened he might choose not to participate. He is definitely one of the experts and I admire him very much.

              But the wisdom of crowds has value. I bring it up because, afterall, Joe mentioned giving more weight to some opinions than others. My response to that isn't to dismiss Pete- he's one of my top 3 most trusted people here, and the first - but to assert the value of crowds. A crowd that happens to include Pete? Man, that's the best of both worlds 🌎

            • AscPete
              AscPete commented
              Editing a comment
              ... Correcting a Mislabeled container / fig is completely different from Re-naming a fig / cultivar.
              The mislabeled fig / container just has to be traced back to the point where the label was switched or lost, many times simply growing out the cultivar helps to narrow down the available options.
              For example if there were only four cultivars sold then the mislabeled would be one of four and could be easily ID'd after growing it out...

            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              "... Correcting a Mislabeled container / fig is completely different from Re-naming a fig / cultivar.
              The mislabeled fig / container just has to be traced back to the point where the label was switched or lost, many times simply growing out the cultivar helps to narrow down the available options.
              For example if there were only four cultivars sold then the mislabeled would be one of four and could be easily ID'd after growing it out..."

              Indeed. And in this context, I'm talking about correcting a mislabeled fig, but apparently that shows "implicit bias."

          • #11
            Shaft --

            You asked for a rewording of the Lattarula item. Before I go there, I need to make a few comments.

            1. This format is very problematic because responses are limited to the ones you provide. And only one response is possible. What if my answer is "None of the above" or "Both A and C"?

            2. Many of your questions have an implied bias. The reader knows what answer you want. Should we correct a mislabel? Should we track down the true name of a fig? Should we distinguish our offerings from those tainted by a bad seller? Should we perpetuate a fraud? Etc. Unless you just want people to confirm your biases, you need to ask neutral questions.

            3. Some of your questions assume the impossible. One question uses the term "known synonym" but there is no such thing. There are suspected synonyms, and we may be more or less confident. But we don't know anything for sure based on comparisons of either (a) morphology or (b) a partial genome. Another question uses the term "true name." But what does that mean? A specific fig tree in Italy or Greece was never named anything. It was "My black fig" or "Your green fig." Down the road there may have been a closely related fig tree. Then immigrants brought many sticks from many trees to many locations. In the U.S., collectors or sellers may have given them names such as Hardy Chicago or Bensonhurst Purple or Takoma Violet or Black Bethlehem. What is the "true name?" And how can we know whether any pair of similar trees in the U.S. originated from (a) a single tree in the old country, or (b) two related trees?

            Re Lattarula, I have two issues. First, your question addresses fraud. That's a hot button, calculated to elicit a certain response. Remove the emotion. Ask something more general and neutral like, "If we can prove that a fig tree is re-named, what is the correct response?" Separately you might ask what constitutes proof. Note that a partial genome can prove that two figs are different but not that two figs are the same. Second, your question uses Lattarula as an example, but as noted Lattarula has a long history of non-fraudulent distribution after the original re-naming." That may complicate our response. Again, ask a more general and neutral question, such as, "If we have strong evidence that a fig was renamed -- maybe last week, maybe last century -- what is the correct response?"
            Last edited by jrdewhirst; 08-29-2021, 02:52 PM.
            Joe, Z6B, RI.

            Comment


            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              Any question or answer you think should be changed, suggest an alternative. I did the best I could to encapsulate every position from those threads. I'm willing to adjust until tomorrow. Send me suggestions

          • #12

            Is it okay to correct a mislabeled fig?
            No, and u dont cell it for existing names. U can cell it as UNK






            Is using UNK to mark an unknown a requirement?
            Yes






            Is using the "NOT" convention better than tracking down the true name of a fig?
            No, dont cell this fig. Get the correct fig and cell that.






            If a fig gets a bad reputation from a bad seller (like the White Marseilles-Agristarts fiasco), is it okay to revert to a different known synonym to distinguish your listing from the tainted market?
            No, dont cell this fig. Get the correct fig and cell that.






            If a fig like Lattarula is a known fraud, should we continue to use the fraudulent name?
            No, dont cell this fig. Get the correct fig and cell that.






            If a fig has a known synonym, is it okay to distribute it as the other fig? (e.g., selling Violette de Bordeaux as Beer's Black [DNA match] or Negronne [morphology match]).
            No, dont change the name u got it.




            What are our thoughts on re-selling?
            Its ok.
            Growing: Brown Turkey, Ronde de Bordeaux, Hardy Chicago, Dottato, Michurinska-10, CLBC, I258, Smith, Bens Golden Riverside Wish list: Dessert King, Sao Miguel Roxo
            Netherlands zone 7B/8A?

            Comment


            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              I'll have the poll live tomorrow. Please submit your answers using that software to be counted

          • #13
            << well, the wisdom of crowds is a well researched phenomenon that goes all the way back to Galton, and before. Your group of experts will be less accurate than my group which includes the village idiot, and 5 year Olds. That's a reality of statistics >>

            Your assertion is too sweeping.

            See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowd

            << the average of 10 learned individuals on a topic will vary from the average of 10 individuals who know nothing of the topic on hand even in a situation where a known truth exists and it is incorrect to just mix the total population of opinions assuming all to be equal as that will incorrectly dilute the impact of signal from the learned individuals over the noise of the un-educated. >>
            Joe, Z6B, RI.

            Comment


            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              Sure, I've heard those criticisms before but there are a couple of issues at play. The first one is 10 people is nowhere near a large enough sample size. That's just a sampling error at that point, and the more you increase the size of the crowd the better the wisdom of crowds gets. As your article stated, "thus the crowd tends to make its best decisions if it is made up of diverse opinions and ideologies." It also stated "scott E. Page introduced the diversity prediction theorem: "The squared error of the collective prediction equals the average squared error minus the predictive diversity". Therefore, when the diversity in a group is large, the error of the crowd is small."

              The quote you provided was about social influence, and how social pressure causes people to make bad decisions. It is literally the sole reason I opposed the "consensus" as strongly as I did, and why I want to keep debate about specific issues off this thread. Social influence. Take a look at the sentences before and after what you provided.

              "The wisdom of the crowd effect is easily undermined. Social influence can cause the average of the crowd answers to be wildly inaccurate, while the geometric mean and the median are far more robust.[35] (This relies on the uncertainty and trust, ergo experience of an individuals estimate to be known. i.e. the average of 10 learned individuals on a topic will vary from the average of 10 individuals who know nothing of the topic on hand even in a situation where a known truth exists and it is incorrect to just mix the total population of opinions assuming all to be equal as that will incorrectly dilute the impact of signal from the learned individuals over the noise of the un-educated.)

              Experiments run by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology found that when a group of people were asked to answer a question together they would attempt to come to a consensus which would frequently cause the accuracy of the answer to decrease. i.e. what is the length of a border between two countries? One suggestion to counter this effect is to ensure that the group contains a population with diverse background"

              In other words I am designing the best, most reliable poll I can, that cannot be dismissed out if hand fir "implicit bias." That's why you all can edit the questions and answers

              That said though, we aren't really talking about something experience would help with. If we were talking about the best way to prune a fig tree or the best way to package them for sale then I would actually weight the expert more than the average person but we're talkin about morality and ethics here and that seems like something everyone gets a say in. Especially Customer, which "ask the experts" ignores entirely, because at the end of the day they are more important.

              To put too much emphasis on the opinions of a self-interested minority,, we're creating a very serious monopoly and I don't want to get too In The Weeds about why that is bad but it would be. More people selling means lower prices for everyone, but we must first make sure they are trustworthy. This best practices list establishes that. Instead of letting people give responses that can be interpreted many ways, we lock them down to a single answer, while trying to provide a accurate representation of each point of view. Thus consensus is determined as to what the best practices are. People can use this, or not, but it's at least a point of reference for some of the more common issues.

              Perhaps a mod will sticky it, to keep it fresh and prevent abuses in either direction
              Last edited by Shaft; 08-29-2021, 06:53 PM.

            • jrdewhirst
              jrdewhirst commented
              Editing a comment
              Re your 1st point: I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're merely being disingenuous. "10" is just a plug number. The point is that if you want an answer to a question that requires knowledge, you are better off asking the knowledgeable. And ultimately you acknowledge that you agree.

              Re your 2nd point: A statistical distribution has both a central tendency and some dispersion. You are correctly making the point that if the sample is unbiased, then a large and diverse sample will give a more reliable estimate of its central tendency. But as the Wiki article notes, crowd opinions are very likely to be biased (rather than random). For example, if a persuasive speaker addresses the crowd before they "vote" then the uninformed and gullible can be influenced. Numbers and diversity do not fix systematic bias.

              But now to the critical point: You view this as a discussion about "morality and ethics." That explains why you used charged questions with words such as "fraud." I thought it was a discussion about managing information -- how to keep names straight. So my final bit of advice is that you state loud and clear that you are asking people to make ethical judgments.

              But I think we can kill two birds -- if we use a best practice to keep names straight, we'll automatically serve the Community and the Customer.

            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              Fair enough jrdewhirst. I see where we got mixed up then. I'm glad we had so many issues getting started as it gave us a chance to have this trial run

              The reason I say that it's about morality and ethics is because of the accusations that were leveraged against me and other sellers, I wouldn't limit this to just renaming although now that you point that out I see where you got the idea. If I had more questions or ideas about best practices I would include those so if there's anything you think is a critical best practice please tell me and I will be glad to have it but at the end of this I want a set of guidelines that people can Loosely agree on as being the ethical way to exist as a big seller or distribute

              The dogpiling that I've seen in other threads and assuming the worst and assuming that someone's guilty without evidence is just the thing that really gets under my skin and this is my attempt to address that problem instead of the conflict that I am guilty of seeking out prior to this so in a way this is my way of making amends

              Regarding your point about a persuasive speaker giving a speech right before the voting, that is why I responded so critically to pee in this thread and specifically asked people not do that. I really think the mods should step in when that sort of thing happens but if not it's okay. Either he didn't understand or he was in tempting to manipulate the results but either way I'm hoping that the pole we create as a community is resilient enough to withstand it

          • #14
            This is making me nauseous... your not going to be able to resolve or standardize the practice my friend. Be a good dude and people will take note, be a bad dude people will take note. Its pretty much that simple. And even if your a good dude, As notorious big once said if you are doing something well you are going to have haters.

            https://youtu.be/tHcc6mv2KLc
            Ike
            bergen county NJ 6b
            Wish list: oh lets face it Ill take any variety I dont have!!

            Comment


            • Shaft
              Shaft commented
              Editing a comment
              Fair. I'll do what I can then wash my hands of it. After that, any aggression I display can be directed at those who deserve it. The haters. First step is figure out who they are from valid criticism. This is that.There are some pretty mean people round these parts

            • AscPete
              AscPete commented
              Editing a comment
              Drfig ,
              Agreed, a "Good Seller Reputation" is usually earned over time with "Best Practices", its "Organic".
              IMO lumping anyone and everyone that has an opposing view or disagrees as "haters" is somewhat narrow-minded.

          • #15
            • I corrected "Yes, but you need to use morphology in conjunction with tracking down distribution catalogs to compare to" to "Yes, but you need to use morphology in conjunction with tracking down distribution history to compare to" based on the suggestions of ASCPete
            • I corrected from "Use the name you were sold" to "Use the same name by which it was acquired" based on the suggestions of AscPete
            • I did not understand this response in-context: "No, if there is no way to get the name of donor cultivar then "NOT" convention should be used." The question is asking about KNOWN SYNONYMS like White Marseilles being renamed to Blanche. This was extensively discussed in the RENAMING FIGS thread I've linked multiple times now. Therefore, no adaptation was made.
            • I added the following option based on the suggestions of AscPete Pete: "Regardless of how much the product has changed, the fig cultivars should be grown out and fruited by the Seller to document/confirm the cultivar. Once complete, re-selling is acceptable."
            • jrdewhirst recommended changing the question about Lattarula to remove "fraud." I want to identify a situation where we KNOW that a rule has been broken, so I'm hesitant to use "If we can prove that a fig tree is re-named, what is the correct response?" because that's a different question it seems to me. I wanted something stronger, because I agree with this poster: "Of course, we should discourage promiscuous re-naming. Renaming of named Variety X as another existing named Variety Y should be a capital offense. Renaming of named Variety X to some entirely new name should merit some form of shunning (e.g., "I will never acquire any fig materials from a grower who mislabels."). The exception would be where the naming is openly discussed and consensual, such as with the recent renaming of Raasti North Persian Unknown as Iranian Candy."
            • I'm asking about the protocol in that case. That is EXACTLY what happened with Lattarula, afterall. I can change the question, but I think there's value in the question I'm asking too. Would it be better to have both questions?
            I will be putting this poll live with reset polls in exactly 24 hours. Please re-submit answers using the platform at that time.
            Last edited by Shaft; 08-29-2021, 11:00 PM.
            My CollectionFor TradeWish ListMy Listings
            Zone 8A •
            Greenville, NC

            Comment


            • jrdewhirst
              jrdewhirst commented
              Editing a comment
              Progress. Just a couple further comments. Whether Lattarula was fraud is irrelevant. You'd have exactly the same issue for an accidental renaming. So remove the emotion and ask a general question, such as, "What is the correct process for (re)naming when we have strong evidence that a named variety was renamed?"

              You might want to make it two questions. In one case, the re-naming was old and the variety was resold non-fraudulently many times under the new name. FWIW this situation applies to MANY of the classic varieties that we grow. In the other case, the re-naming was recent so the variety was not resold many times under the new name.

              Until you get to re-selling and tissue culture, the poll is all about naming protocols. You have 4-6 prototypical situations and you want to know the correct protocol. Organize accordingly. In response to your PM, I've given you some suggestions.

          • #16
            Shaft my friend I think that Drfig is providing good advice. I was fortunate to meet him this weekend and can tell you he is an intelligent and wise person first hand. The only time a list of fig names was ever correct was in 44 AD when the first list was produced. In 1909 is was said that figs were the most mixed up single species in nomenclature, it was reaffirmed in 1955 by republishing the 1909 statement. One of the failings in my opinion of this Forum is it seems to encourage increasing synonyms instead of promoting not adding more. Trying to get people to change this behavior has never succeeded unfortunately. Like Drfig said you will never change it, it has been out of control since the written history of figs. But we can attempt to slow it down............................. maybe. Ever read the book "Who Moved my Cheese"?

            Comment


            • Drfig
              Drfig commented
              Editing a comment
              jmrtsus I appreciate the compliment of calling me very intelligent and wise but we did not meet this past weekend, unless my spirit Appeared to you. I was on call all weekend in The hospital. You May be thinking of figdr who has similar name to mine.

            • jmrtsus
              jmrtsus commented
              Editing a comment
              Yep! Got it backwards! But I do follow you posts and like your comments. Maybe one day we will meet. I have to go change my thank you to him for a presentation on grafting this weekend.....not the first time I have been a dufus! Thanks!

          • #17
            Unfortunately, the "forum police" has won it seems. The complaining and reporting of Malcolm's Shaft opinions has gotten to so many that the gods spoke into his account being banned from the forums. What a shame.... what a shame people can't seem to be able to take criticism, other's opinions or be mature enough to turn the eye and look the other way. I see a snappy and at times pushy guy when it comes to Malcolm but the guy has a passion for figs. A passion I remember I came in with a couple of years ago. To everyone out there I say "Don't be intimidated, don't be scared, speak, whether you feel you are right or feel someone is not. When silenced, it's only because others are weak and can't handle reality that every head is a different world". If I get banned, I'll live and move on.....
            Last edited by TorontoJoe; 09-03-2021, 07:50 PM. Reason: Inappropriate

            Comment


            • jmrtsus
              jmrtsus commented
              Editing a comment
              It is a Forum that is owned by someone with a financial interest in fig sales and the tenor of the Forum is marketing not consumer oriented. Nothing wrong with that, it is his forum and his rules. Shaft (Malcom) cannot post or send messages. No reason given and he cannot even ask. I told Malcom this morning the poll thing had PO'ed the cabal over trying to do something about all the synonyms and he could expect problems. He could not seem to understand as he was under impression it was a good thing and did not expect the reaction he got. I've seen it for years here and my ignore list continues to grow. I do miss your wit, but see others fading away from here with you. I see you on the new Forum and will check it out.

            • don_sanders
              don_sanders commented
              Editing a comment
              lol Fig conspiracy theories. While WillsC does sell, owns the site, and probably indirectly benefits from it, I can assure you that none of the mods have any interest in WillsC fig sales, do not benefit from his sales, and are not motivated in any way by them. WillsC does less selling here than many vendors that visit the site. There are also NO issues with the "poll thing" or synonyms discussions and have no influence on any moderation. Everyone is free to continue polling and discussing synonyms if they like. Discussions, disagreements, constructive criticism, opinions, etc are all welcome.

              Disruptive people, trouble makers, trolls, degrading, belittling, direct or indirect threats, etc are not welcome.

            • jmrtsus
              jmrtsus commented
              Editing a comment
              What I said is he like others profits from fig sales and the Forum is marketing centric, both are true and OK. Lots of people use Forums to buy, sell or trade items. I have been on this forum since the other one died. An any discussion of the multiple name game starts a fire. People on this forum add and add and add new names and conventions. This in turn creates new sales for all sellers and even more confusion to the name game. It also screws new people that have not learned the name game yet. And that is wrong. What Shaft did was try to do something he and others thought was good but it quickly turned bad.
          Working...
          X