Send pbs mailing list submissions to
pbs@lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
pbs-request@lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
pbs-owner@lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of pbs digest..."

List-Post:<mailto:pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
List-Archive:<http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php

Today's Topics:

1. Re: Seriously Facebook (Michael Mace)
2. Re: Name changes in Massonia (lou jost)
3. Re: Seriously Facebook (Matt Mattus)
4. Re: Name changes in Massonia (Hannon)
5. Re: Seriously Facebook (Ina)
6. Re: Seriously Facebook (Matt Mattus)
7. Re: Photo use (was Facebook) (Jacob Knecht)
8. Re: Photo use (was Facebook) (Hannon)
9. Re: Seriously Facebook (Eugene Zielinski)
10. Re: Photo use (was Facebook) (Tim Harvey)
11. Re: Photo use (was Facebook) (Hannon)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:07:05 -0800
From: "Michael Mace" <michaelcmace@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Seriously Facebook
To: <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <006901cdf834$6a7e1c90$3f7a55b0$@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Clayton wrote:

group do you want PBS to be?

Nice. That brings us around to the place where I think we should start the
conversation: What do we want PBS to be? What problems do we want to solve
in the world and for our members? Answer those questions and I think you'll
be well on your way to deciding what to do with Facebook (which is, after
all, just a tool rather than an end in itself).

My two cents:

--I think PBS as-is works very nicely. This forum is great and I don't think
there's much about it that we need to fix. The bulb ex also works great, as
long as we don't wear out Dell.

--The wiki is great, but contributing to it has a big learning curve. The
wiki could be even better with more contributions (for example, how about
cultivation notes for every species?). The worry is that if we make it
easier to contribute would we overload the wiki admins with too much work.
The danger is real and we shouldn't wish it away.

--Do we want more members, or more people with affinity to us? (For
example, more people who use the wiki? Are there different levels of
participation we'd like to encourage or create?) There's no reason we have
to be structured like a traditional offline enthusiast group. The web is
infinitely flexible.

--The big, big, big problems that I'd like to see us address are:
1. I get the feeling that bulb growing is a dying art. Our members
are getting old faster than we're adding new ones. This is a problem for
many plant societies, we don't have it as badly as some other groups, but
it's a real problem and we should not leave it until it becomes acute.
2. Sources for wild bulb seed are dwindling away. This may be
related in part to item 1, but it's also due to government action. This
problem will definitely get worse. Having more members might help here, as
we could lobby more effectively.

Being more active on Facebook might help with growth in membership, but
there are a lot of other options we ought to consider. For example, if you
really want to recruit young people, Facebook is not the place to do it. The
right location is Tumblr. We could also do a ton with Instagram...

There's a lot more we could/should discuss on this stuff, but I doubt we can
cover it all in this forum -- the conversation will get too complicated.
But maybe if we can agree on the problem(s) to solve, it'll help drive
whatever followup conversation happens.

Mike
San Jose, CA

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:38:22 -0800 (PST)
From: lou jost <loujost@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Name changes in Massonia
To: pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID:
<1358815102.87001.YahooMailClassic@web164003.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Dylan, are you claiming that there is an objective ethics, and? objective concept of beauty, imposed by some immaterial agent?

Maybe it would make our conservation work easier if there were some god who ordered everyone to take care of the world. Is that a good reason to believe such a thing? No, obviously not. We should believe in things something we have evidence that it is true, not because it would be nice if it were true. There is no credible evidence for such a god, and conservation is not served by fooling ourselves and others about this. Honesty is essential in conservation.

Lots of people often repeat the false idea that tropical forests are the lungs of the world, and make our oxygen. If this were true, it would be a great reason to conserve forests. Does that mean we should believe it, and use it to motivate conservation? Of course not. It is not true, and our wishing it was does not make it so. Eventually, informed anti-conservationists will point out the lie, and it will cast doubt on our credibility and our other conservation arguments. In the same way, bringing in imaginary higher powers or religious sentiments to defend conservation can only backfire, because these myths have no credible evidence to back them up.

Lou

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 20:28:35 -0500
From: Matt Mattus <mmattus@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Seriously Facebook
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <CD235573.B4C2%mmattus@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"

You can't do anything with the PBS Facebook PAGE is probably because it is
only 'page', and not a 'GROUP'. A Facebook group will require a hosting
moderator, who can approve members on a case-be-case method.
Once you have a group, any group member who is active and approved can post
a photo to it.

I belong to a few such groups for plant people, and I manage one as well.
You would be surprised who participates in these groups. It can get
difficult to manage such groups, as quickly, one is bombarded with people
who want to become a member - but is that a bad thing for the FB side of the
group?

I too think that this discussion ( and fear of Facebook) is silly.

As for photos being 'searched' and 'stolen' - I too think this is an antique
fear. Look -it's no longer 1995, today with digital photography, everyone
has photos, and any Google search for a bulb will still bring up the Wiki
images ( which you should continue). A facebook group would be a terrific wa
for many of us to not only read notes, but to also see photos at the same
time.

As for photo fear...really? Who would really want a photo of a Massonia
pustulata besides us? Or someone who should be in this group? No one sells
photos anymore, and no one pays for the use of photos anymore. In a world
of Instagram and Twitter, photos should be our greatest asset.

I file this fear in the same bucket as those who still place those annoying
? copyright lines ghosted over their images. Crazy.

On 1/21/13 5:49 PM, "Ina" <klazina@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:07:40 -0800
From: Hannon <othonna@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Name changes in Massonia
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
<CAFsz2W8-VprTP6b0A5vJNPhBgud6P185dYiNaBe_xNZrXFcLHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Lou,

I am claiming that you cannot proclaim the virtues of conservation based on
materialist beliefs alone. You wrote:

"We should accept the worldview that best agrees with our current evidence.
Honesty is the best policy in conservation. And the best evidence we have
today is that Darwinian evolution explains all the beautiful forms of life
on this planet, including our own."

Again, I ask what does your statement about evolution have to do with the
concept of beauty or establishing conservation priorities? How is any
ethics derived from materialism, whether "objective" or not?

I'm not sure why you continue to introduce religion into this discussion.
It is not irrelevant but I believe it takes us off course.

Dylan

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:22:27 +1300
From: Ina <klazina@orcon.net.nz>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Seriously Facebook
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <50FDF7E3.5000709@orcon.net.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Ahhh. So it needs a moderator. Is anyone in the PBS interested?

I also am a member of a few Facebook bulb groups and it is fascinating.
One thing I like about Facebook, I can turn off if I don't want to
follow something. At least I don't have to look at it. Or read a lot
of stuff which I am not interested in.

Ina.

Ina Crossley
Auckland New Zealand Zone 10

On 22/01/2013 2:28 p.m., Matt Mattus wrote:

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:31:44 -0500
From: Matt Mattus <mmattus@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Seriously Facebook
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <CD236440.B4CD%mmattus@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

I will add that if this current model of PBS is working, why change it?
A facebook presence will attract new members, and curious people, but the
way I imagine that it will work is that the FB discussions will be brief,
often with a photo. A different type of communication, a different
experience.

The in-depth sort of conversation that goes on here, will still remain here.
I think both models will work, and the more curious newbie, may choose to
join this group if they feel that they want to become more involved.

The Facebook group will be best for the "look what bloomed today" sort of
chat.

On 1/21/13 9:22 PM, "Ina" <klazina@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:44:35 -0800
From: Jacob Knecht <jacobknecht@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Photo use (was Facebook)
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
<CAB2o=0kh_4kOADcAqEU53djQ=eQ6Ju399=sLPfGZp1kV68Qt4w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi all,

I don't get to follow or post often here due to time restrictions but I saw
Matt's comment and felt compelled to add a few quick personal thoughts:

While I agree that copryright stamps on photos are unsightly and this is
why I've never used them, despite my concern about theft, I strongly
disagree with your statement about photo vale/copyright.

"No one sells photos anymore, and no one pays for the use of photos
anymore" It's dangerous to overgeneralise. There has been a decline in
this area, but good photos still have value and are still very much bought
and sold. I sell publishing rights to a number of my photos to magazines,
journals, websites, newspapers and licensing to plant vendors.

I put a great deal of care, effort and resources into the photos I take and
share on my flickr and tumblr accounts, as well as upload to the PBS wiki.
I share my photos because I want as many people to enjoy and be inspired by
them as possible, especially I hope to get more younger folks interested in
horticulture. My photos are continually used on other websites and blogs
without attribution. When there isn't attribution or back-linking I am
disappointed but not terribly so. My photos are quite often stolen for use
by web- and eBay-based sellers of plants and seeds. I take issue when
people take my creative content (photos or text) without out permission to
use for their own monetary gain, that is real theft, both unethical and
thankfully still illegal.

PBS wiki photos used *all the time* on eBay for plants and seeds. I don't
have time to be the policeman but this theft is shameful. Without these
images they wouldn't be able to sell hardly any of their wares. It is
perhaps easy for someone on the outside to devalue an image of a special
plant, seeing as how spoiled we've become with the internet, but surely
Matt as someone who takes beautiful images of your own plants, you know
that costs go into each photo: the expense, time and effort of acquiring,
growing, bringing to flower and being present with the plant at the right
moment and lighting for the photo, not to mention the time in editing,
uploading, and the cost of camera equipment. What about in situ photos,
with all the travel costs?

The internet is huge now with seemingly immeasurable data but we need to be
reminded that quality content doesn't create itself, such content only
springs from genuine effort and resources. I maintain that quality photos
of interesting subjects will continue to have value for many years to come.

Jacob Knecht

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 19:06:02 -0800
From: Hannon <othonna@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Photo use (was Facebook)
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
<CAFsz2W80NwdsavD1mQwfxFuCC-mWobWptZHN598LsO=AwaQ=DA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Thank you, Jacob. Well said.

Dylan

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 20:19:22 -0700
From: "Eugene Zielinski" <eez55@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Seriously Facebook
To: "Pacific Bulb Society" <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <380-22013122231922895@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

I'm glad Matt brought up the difference between a Facebook Page and a
Facebook Group. A page is your own personal megaphone. Only you can post
a message on your page and only your approved friends can respond to it.
(So, only the owner of the PBS page can post on it.) In a group (open
group) only approved members can make posts, including pictures, and only
members can comment on the posts. But non-members can view the posts.
I think a Facebook group would be of benefit to PBS. However, I think only
members of this e mail list should be allowed to be in the Facebook Group
(and only if they want to be, of course). This would make administration
of the group easier and (hopefully) keep the spammers out. I see a big
advantage in being able to post, access, and discuss pictures quickly --
pictures that may not be worthy of wiki space. And if the image is notable
for some reason, it can be moved to the wiki.
One of the reasons I love this e mail group is that it does NOT allow the
posting of images. Images tend to make the discussion go downhill rather
quickly. (Someone will post an image, and most of the responses will be on
the order of Ooooo...that's nice; Ooooo...pretty picture; Ooooo...I'm
jealous. Not too informative as far as I'm concerned.)
Aside from the possible misuse of images by outsiders, I see another
problem with a Facebook Group. Contrary to my comment above, there are
often useful discussions generated within these groups. Thus, those who
only pay attention to the e mail list may miss out on a good Facebook
discussion and vice versa. This may dilute the PBS, rather than enhance it.
One important thing -- the Facebook issue cannot be decided on this forum.
It must be decided by the PBS board.
Comments and disagreements welcome.

Eugene Zielinski
Rapid City, SD
USA

post

------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 19:41:00 -0800
From: Tim Harvey <zigur@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Photo use (was Facebook)
To: Bulb Society Pacific <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <BAY160-W623454C14294441B01342BC160@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

So the fear about posting images on Facebook is unfounded then (PBS is worse!)? None of my images on Facebook have ever been plagiarized, to my knowledge.

T

------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 19:43:44 -0800
From: Hannon <othonna@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs] Photo use (was Facebook)
To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
<CAFsz2W_JbvC3NK=awaPyoRj1rm6RJKWA6h0z0OH4MjduMh_4pA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I have had photos ripped off from the CSSA Journal (scanned, apparently)
and posted on a Russian site. They were from over ten years ago.

Dylan

On 21 January 2013 19:41, Tim Harvey <zigur@hotmail.com> wrote:

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
pbs mailing list
pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php

End of pbs Digest, Vol 120, Issue 36
************************************