dave said:On select pulldowns, if a plant already has an option selected for the pulldown (like minimum cold hardiness) and you subsequently submit a mass proposal that adds a different pulldown option, it will indeed add rather than replace the pulldown.

That seems like a benefit to me! It tells the reader that someone thought 10F was the minimum cold hardiness, and someone else thought that -5F was.

Due to microclimates, I bet that people who base their temps on NOAA reports or their own window thermometer, but grow plants in particular exposures will naturally be reporting that kind of variation. Also, a climate with consistently gradual temperature changes will probably support much more tender plants than a climate with many rapid temperatures changes including multiple cold snaps and warm snaps.

When the facts are fuzzy, it's a good thing if the reporting can express some of that fuzziness. Just my opinion.

On another issue:

eclayne said:
I think this sort of notation is confusing
Flowering: Other: Many will repeat bloom if spent blooms are removed.

How about "Flowering: Other: Many Armeria will repeat bloom if spent blooms are removed."

That way the reader will know how generic the comment is: it could be a species name, a genus name or even a common name.

I'm not a fan of fuzziness or of blanket statements that may or may not apply in the database information boxes. Comments can always be added to clarify these points.

I agree that anything that can be stated precisely and correctly, should be.

But when the fact is that a given cultivar (for example) is hardy in Zone 6 for a few people, Zone 7 for many, and Zone 8 for 90%, which number is "right"?

None of these numbers would be right in your example. Not even zone 8, because the plant is hardy there for only 90 percent of growers. The minimum hardiness zone should be one in which 100 percent of gardeners can grow the plant without taking any special measures in preparation for cold weather.

I suspect that the people in the lower zones in your example are taking special measures, either consciously (by appying thick mulch covers, for instance) or unconsciously (by situating the plant in a location offering shelter from the effects of cold weather).

Curiosity question....


Let's say I use the amazing new databox to populate data across the entire genus (?) of a plant... all 4 instances of a particular plant , for instance, like the example Dave used earlier. How many acorns do I get? Is that considered ONE entry, because I used the databox one time, or FOUR, because it went to four different plants?

I don't think the mass proposals earn acorns, but I could be wrong.

I added acorn rewards this afternoon and it's one acorn per proposal.

Well in that case, I'll be taking the long way around the barn.

flaflwrgrl said:Well in that case, I'll be taking the long way around the barn.

I don't see the benefit/incentive to the ATP member of doing the mass proposal, if the user can get 5 acorns for 5 individual DB proposals, but only 1 acorn for doing a mass proposal of the same data. Acorns are the incentives you use to encourage people to help fill in the gaps in the database, right? Or am I mistaken?

Next question:
What will show in the user's profile under number of proposals submitted if they use the mass proposal?

Not everyone contributes for acorns.

This tool is for people who want to see the database be the best it can be, for their own use and the enjoyment and betterment of others.

fiwit said:



I don't see the benefit/incentive to the ATP member of doing the mass proposal, if the user can get 5 acorns for 5 individual DB proposals, but only 1 acorn for doing a mass proposal of the same data. Acorns are the incentives you use to encourage people to help fill in the gaps in the database, right? Or am I mistaken?

Next question:
What will show in the user's profile under number of proposals submitted if they use the mass proposal?

I those

It would be completely illogical and unfair to award acorns for each entry involved in the mass proposal. This morning's mass proposal for the Armeria genus, for example, was applied to 156 plants. It would be ludicrous to award 156 acorns for the same amount of work it takes to submit one proposal earning one acorn.

Acorns are nice, but your time has to be worth something too. The mass proposals save time. Most people don't have the time to fill out the information boxes in 156 entries in one day, but they can do one mass proposal and have all of that information in all of the entries right away.

What zuzu said.

Earn your acorns sending in articles and images. A good lengthy article nets you 50 acorns in one fell swoop.

I really love this new feature. Reading all the posts has been enlightening. I will now think differently when doing a mass proposal.
I really did think that this addition: Flowering: Other: Many will repeat bloom if spent blooms are removed. was useful since it did state "Many", instead of "Will". I understand that not all will repeat bloom, but was trying to address that information. But I guess that would be one of those 'fuzzy' areas? So maybe I will go back and add that information to the ones that I know will repeat bloom.

I agree about the acorn issue, one acorn for the mass proposal is good, I know I wouldn't go to all 156 Armeria entries and fill in that information, and love see that the entries are no longer empty of information. Edited changing would to wouldn't, because I don't see myself going to all 156 entries.

I don't think that we can be right on with growing zones, other than what growers, plant societies, those growing them in their gardens, etc., give as a correct growing zone. For instance, sempervivum grow very well for me in my zone 8. But I know there are those that have real difficulties growing them in their zone 8, same goes for zone 9 growers. It all depends on what all the other growing conditions are. Same applies to the lower end of the growing zones, zone 4. When I see growing zones for a plant I see it as a recommendation for hardiness.

>> When I see growing zones for a plant I see it as a recommendation for hardiness.

I agree. Biology isn't as deterministic as physics. Not even chemistry is as exact as physics.

As you move to the more interesting sciences and engineering areas, rigid or mathematically precise rules become less useful and reasonable interpretations of general guides become necessary. In chemistry, a careful high school student who tries really hard can get closer than 1% to "the exact right answer". But in biology, even in a lab, even one decimal place (+/- 10%) may be doing good! Biology in the field? You're lucky if goats or locusts don't eat your whole experiment.

Despite all the science that has gone into human medicine over the last few hundred years, any given patient with any given disease is likely to display only 50% to 70% of "the" symptoms.

Almost anything said about a plant species or cultivar has to be generalization that varies with many hard-to-measure conditions. Each individual garden is like a new field of study, and the "rules" will be very slightly different in each bed. Observant gardeners will learn either that they can beat "what most people say" about plants' hardiness, or that they have to be more careful than "most people".

valleylynn said:
I don't think that we can be right on with growing zones, other than what growers, plant societies, those growing them in their gardens, etc., give as a correct growing zone.

I agree - I always take zones with a grain of salt. Within each zone (and often in each garden), there are micro-climates that allow you to "push" one way or the other. I know, for instance, that the cold air of winter will pool to the bottom of the hillside, allowing me to grow some plants that need more winter chill in that particular area of my yard. But... that does not make them hardy (at least in my mind) in my zone in terms of a database entry If I were to move them to the flat area of the yard, it just doesn't get cold enough (combination of the heat radiating from the house and the natural air movement) and they would succumb eventually after pouting for a while.

I think the Rubus genus could do with a mass population but its so big I think a more knowledgable person than me would have to propose it. I was just thinking of blackberries and got more than i bargained for.

I have been thinking about that dbrawber. I think what we need to do is just fill in the information that would apply to all blackberries. That would take a bit of research.

I want to do more of this, but need to think about being more accurate. The wheels are turning.