I love the idea of celebration weeks!
And I am certainly capable of celebrating everything that is going on in my plant world as well as the rest of the plant world at any given moment in time despite the limitations imposed by this construct.
What I cannot do, however, is participate as I would like to within the constraints of the specified plants in the specified weeks...
"...this year we will be celebrating each plant type while it's peaking in our gardens. "
because my plant types will not be peaking in my gardens at the designated times. So, for example, while " we" celebrate roses here on ATP, I will celebrate spring blooming bulbs along with a slew of other spring wonders (that I love more than roses but they don't even garner an ATP celebration week) while my roses work on growing leaves...
case in point:
May 7
after spring bulb week is long over, and after rose week is over, I will be sticking my nose in daffodils and daphnes, still waiting on those thorny primadonas to make buds...

"...we want the Celebration Weeks to be highly interactive. It won't be so much a time to read and learn, but a time to share. We'll want people to post pictures from their gardens that week. Talk about what's blooming and why you love them" is all well and fine...except for the subject limitation for the timeframe and the timelimit for the subject.
For example, Roses week Sat, April 25, 2015 to Fri, May 1, 2015, I will most definitely be celebrating gardening all week but not roses per se. As others have said--sure, I can still have fun watching others celebrate roses 'early' for me and on time for them. I could post photos of leafbudding canes and previous years' photos if I felt so inclined to participate in the celebration of roses, but, honestly, I'm much more inclined to be more interested in, swooning over, and photographing what I do have going on in my gardens than what I don't.

Maybe in the 'off weeks' we can celebrate the variety of what's actually happening in gardens all over the world since our plants will not necessarily conform to the ATP calender of events???

Having the photo contests and other mini-contests tied to the specific plant weeks when they occur prior to my plants' ability to get with the program is also a bit disconcerting for me...
In the case of plants that I have had for years, sure, I can post old pics taken with old camera and poor skills
But, I've got new plants and a new camera and a magic lens and I'm still learning how to take better pictures
I hope that we will get an early spring because I got a bunch of new spring bulbs. In my imagination I just know that I will get some fantastic pictures of their blooms this year... but, not by Fri, April 3, 2015

Thank you all for your feedback.

I do want all of our northern friends to know that we did not forget about you, or ignore your growing conditions Dave and I put a tremendous amount of time and effort into trying to make the Weeks at a time that was most convienient for the majority of people. No matter when we schedule the weeks, they are not going to be at the ideal growing time for a large population- that's just how it is when we're dealing with zones 3-10! I just want you to know that we did try

That said, we'll try again this coming week, and come up with a final schedule. It will not suit everyone, but we will do the best we can.

Please keep in mind that the year is all about celebrating our plants and our gardens. No matter what time of year, we can celebrate our favorite plants!

Trish and Dave,

I think we can all agree that there ain't no pleasin' everyone in this regard. That is to say that there will be a certain portion of the members whose plants are not peaking or who will not have had their plants bloom yet during their designated weeks.

In thinking about it further, it's become a very simple question in my mind: how much of the crowdsourcing crowd do we want to service and how much of it are we willing to exclude? And then let the available data set the dates (mitigated by the other identified factors in play, of course). But really, inclusiveness is based on empirical blooming data - not a wished-for schedule.

Ultimately, I guess that means that the gardens themselves are no respecters of off weeks and things fire when they do. So, if having staggered weeks is a more important value than inclusiveness (and it may be, given the work involved), inclusiveness necessarily will suffer. I realize that this is a ton of work generally, and adding these weeks with "peaking" timing adds even more to the load.

If I ran the circus, the only criterion would be how much of my population am I willing to exclude from participating, come up with a number, and ask the data where to draw the line. Then maybe shuffle a little within a specific exclusionary window to make things fit practically (given the other criteria in play - such as the necessity for some off weeks).

With that in mind, this is what I'd suggest:
1) Conduct a census of members by zone (how many gardeners live in each zone?).
2) Figure out what percentage of contributors live in each zone (what percentage of total gardeners live in each zone?)
3) Apply the exclusionary criteria (mentioned above) to identify the service-to cutoff zone (e.g. if ~75% population coverage is the goal, that means that you add percentage from 9+8+7+6, etc. until you reach 75%)
4) Identify bloom times (peak) for the categories in question by the zone identified in #3 (by any of a variety of methods)
5) Select the week based on #4
6) Re-shuffle the weeks, erring on the side of later rather than sooner (inclusiveness), based on the other criteria that's been identified.

Not my site and it's entirely up to you. I'm grateful for the countless hours fun and edification and community that the site provides for me and others and thank you for that. I brought this to the table not as a criticism, but truly with the hope that some data-based tuning with an eye to inclusiveness might occur (thereby pre-mitigating rather than ex post facto-ing in the future).


Also, @zuzu: I think if you'll reread my posts (with a careful eye to what I'm actually asking the data as well as the conclusions that I draw), you'll see that there was no disingenuousness at all on my part...and that the conclusions drawn support the data given the acknowledged and articulated caveats in play. Further, even if I were to include your potential contributions in the roses data (being 100pct generous with the assumptions in the inclusion), that would knock the exclusion rate from 85 to 80 percent in the sample (which happens to be the only extant sample for the question at hand). And that's still pretty untenable for a crowdsourced enterprise.

I don't see where Dave and Trish excluded anyone.

Vicki you beat me to it. I can't see how it excludes anyone. No one is prevented from participating. I really don't understand.

me neither Jennifer - It's all about all the fun we're going to have, eh?

Would voting help?

What if you had the gardening topics listed and asked which week members would prefer if they are planning to participate in that specific gardening topic or plant. The week with the most votes wins for that particular topic. Others could still participate if they wanted to show and talk about yet to peak plants in their garden or share photos and info from the previous year. It would seem that this would be most successful if a "majority" of folks wanting to contribute to each topic were included. I don't know how many folks grow all these different species of plants? There are many that I don't grow, so I would likely not be contributing. (I'd just be reading.)

Trish said:Thank you all for your feedback.

I do want all of our northern friends to know that we did not forget about you, or ignore your growing conditions Dave and I put a tremendous amount of time and effort into trying to make the Weeks at a time that was most convienient for the majority of people. No matter when we schedule the weeks, they are not going to be at the ideal growing time for a large population- that's just how it is when we're dealing with zones 3-10! I just want you to know that we did try

That said, we'll try again this coming week, and come up with a final schedule. It will not suit everyone, but we will do the best we can.

Please keep in mind that the year is all about celebrating our plants and our gardens. No matter what time of year, we can celebrate our favorite plants!

I'm happy with the plant weeks that y'all picked.

Thank you for all your hard work in trying to come up with the 2015 plant weeks.

Are we having fun yet?

I have to confess I don't see the problem. Taking rose week as an example, if rose week in February worked well for the past two years, how can moving it to May exclude anyone? We're exchanging information here, not just photos. Even if photos were the focus, however, let's look at the the database images. There are 15,209 rose images. Calif_Sue has contributed 4,071 and I have contributed 4,344. Just the two of us combined, therefore, have contributed more than 55 percent. I'm not even counting the other rose image contributors in our zone, all of whose gardens have roses in bloom by May.

The object of this year's theme is the celebration of plants. ideally, it will be a year to discuss our favorite plants, relate our experiences with them, talk about the best sources, provide planting and growing recommendations, etc. We'll also share photos of plants, but those photos will not have to have been taken on the day we discuss them.

I think surveys and statistical computations will complicate the issue unnecessarily, and we probably will end up with results resembling the current calendar anyway.

Wait, why does it matter when the pictures were taken or when the flowers bloomed? I think we're complicating a very simple thing here. It's not a contest for who has the best flowers or photos that week, it's a celebration! Calendar year doesn't matter.

Just say "anyone who grew daylilies in the last year may post their pictures for Daylilies Week" in July - why not? That way Gleni in Australia can post his gorgeous daylilies that are in bloom now, right alongside the ones that bloomed in my garden in April, and those reblooming last fall in California.

It doesn't matter to me when any of those topics are celebrated to be honest. (I was just suggesting the idea of voting.) I have a pretty limited variety of plant species, so I will be doing a lot of reading of the various topics that will be celebrated. It sounds like fun and I will get to learn about plants that I am unfamiliar with.

I don't see the problem either Zuzu. The majority of my daylilies will be finished by July - so what? I will still enjoy viewing all the photo's and articles posted.

Dave and Trish - Thank You for all your hard work to prepare a fantastic and FUN year for all of us. Thank you for all that you do for all of us

oh yeah this is fun--
There are two separate issues here.
One is the celebration week that is being billed as it is this year and the other is the associated contest(s).
Who here grows daylilies for the foliage? daffs? tulips? amaryllis? iris? roses? anyone ???? seriously

zuzu said:
I have to confess I don't see the problem. Taking rose week as an example, if rose week in February worked well for the past two years, how can moving it to May exclude anyone?

People are not excluded; it is the roses that bloom in June, July, September, and October of 2015 that are excluded--i.e. mine!

It really does not matter when the plant weeks are scheduled to celebrate the plants, talk about them, and share info and photos.
This year, however, it has been promoted as it has and I am merely pointing out that it doesn't work that way for me because my plants cannot be pigeonholed into peaking accordingly. Whatever--I can still celebrate them both before and after their show!! But I would prefer that it not be 'sold' to me as the bankrupt idea that it is i.e. to celebrate my plants as they are peaking when they are not.

It really does matter that the photo contests--which are actually photo contests--are scheduled prior to bloom time for several of the plants that I grow because I am clearly excluded from entering the (hopefully) great photos that I have yet to take.
So, for for the first seven plant weeks and associated photo contests from Amaryllis in Jan. to Peonies in May I am SOL on the opportunity to take the new and improved photos (that I intend to take this year) in 6/7 of the plant categories in time for the contests. Frankly, I resent that.

For those of you who don't understand the argumentation in this thread, try this:

Suppose that you want to throw a surprise party for your significant other. Being diligent, you check with the ten people on the guest list about when they'd be able to attend. These are your results:

Monday: 0
Tuesday: 1
Wednesday: 3
Thursday: 5
Friday: 6
Saturday: 8

Barring other conflicts in your life, on which day do you choose to throw the party? If you choose Monday or Tuesday, there are a couple of other conversations we need to have before we can continue this one. But I think it's pretty transparent here.

The plant weeks this year differ from those in the past (given the descriptions) in that as well as being informational, they're participatory events. Meaning that they're supposed to occur while the subject is blooming (or shortly thereafter?) so that information/experiences/photos can be shared. And so that photos can be contested, too.

In checking with the guests availability for the RoseParty(tm), it looks like fewer than two of the ten people on the list can show. Granted, those two are party animals and their participation in matchless, but the other eight are out in the cold.

The IrisParty(tm) nets similar results. Only four or five friends can show up to that one. The other fiver or six will have to wait for next year.

The crux of the argument is: check the availability of guests and plan around their bloomin' schedules if it's possible. Dave and Trish understand that and are working on juggling things a bit, it seems.

I'm really looking forward to these serial parties...irrespective of when they occur. I only started this thread in order to point out that the scheduling of some of the weeks seemed a bit premature given the demographics of the site. And to suggest that all other things equal (and they're not) some reconsideration of some of the dates may be indicated in order to include more of the site's population (in the stated purpose of the weeks/parties).

I see the sense of your argument. I just don't agree that anyone is being excluded. Former years photos are acceptable as entrants, so I see no problem. It's not like we have to have the physical flower/plant as evidence that it was taken this year. So 2015 will be acceptable in 2016. No big deal in my book.

It's true that former years are acceptable.

@evermorelawnless and/or @dirtdorphins do you have a specific new proposal of dates that you'd like to throw out there? That would be useful and constructive.

Dave,

I am not in a position to guess at what would be good dates in this moment - because setting good dates, in my opinion, is not about my opinion at all but really should be data driven. It's really not about what I think on some level. With that caveat, I could propose some good dates if I knew:

1) what an acceptable number (to you) is for inclusion. How many of the 10 guests do you need to have showing up at this year's parties?
2) what the guests' availabilities are (and that will vary from party to party, of course).
3) if are you 100pct committed to having breaks between party weeks or are there a few cases in which back-to-back parties would be acceptable?

To answer the second of the above, I can tell you what questions I'd need to ask the database to make good guesses. Or we could discuss a couple of options I have in my head. I'd be happy to make time to crunch numbers/data in a demographically/mathematically defensible way and come up with a list of proposed dates based on those conclusions and the other criteria in play.

If it is to me about maximizing participation (and it is), it could well be that based on the data my zone (5b) might be out in the cold in some categories. That would be fine if the numbers indicated it. I'd much prefer that the numbers tell me what to think (provided I'm bright enough to ask them the right questions) rather than the other way around.

--

The one of the other issues seems to be the photo contests that accompany each week (and while that's very important to some, it may be very tangential to the weeks for others). And I think if that were spelled out more clearly, that may mitigate some of the participation concerns on that end (at least regarding the contests). So, to clarify:

1. Will there also be a year-end photo contest again (with the categories that don't appear in the celebration weeks)? (pollinators, tropicals, annuals, trees, landscapes, etc.)
2. Assuming there is, will the weeks' categories be included also (to account for August roses and May daffys, for example)?
3. If there is, will the winner of the week's contest be automatically included in the top-ten/final ballot, etc.? How might that be handled?

Knowing this stuff might give the plant weeks a little more perspective for the avocational photographers out there who get a kick out of the contests and want to participate.

You asked two sets of questions. One set 1:

1) I don't know how to answer that.

2) I'm not sure what you're looking for on that.

3) I am willing to have some back to back celebration weeks, especially during the busiest and most crowded times of the year.

second set:

1) Yes, we'll surely want to have a "pick up" contest near the end of the season to include all the extra categories that don't fall into a plant week.

2) Yes.

3) Yes, there will be a final ballot that includes the first place winner of every category - all the plant weeks plus whatever categories are in the final pick up contest.

I'll get with you sooner than later with some ideas and numbers and suggestions. To have such an involved/agile site owner/admin is just a joy. Thanks, Dave!!