Diana Kulaga wrote:
The web site is much better, too. Really, they have been trying hard and
doing some great stuff.

Diana

wrote in message
...


Pity, becasue the magazine has gotten better. At least imho and fwiw.

K Barrett


i agree; i had suggested in one of their surveys that they add more
technical stuff to it, and they seem to have done that.

--j_a


I had an interesting discussion with Linda Wilhelm who is on the AOS
judging committee, last year. She was encouraging me to return to the
fold after having dropped my AOS membership a few years back in the mass
exodus.

I used the analogy of a divorced person who is assured the ex-spouse has
changed and urged to re-unite with them. I said it took quite a few
years to alienate me, after so many years of membership, to the point
that, after a number of years of submitting objections, suggestions, and
complaints, I finally 'divorced' the AOS. And it will take quite a while
to convince me that I should re-join.

Not trying to be unnecessarily negative, but they'll just have to prove
it and that will probably take a decade at least. And a lot of
institutional change and re-direction that I don't see yet.

While I hear a lot of words proclaiming they have changed, I have yet to
see the proof. Anyone can say "we've changed!" The mag is marginally
better but still nothing like the fine Journal.

As for the website, they deliberately destroyed a cherished community
because they didn't like hearing criticism. I don't think they can ever
put Humpty Dumpty together there again. There are many orchid forums
now, all offering pretty much the same things (and none of them seem to
have that 'community' the old AOS site had) and most more interesting
that the AOS's.