OGRES, have you guys seen this yet?
 

http://iloveorchidvendors.com/

Subject, of course, to learning the new rules, I'm pleased to see a
come-back. I thought the OGRES site was a valuable resource for orchid
buyers, and always provided a link to it from our site.

--
Kenni Judd
Juno Beach Orchids
http://www.jborchids.com
"Al" wrote in message
...
http://iloveorchidvendors.com/

Since Al spilled the beans, people who are serious about helping
determining policy at the new version of OGRES should go to the
iloveorchidvendors.com site, and contact the advisor_inquiry e mail id
to get information about participating.

No promises, do not want too many people; but could use a few more.

rob't
Robert Bedard
iloveorchidvendors.com

Kenni Judd wrote:
Subject, of course, to learning the new rules, I'm pleased to see a
come-back. I thought the OGRES site was a valuable resource for orchid
buyers, and always provided a link to it from our site.

Well...the website was up there for everybody to see.... I am sorry if I
did something bad.

You could search the archives of this group to find the many discussions
about OGRES over the years.

"Robert Bedard" wrote in message
...

Since Al spilled the beans, people who are serious about helping
determining policy at the new version of OGRES should go to the
iloveorchidvendors.com site, and contact the advisor_inquiry e mail id to
get information about participating.

No promises, do not want too many people; but could use a few more.

rob't
Robert Bedard
iloveorchidvendors.com

Kenni Judd wrote:
Subject, of course, to learning the new rules, I'm pleased to see a
come-back. I thought the OGRES site was a valuable resource for orchid
buyers, and always provided a link to it from our site.

Al wrote:
http://iloveorchidvendors.com/


Darn! Just when it seemed to be gone for good, someone
has to go and restart a bad idea. Hopefully it won't
get off the ground!

Al didn't do anything bad. ;-)

Al wrote:
Well...the website was up there for everybody to see.... I am sorry if I
did something bad.

You could search the archives of this group to find the many discussions
about OGRES over the years.

"Robert Bedard" wrote in message
...

Since Al spilled the beans, people who are serious about helping
determining policy at the new version of OGRES should go to the
iloveorchidvendors.com site, and contact the advisor_inquiry e mail id to
get information about participating.

No promises, do not want too many people; but could use a few more.

rob't
Robert Bedard
iloveorchidvendors.com

Kenni Judd wrote:

Subject, of course, to learning the new rules, I'm pleased to see a
come-back. I thought the OGRES site was a valuable resource for orchid
buyers, and always provided a link to it from our site.

If you aren't being facetious, you could join the advisory group and try
to shoot it down ...

;-)

tennis maynard wrote:

Al wrote:

http://iloveorchidvendors.com/

Darn! Just when it seemed to be gone for good, someone
has to go and restart a bad idea. Hopefully it won't
get off the ground!

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 22:16:53 -0700 in Robert Bedard wrote:

If you aren't being facetious, you could join the advisory group and try
to shoot it down ...

;-)

The whole thing seems to be designed to attract trolls.

Bad puns aside, having notes from the advisory group available
from the stub website may be nice. I don't want to know past history
on OGRES. I do have a more than healthy amount of cynicism on rating
systems in general and am curious if I need to turn the dial back slightly.

--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:58:10 GMT, ?
wrote:

The whole thing seems to be designed to attract trolls.

It really didn't seem to before. Like any rating system, the user
needs to apply some intelligence to the responses and filter out
obvious trolls and malcontents. I thought the previous version worked
pretty well and provided useful information.

deg

Robert Bedard wrote:

If you aren't being facetious, you could join the advisory group and try
to shoot it down ...

;-)

I'm not being facetious, but I don't think that's an
option; as presented the advisory board is just setting
policy, not deciding on the fate of the project.

Since the sponsor and others who may get involved are
obviously watching this list, I felt my best option was
to post here, and hopefully elicit similar replies.

I was pointing out to Mr. Bedard that OGRES had been a subject of discussion
in this newsgroup many times before, if he didn't know that already. If he
was interested in seeing previous comments on the topic there are archive on
the internet.

Trolls attract trolls. They follow me around like so much unwashed family.


"?" wrote in message
rg...
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 22:16:53 -0700 in
Robert Bedard wrote:

If you aren't being facetious, you could join the advisory group and try
to shoot it down ...

;-)

The whole thing seems to be designed to attract trolls.

Bad puns aside, having notes from the advisory group available
from the stub website may be nice. I don't want to know past history
on OGRES. I do have a more than healthy amount of cynicism on rating
systems in general and am curious if I need to turn the dial back
slightly.

--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

I happen to be the person that is attempting to ressurect OGRES.

I can assure you that the offer to help determine future policy is
genuine. It is not easy to come up with a system that is really fair.

It is also quite possible that it will not be ressurected if enough
people do not show interest.

I was not the one that originally posted about it here, and somebody
else brought it to my attention. I do not generally hang out here, but
as there seemed to be some interest, I thought it would be smart to pay
attention.

rob't

tennis maynard wrote:
Robert Bedard wrote:


If you aren't being facetious, you could join the advisory group and
try to shoot it down ...

;-)

I'm not being facetious, but I don't think that's an
option; as presented the advisory board is just setting
policy, not deciding on the fate of the project.

Since the sponsor and others who may get involved are
obviously watching this list, I felt my best option was
to post here, and hopefully elicit similar replies.

So, pray tell, what makes it a bad idea? Do you have any well thought
reasons or are you just slamming? Do you read resturant reviews?
Movie reviews? Those are OK, but not this?

lbf


tennis maynard wrote:
Darn! Just when it seemed to be gone for good, someone
has to go and restart a bad idea. Hopefully it won't
get off the ground!

On 15 Aug 2005 18:45:48 -0700, "L_B_F"
wrote:

So, pray tell, what makes it a bad idea? Do you have any well thought
reasons or are you just slamming? Do you read resturant reviews?
Movie reviews? Those are OK, but not this?

lbf

We did not use the site often. We had our faithful vendors and
did not venture into the unknown. But I thought it was useful
and generally truthful.

Opinion is opinion, and must always be taken with a look to the
speaker as well as to the subject. Do I generally agree with
what is being said by this person? Are they normally all hot
air? A grain of salt is always a good assist.

In some ways E-bay has it right. The buyer as well as the seller
collects feedback and the buyer is required to score or comment
on the seller.
SuE
http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php

Susan Erickson wrote:
On 15 Aug 2005 18:45:48 -0700, "L_B_F"
wrote:


So, pray tell, what makes it a bad idea? Do you have any well thought
reasons or are you just slamming? Do you read resturant reviews?
Movie reviews? Those are OK, but not this?

lbf

Anonymity. Lack of reciprocity, reliability.
Definitions (what constitutes a 'bad' plant? What's
blooming size? What about the person who complains
about the plant, advertised as a 5" seedling, that
"it will take years to bloom, because it's 36" tall at
maturity", when the plant received (cost $5) was
actually LARGER than advertised, at 6"??? Yet all you
see is the complaint about the plant being 'too small
and years from blooming'[actual case history]?????
We've had all this before, my reasons are the same as
last time.

I dealt with vendors panned on OGRES who were great,
and unfortunately with some wildly praised who were
absolutely, frighteningly horrible.

Better to ask friends or groups if you have questions
about a vendor.

I work in a service industry, and 90% of our
complaints are unfounded, exaggerated, or outright
lies. My opinion of people has dropped sharply since
this and I think many, if not most, are scammers,
people who feel they are always entitled to 'more' no
matter what they get.

OGRES or anything like it is just an invitation to
scammers, perpetual whiners, and people who are just
unrealistic.

Back to 'what's blooming size'. Well, phals usually
bloom for me at about a 4" leafspan. Is that blooming
size?? I recently traded a plant which had bloomed
twice (cattleya, 9 growths), two years in a row; the
recipient complained that it was 'not yet even
blooming size' despite the presence of two previous
trimmed dried flower spikes!!!

It's an invitation to abuse and extortion. Bad idea
all around.

Don't pooh-pooh by opining 'oh, well, that will be a
rare exception'. Don't fool yourselves. It will be the
norm.






We did not use the site often. We had our faithful vendors and
did not venture into the unknown. But I thought it was useful
and generally truthful.

Opinion is opinion, and must always be taken with a look to the
speaker as well as to the subject. Do I generally agree with
what is being said by this person? Are they normally all hot
air? A grain of salt is always a good assist.

In some ways E-bay has it right. The buyer as well as the seller
collects feedback and the buyer is required to score or comment
on the seller.
SuE
http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php