RE: second motion to amend awards ballot

[cheryl deaton <c95039e11@rewrite.aisboard.org>]

Gerry,
If there wasn't a requirement, then how would the nominees for the Dyke's
Medal be decided?  Only those winning a Special Medal in each class, no matter
how many?
Cheryl

> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:11:13 -0700
> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] second motion to amend awards ballot
> From: 7e2de1ee1@rewrite.aisboard.org
>
> Cheryl,
>
> I believe that what you are saying is equivalent to completely dropping
> the requirement.
>
> Gerry Snyder
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> On 7/28/2014 4:00 PM, cheryl deaton wrote:
> > Gerry,
> > If an iris has won its class's Special Medal then it should be on the
ballot
> > for all the years it is entitled to be on the ballot for the Dyke's
Medal.
> > But if for some reason a class does not have 3 irises eligible from the
> > Special Medal group, then I do not think it is fair to bring up an iris
that
> > had previously been on the ballot for the allotted time, and was dropped
for
> > that reason, just so there are 3 irises in each class up for the Dyke's
Medal.
> > I think we should have (at least)  3 irises in each class IF ELIGIBLE.
Is
> > that clearer?
> > Cheryl
> >> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 15:47:59 -0700
> >> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
> >> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] second motion to amend awards ballot
> >> From: 7e2de1ee1@rewrite.aisboard.org
> >>
> >> Cheryl,
> >>
> >> Are you saying that you think that it is more fair for an iris that
> >> never won its class's Special Medal should be put on the Dykes Medal
> >> ballot, possibly getting extra years there?
> >>
> >> Or are you saying that you want to get rid of the requirement to have
> >> (at least) three iris from each class on the ballot entirely?
> >>
> >>
> >> Gerry Snyder
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> On 7/28/2014 3:31 PM, cheryl deaton wrote:
> >>> Hello all,
> >>> I do not think it is fair to place an iris that has been dropped from
the
> >>> eligibility list for the Dyke's Medal back on the ballot, just to bring
> > the
> >>> numbers up to 3 per class.  It really seems unfair to the other classes
> > of
> >>> irises that do not get that "extra" year of eligibility.  If there is
an
> > error
> >>> in the placement of an iris on the ballot, then I believe it should be
> >>> addressed as additional time, but just to make up the numbers doesn't
> > seem
> >>> fair.
> >>> Cheryl Deaton
> >>>
> >>>> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 11:57:43 -0700
> >>>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
> >>>> Subject: [AISdiscuss] second motion to amend awards ballot
> >>>> From: 102x@rewrite.aisboard.org
> >>>>
> >>>> Bob Pries moved and Cheryl Deaton seconded the below motion.  It is
now
> >>>> out for discussion.
> >>>>
> >>>> "In cases where there would otherwise be fewer than three irises on
the
> >>>> ballot for the Dykes Medal in any iris class, the most recent earlier
> >>>> winner(s) of the Special Medal in that class that have been dropped
from
> >>>> the Dykes Medal ballot shall be added back to the ballot in order to
> >>>> bring the number of candidates up to three."
> >>>>
> >>>> Michelle
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> <aissecretary@irises.org>
> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/