Keith
No one has a problem with Allan getting credit for his wonderful work. The problem is many plants registered where look alikes. Rendering point of reference useless.
I doubt Allan would have registered many that appeared on the registry. He was very selective in that area.
Regards
Helen Rigsby

Keith,
I don't think anyone here has questioned your intregrity. I have to agree though, do you really think Allan would have registered that many? Many of them while very nice, (and I am a big fan of the plants you have been registering) look alike. If you have 3 that look somewhat alike, why register all 3? Only the best should be registered, and again I really like many of them. The other point I have made in past posts is why register so many when probably less than 10% of them will ever make it out of Australia? New introductions should be Distinctive, preform well, and be an improvement over everything already out there. There are probably other qualities you could include in evaluation, but ask yourself this, do all those plants qualify under those circumstances?

In all honesty I quit looking at the new photos of Allans new plants in the database months ago, because there were so many that looked alike. I ask you again do you really think Allan would have registered that many? How many did he register in how many years?

John

I agree with Helen and John, too many look alikes which might be too more confusing for me.

Keith, I'm not sure why you have singled Kerry out. She did not instigate this discussion, nor has she been the most vociferous participant. Your recent domination of the "What's New" page has been the topic of conversation wherever I go, not just on this forum, so I find it difficult to believe you have not been aware of it before now, or are surprised by it.

I don't quite agree with your assessment that it's just "politics". It brings up some legitimate questions about a) the purpose of registation (always a hot topic around here), and b) what constitutes being a good and responsible hybridizer. Even if we accept the current practice of using the registry as simply an ID bank (rather than it being reserved for hybrids deemed to be of exceptional merit, as is the case in many other plant societies), as the others have already pointed out, registering so many that look so similar only defeats that purpose.

As to the second question, my feeling is that the hybridizer's job is comprised of 3 main parts: the actual mechanics of putting pollen to stigma, the creative vision to select parents with maximum potential, and the good judgement to cull out all but the most distinctive seedlings from the grex. Clearly Freeman has shown the first two, but he left the third to you, and that's where it falls down.

"Do you want me to throw out 90% simply because he did too many." In a word, yes, although I would disagree that he did too many. Prolific as he was, I can't believe you are telling us that Freeman did more crosses than all of the other Neo hybridizers in history put together! And yet the FCBS Neo files up to this point held somewhere over 2,000 photos, and I hear you're planning to add 4,000 to that, single-handedly tripling its size. That doesn't seem excessive to you? The number of grexes of the ones you have registered so far doesn't seem excessive, only the number of cultivars selected from each grex. I counted over 35 from some of them, many barely distinguishable from the next. I just don't see how anybody stands to benefit from this, except you, of course. If there is any politics involved here, this is where I see it.

I realize I am opening myself up to counter-attack here, and if you want to tell me that some of my own hybrids probably shouldn't have been registered either, go ahead, I won't argue with you. I've already discussed that issue ad nauseum, but the bottom line is I know which ones are the stand-outs, and they are less than a fraction of one percent of all the ones I've done. The same holds true of every other Neo hybridizer on earth, no exceptions. Judicious culling is what makes or breaks a reputation, not prodigious output.

Well, at least there is some sense to the discussion now and not just negative nonsense much of which is untrue.
I have always been of the opinion that only plants worthy of being registered should be registered. However, after seeing quite a few plants being registered last year that were, at best, very ordinary, I contacted Derek Butcher and asked what the criteria were for registration. He advised that there were none and that if he received a request and a photograph, he was obliged to register that plant. I have not simply sent photographs and names for everything I can lay my hands on. Although I agree that a few more could be culled, I believe that most of the plants I have put up are of very good quality and are individual enough to warrant naming. I new Alan for quite some time and we did a lot together and yes, I believe if he had had the means, he would have named all of these plants and probably more. There are many, many plants in the past that have been registered that are no where in the same class as these plants and many of these by hybridisers with reputations that are known throughout the world. I don't want to get into names but I can tell you that over the years I have bought a lot of named plants including imports and many of them have since been dumped.
It is not unusual for quite a few plants from one grex to be registered - I don't see what it proves to put a limit on the number - you might not know that they are from the same grex because often hybridisers will not give the parentage or will make it up.
In Alan's plants, you will see quite a few that are concentrica X or others where only one or neither parent is known. I remember quite well the reason for this. Alan had collected seed from a concentrica and had them all drying on a sheet of paper, all in separate groups when a gust of wind upset and mixed the lot. So, whilst he knew that the mother plant was concentrica there was no way of knowing what the pollen plant was. So, even though there may be several plants registered as concentrica x, there might actually be several grexes involved. You will also see that in several instances, Alan listed multiple parents. He had the idea that if you took pollen from several plants and mixed it up, you would get a mix of these plants in the offspring. Doesn't happen but I have kept the records as he made them rather than guessing. The mind boggles if we try to imagine what might be the results if this experiment were applied to the human race. Whatever the parents of these plants were, these results can still be just as good.
Alan did over 600 crosses - the result is about 10,000 to 12,000 plants that I have and there are others around too.
I have put a lot of work and expense into these plants over the past 14 years or so. Bromagic has been on the market for 2 years not 10 years.
There seem to be a few points that have got peoples backs up.
Firstly, the number of plants being registered.
Yes there are a lot but I do not agree that plants should be excluded because of numbers. I firmly believe that most of the plants I have put up for registration are worthy and many people have agreed. There are many plants that have been put up in the past and are still being put up that are no where near to being in the same class as these. You can't exclude Freeman plants in favour of inferior plants (and I don't mean all plants - there are a lot of good ones too) simply because there are too many. If I ask people to pull out the ones they think should not be there, I would end up with a whole lot of different opinions. If there is a judging panel or single judge, there will still be disagreement for various reasons including vested interests.
Secondly, similarities in the plants. Well, having worked with the plants for 14 years or so, I do not agree that they all look the same and that is simply a matter of opinion too. There are many similarities in (I was nearly going to put down names but I don't want to get into that) plants by other hybridisers as well.
So the dilemma is, if you have 3 or 6 or whatever really good plants from the same grex or different parents that are similar but can be clearly identified as being different, you should discard all and only keep one. Many people over the years have lumped a lot of plants into the one group and called them the same name and all the time I now hear people saying "my --- does not look like that - which is the real one". I try to make a living from plants so I expect my views might be somewhat different in some ways. If plants are not good enough, they will simply fade out of existence.
Thirdly, that I have done the wrong thing by Alan Freeman.
I have always tried to be as honest and sincere as I can be - I don't think any of us succeed 100%. Have any of you bothered to find out whether things that have been said are true before passing judgement. Sure, some of the things said upset me because I know they are untrue and are bordering upon being slanderous. You are entitled to have your opinions regarding the quality, culling, registration system and many other things but you are not entitled to pass judgement on me, particularly without having the truth.
I have acted in good faith in registering Alan Freeman's hybrids and if you have any problems with what I have done or the way I have done it I am sorry but whether I am right or wrong is a matter of opinion.
I really don't care now if any more plants are registered or not - it means little to me as I fully intend to be out of the business in the near future one way or the other.
However, whether I am in the bromeliad game or not, I believe the problem will still go on as there are many other people doing thousands of hybrids out there and with the advent of digital photography, computers, internet, availability, interest etc, the making and registration of new plants has entered a new era. I believe the system will have to be looked at seriously and maybe this kerfuffle is serving a purpose in bringing this to a point of discussion.
I am prepared to discuss these things but discussion can only take place if minds are open.

Regards

Keith Golinski

First i will say I am a big fan of Allan Freeman hybrids but I see plants registered I don't think he would have(my opinion only).
I agree 'other' plants were also registered that should not have been. Either they were inferior or another hybridizer's culls. The best reason there to destroy them but maybe here again the monetary gain issue was greater than the desire to make sure only the best are registered.
The reason this was allowed is beyond me.
If plants are going to "fade out of existence", we register them?
Why bloat up the database with redundant photo's? Posting of pictures is somewhere around 5-6 months behind the registration entries because of this.
As far as your intentions Mr Golinski, that is between you and your conscience.
The whole issue still boils down to the system is faulty and the only way to fix it for now, is be very selective in what we register until a better system comes along

It seems pretty obvious to me that if you want to point the finger it needs to be pointed at the obsolete registration system. If Bromagic has the material and facilities to offer 1000's of unique (genetically at least) plants for sale then why should he be hamstrung by the registration system? I would assume that Bromagic is a for profit business so they want to sell as many plants as possible. My experience is that a named plant will generate a lot more demand/profit than an unnamed one. You don't have to think long and hard to figure out what to do. Again, too bad FCBS hasn't got a cultivar registration system that scales. Maybe this thread will get the discussion going on how to make the system scale to the new reality rather than trying to convince breeders and growers to give up revenue because of some antiquated system.

I can tell you that I'm going to sell my plants. I'm not going to throw them away because they aren't "unique" enough. And you can bet I'll put a name on them if that is what it takes. I might put some nonsense name on them just to make life simple, but maybe not. I reserve the right to do what I want with my creations.

I do have some ideas on how to improve the system, but I would expect you guys who have been in the business for a while to have much better ideas.

Greetings to all.

As a person who has been active in several plant societies, groups, chapters over the years I'd like to make a comment regarding Mr. Golinski and the Allan Freeman hybrids.

I think (and isn't this what the argument/discussion is all about ... what each individual thinks is a worthy hybrid?) that Mr. Golinski is serious and conscientious about his Bromeliads. I will take him at his word that he is trying to get these Alan Freeman hybrids out to the world, and under the name of Alan Freeman. As for the question of whether or not many of these hybrids should be culled out and pitched into the rubbish heap, I say just take a good look at the pictures on the Bromagic site. There a many beautiful varieties there, and yes, some are very similar, and perhaps a few should be dropped, or not registered. But, "in my opinion" most of them are distinctive enough to warrant registration, or being sold as "named" variety.
Some of these "subtle" differences may not be so subtle to another person, or maybe the plant is a larger and more vigorous grower. No doubt you've wondered why Home Depot has so many paint chips ... what's the need? But, when it's time for you to go and select a paint for your home, aren't you glad they have all those "subtly" different colors. Everybody likes something different.

Someone else pointed out that the problem may be with the obsolete registration system of the FCBS. I suggest that instead of going after Mr. Golinski, that positive energies be directed towards FCBS to come up with a more "selective" registration system. It appears that Bromagic is playing by the FCBS rules, and taking all the criticism for it.

Keith Golinski is a professional at what he does... he's living his dream of growing Bromeliads and I for one respect him for it. I wish I could get on a plane, fly to Australia, and see his operation... somehow I feel that I'd be very impressed.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, I've been active in plant societies for some time (over 25 years). I've seen so much unhappiness, and people hurt because what started out as a hobby, or a group of people getting together monthly, got WAY TOO SERIOUS. I suggest to everybody, take a deep breath and be happy that you have your nursery, your plants in your back garden, or whatever you have, and just enjoy them! Please don't criticize Mr. Golinski because he's not doing what you might have done if you were in his position.

Cheers, R. Walton

Really glad to see a few positives coming up here now.
My conscience is quite clear. Yes, maybe there should be a bit more culling and I would do that but I do not see why I should cull out plants that deserve a name if those being culled are still better than others being accepted regardless of number.
I agree that the system is not good and I think this is about to change. I will be glad if my actions have helped to bring this about. If my suggestions are taken up, there will be more culling and there need not be a backlog - the problem might be in finding people without bias to do the "yes or no" thing and people capable and willing to do the job. I believe this will be discussed at the 2008 conference in Cairns. One set of rules for all would be good.
Being accepted for registration has no meaning at present and that is not good.
I was a good friend of Alan's for 10 years and I probably new him better than most other people at that time until we fell out over something quite minor and over which I had no control - in hindsight, I can see that Alan was probably not the old Alan that I knew at that point and I would rather remember the old Alan. Others should have and did know better and could have helped him but probably only made things worse. I hate this game for what people are prepared to do if there is a plant or something else in it for them.
Although I do have some interest in getting back some of the time and money I have put into these plants over 14 years, my primary reason for naming is that I know that if I have to break up Alan's collection and sell them off piecemeal, many of them will have their tags taken off by purchasers and people will claim them as their own and that will be sad. At least with names they have a chance. All Alan Freeman plants I sell are labelled with his name as hybridiser whether named or unnamed where they also have an individual code and parentage so they can be matched if named. These are not just the last of his plants as someone said, they are by far the bulk of them. Alan did not name many plants because he kept very few himself. Those I did not get are scattered and he is recognised for very few of them.
I have withdrawn all of my submissions for registrations because of the hassle it is causing.
Not all opinions are the same though - these are just two excerpts from recent emails both from the USA:
1. "Your new web site is awesome! I am spending all my evenings reviewing the photos and selecting a new wish list!!!! You are one of the few trusting individuals I know! I think they're jealous!!! they realize that the bad press upsets you. you sell quality plants and are a successful business man. They can't match your standards with a ten foot pole!!!!! Moving is a royal pain but to my wife's chagrin I spend all my free time reviewin yor photos!!! The new pix are better than ever. Thanks for the update! My thoughts are with you! Best regards"
2: "My name is ............ and I am writing to you from .............. U.S.A. First let me tell you that I am absolutely amazed by your site, and the quality/assortment of Bromeliads. I'm very keen on Neoregelias, and I've never seen the likes of what you grow.
My main question is will you ship to the U.S.? ................................
And, even if it would be strictly by your selection, I'd still like to purchase from you... I'd just like to have almost any of your Neos!"
Although I think Alan's plants are some of the tops in the world, I don't know if all the pain that has gone with them has made it all worthwhile. Comments like those above, of which there are many, ease that pain somewhat.
If you want any information about his plants or my association with him and his plants, you only have to ask and I will answer what I can - I will give you facts, not gossip and I am willing to submit to a polygraph test anytime.
You might notice also that I am not afraid to put my name on these postings.

Regards
Keith Golinski

I spoke out against the system and its bias registration long ago. Complaints fell on deaf ears, its to late for change. You spend several years growing out a plant to be told you can't register it without going through 10 degree's of BS.
Growers don't register plants under this system. Many plants are named and sold without the BSI to make it official. If a plant is good, its beauty and value will be recognized. Todays collectors are intelligent and know what they like. Commercially no one cares
Part of being in business is salesmanship. No one needs the BSI to sell a great plant.

Maybe I can put some things in perspective. I hybridize Daylilys (Hemeorcallis). Some time early this year the 60,000th registration was made. You would be really hard pressed to find half of them, more than likely at least half of them have been lost. It really doesn't make any difference either, the best even the first original registration are still available. That tells me that there were probably 30,000 plants that were registered that were nice I am sure but nothing special.

I produce about 3,000 seedlings a year, after doing that many for the past 5 years, I have maybe 3 that are worthy of registration, a dozen or 2 that are good enough to keep for breeding, some really nice garden flowers, and a lot of junk. The 3 that may be worthy of introduction, are exceptional in every respect, it is the next group that is a problem, these look a lot like previously introduced cultivars, but are better in many respects, they would be worthy of introduction, but there is already a plant out there that looks alike. The good garden plants also tend to fall into this category. Which leaves a whole bunch of plants from good to poor in quality. There are usually still some pretty good plants, and they are given to some of the elderly in the area, the rest are run through a shredder, and composted.

I am sorry, but I see no purpose in further inflating the numbers with average plants, and no I don't feel Allans plants are average, but really why register 3 that look alike? Subtle differences are just that, and if they are not distinctive enough take one of each not be able to tell them apart, what purpose does registering all 3 serve?

New registrations should be distinctive, and an improvement over anything already out there. Anyone can register a plant, but not every plant should be registered.

Keith,
I am sorry that you have been offended by some of the discussions on this forum, and in re-reading them, I can see more clearly why you have the right to be hurt and annoyed.
I personally apologise for my minor contribution to these discussions on a public forum, where a couple of my comments were indeed personal and critical.
I have never questioned your respectful acknowledgement of Alan Freeman's hybrids. I do own several Freeman neo hybrids which, although lovely, are difficult to distinguish between. I also grow several which are distinctive and immediately recognisable. There is no jealousy, nor vindictive motive, behind my opinion that too many similar registered plants by the same hybridist might negate the reputation of the unique ones.
I am surprised that you suspect unnamed hybrids might be claimed by others as their own. I didn't think such fraudulent activities would occur.
Your justification and intentions do come across as sincere and admirable. I hope your positive suggestions for an improved registration system will encourage and aid the process of recording future hybrids.

Regards,
Kerry Tate.

I thank you for that Kerry.

Regards

Keith Golinski

Maybe it is time to let this whole thing drop but I was very surprised to find this on reading back over some of the postings dated April 10th in view of the comments above:
from lisaclv
As to how something can be released before it's been registered......... easy! It happens all the time, in fact some hybridizers never bother to register their plants. I only started registering my stuff within the last year or so. It just wasn't on my priority list until recently, and it's still a bother, but since I am selling to Michael I wanted to have a legitimate reference that people can use when buying from him, and FCBS seems like the easiest resource for that kind of thing. That doesn't mean that I think they're all outstanding hybrids (which I still think should be the prime reason for registering), but I'm playing along with the current registry-as-ID-bank philosophy to the extent that it suits my purposes.

Oh well!

Regards

Keith Golinski

Keith, what about that is surprising to you? It seems to me perfectly in keeping with my comments above. That's what I meant when I said that I wouldn't argue with you that all of my hybrids are necessarily worthy of registration either. Some are, but I think we're all agreed that the process has lost all meaning in terms of signifying merit or uniqueness. What is left in its place is FCBS as an illustrated marketing tool, so why not call it what it is and admit that we all use it for that, either as buyers or as sellers, or both. It even has links to the grower's websites, for godsake! How much more commercial can you get? Taken in that light, any massive influx of registrations from a single source is bound to come across as market positioning as much as it is a concern for giving the hybridizer his due. I do think you are sincere in wanting to give Freeman credit, but I also think you stand to benefit by being able to say you have several thousand unique registered hybrids. To the uninitiated, that still sounds like it means something! The bottom line, though, is that putting all those photos on your website is probably just as meaningful and useful, and it doesn't generate the same kind of controversy either.

I'm actually glad you put that quote up there because it goes to the heart of what I think the problem is, which is not so much the registry itself as the message that is being put out there that you MUST register every plant that leaves your nursery, and to not do so is somehow unethical. I made those remarks in response to someone asking me how it was possible that someone in Australia could be selling one of my hybrids that had only just been registered, as if it were not only logistically inconceivable, but also an unconscionable act for anyone to sell, give away or trade a plant without first making sure its picture was on FCBS! I don't get this attitude, it seems to me to be putting the cart before the horse. My feeling it that once a hybrid has proven it has commercial appeal, then is the time to think about registering it, otherwise we'll have every seedling from every grex up there, just in case!

This kind of thinking has led not only to the registration of some rather marginal hybrids, as you have pointed out (and I agree that Freeman's cvs. are superior to some that has already been registered), but also to people's feeling they have an obligation to attach a name to any plant that doesn't already have one, regardless of whether it's their plant or not. In the process of registering my hybrids I've come to find out that other people have already taken it upon themselves to name a couple of them and and submit them for registration! Who knows how many more there are that I don't know about? Now, you could say, as Derek does, that this is all the more reason to not let anything go without first naming and registering it, but my feeling is that if there wasn't such a stigma being attached to selling things under formula name nobody would feel the need to do this. As it is, there is nothing to prevent anybody from submitting anyone else's plants, whether they are already registered or not. Sad to say, your comments about somebody else claiming Allan's plants as their own did strike a chord, given this recent experience. It's something that simply never crossed my mind before this, but I'm not sure that getting the pictures on FCBS will help any. If the registrar recognizes it and catches it he'll let you know, but he'll still post the other name and accompanying picture, just adding a note that it is really such-and-such. If the plant is not distinctive enough for him to easily recognize, then it will just pass through the cracks.

I've been thinking about what to do about this situation, and I don't have any clear answers. My first reaction was that nobody should be able to register any but their own hybrids, and if the breeder didn't choose to name it or register it, then so be it. This still reflects my gut feeling, but there are obvious problems putting it into effect. For one thing, I actually did authorize someone else to register some plants for me at a time when I thought it might not get done otherwise. That time has passed, but there are circumstances where someone else has to step in, as in your case, Keith. Understand that I am not picking on your situation at all with this, only people who do this without attempting to check with the breeder first. I'm not sure what the best way to handle it would be.

I'm also not proposing we go back to the old system of making people jump through hoops to get anything registered. It was that way for a long time and that's why a lot of older hybrids that SHOULD have been registered never were. I'm glad it's so much easier now, I just wish that our current registrar wasn't badgering people into registering everything but the kitchen sink! When did it become a crime to sell an unregistered plant? It's like selling a dog with no papers. You probably won't get as much money for it, but there's nothing shameful about it.

Hi Lisa
My point was that you seemed to be arguing against what I was doing whilst using the registration process for exactly the same purpose - as a means of being able to identify a plant sometime in the future and not simply as a means of getting only the top plants registered because it means something - as you said 'playing along to the extent that it suits my purposes'.
As I said in one of my earlier posts, I guess my views may vary somewhat in that I have been a commercial grower for 20 years and that does not mean that I have done everything just for monitary gain. However, when you make a large collection from all over the place, I think the differences in plants may become more glaring especially if you have a number named the same, under the same conditions, over a period of years and customers coming all of the time saying mine doesn't look like that or I got one of these from you and your name isn't correct or that one has tha same name on it as that but they look entirely different. I guess this leads me to be strongly in favour of naming plants that are not the same, even if reasonably close, with a different name. These differences can become more and more obvious as time and generations go on so you get plants that have been lumped in together under the same name being sometimes nothing like each other. It becomes very confusing and even embarrassing. I have plants like Gee Whiz, about 6 distinctly different forms, I won't even call them clones. I have 3 or 4 Two Tones, I have 2 Chirripos, 2 Coconut Ice, 3 Spot On, there were 48 Red Planets at first I think and nearly as many Fool's Gold and it's never shrunk to be just one of any of these.
Lisa, I don't know if you grow your plants as a hobby or as a business - you obviously sell plants but whether you depend upon it for a living I don't know. I can assure you it does colour your attitude and necessarily so - there is no fortune in growing broms anyway.
I did place a reasonable importance on the registration of plants but my mind is changing rapidly. I think it is a joke and it really is only a central storage point for pictures for people who do not want to do the work in setting up their own facility and I am becoming of the opinion that there is more credibility in not being part of it. This is fine as long as people are not deliberately given the impression that if a plant is not up there then it is no good.
There seem to be no guidelines or even uniform ideas when it comes to registration and I guess that goes back to how this whole debate started. Everyones ideas are different. I have gained the impression over quite a few years that registration of all things different was being encouraged because there was this chaos out there that needed to be sorted out but it seems that this is not the case.
Derek pointed out that I had several plants named from the same grex. I put together a collage of these and sent it to him, about 15 plants I think, and to me, most were distinctively different with only a few that I could say looked similar but perhaps that's just the picture that looks similar. I was surprised when he said that in his mind, he could accept all of them being known by the same name and he would not cull any of them. Now, I'm more confused than ever.
So perhaps if I feel strongly that these plants should have different names, and culling of the magnitude you suggest is not an option when it is your income, then the best option is to put them on my own website with my own names prefixed by a stable name such as 'Bromagic' to keep the name individual as Derek suggests is the best way to please everyone. I think people will get sick of writing Bromagic before every name but if not, when people start using the same names on other plants, there is more chaos again. At least registration prevents duplicate names (mostly).
So the FCBS is ok as a marketing tool so long as it is not used by commercial growers. In my experience, most people who get into broms become commercial growers.

Regards
Keith Golinski

Keith, you've made some good points and I'm not going to argue with any of them. I'm glad we're finally having an honest discussion here, and admitting that the system as it exists is flawed. To be clear, I was not condemning you for attempting to use it just as I have been. My main point is that the sheer numbers are overwhelming to many of us and to my mind, not selective enough. You disagree. There it stands and there it will probably remain, but at least I have a better idea of where you're coming from now, so this has been a worthwhile exchange.

For the record, I am commercial, but at the same time I think the greatest number of cvs. I've ever selected from a single grex of Neos stands at 4 or 5, and I'm much happier when it's only one or two very distinct ones. That doesn't mean that there were no other saleable plants in the group, and in some cases those do get out under formula even though I've chosen not to propagate them. As you say, the economics of the situation makes it difficult to simply throw things away after so much time investment, but I am continually trying to discipline myself to do so in order to avoid the problems that have arisen as a result of having unnamed babies in circulation. I'm not there yet, but my trash pile is constantly getting better and better looking! It's a difficult thing to do, no question, but in my mind it is preferable to having a bunch of subtle variations on a theme that the average person can't tell apart.

As far as how many you choose to select, or posting pictures of every single one of them on your website, that's up to you to do as you see fit and I don't have a problem with that. I'll admit that some of my sour grapes have been occasioned by a) having to wait several months before anything I sent in could be posted because of the backlog, and b) having a name I'd been using get taken by you and having to change it, which causes all kinds of confusion once the plant is already out there. Derek's suggestion of adding Bromagic to the names would certainly help in that respect. I know it's a bother to write, but you might think about it.

I have also suggested to Derek in the past that there perhaps be two separate bodies: one being the type of free-for-all photo ID bank that FCBS has turned into, but that this not be tied to or confused with the process of registration, which should be reserved for stand-out hybrids. He won't hear of it, still persisting in the belief that this is helping to create order out of chaos, when the reality seems to be just the opposite. I wish I had some simple solutions to offer instead of just frustration, but hopefully the discussions at the WBC will bear some fruit. If you ask me, it's long overdue!

Hi Lisa
Yes I think it is good to talk about it and try to find some solutions. It has caused some grief and ill-feeling and that is something I did not intend and don't enjoy. I have lost quite a bit of sleep.
I have asked that my stuff be put aside from being posted on FCBS, it seems to be the what's new section is the biggest problem and that might let Mike get on with other people's plants.
This is a short term fix as I feel it will come up again in the near future but al least it will ease things now.
It's not important to me to get my things up there.
I think we should give it a break and perhaps setup a discussion group on this matter and try to come up with some ideas. I will be away for a few days.

Regards

Keith Golinski

I forgot to mention a half-way measure that seems to work for me. If I have two or more from a grex that are of equal quality and so similar in appearance that the differences would not be immediately noticeable in a photo I tend to give them the same name, but with a #1, #2, etc. after the name. I know I'm not alone in doing this. You might argue that the numbers will get lost in the shuffle, but really they shouldn't, that being an important part of the name. If people are careless then names will get altered, tags lost, etc. no matter what you do to try and prevent it. An FCBS photo of one will give anyone who's using it to help them decide what to buy a good general idea of what any of the numbered clones will look like, and given the vast differences that can exist between photos of even the same clone taken under different conditions, that's about all you can realistically hope for.

Sorry, Keith, we were apparently writing at the same time.

Yes, giving it a rest sounds good to me too. For my part, I never intended my remarks to be adversarial. I just get frustrated sometimes and when somebody brings it up here I'll blow off some steam, but I think I've said about all that I need to say at this point. I thank you for coming onto the forum to present your point of view, that really helps to humanize the situation!

Lisa, naming the grex and then numbering the members makes lots of sense to me. Anyone can do that right now without any changes to fcbs.

Another idea I've had that could to be tackled and it doesn't need to be done by bsi or fcbs is to start a bromeliad review/rating web site. I think it would be great if bsi had a members only peer review (Ken you have free time right?) and then somebody else did an unwashed masses review.

Reviews solve a couple of big problems. The most important solution, in my opinion, is that reviews show distribution. Assuming that you would actually possess a plant before you did a review, it would quickly become apparent which plants are in circulation and which ones are not. I use reviews quite a bit when buying computer stuff (e.g. newegg.com) and it sometimes helps and sometimes doesn't, but I like having them. I almost never buy anything that doesn't have a review.

I think a nice side effect of a peer review is that it would set some defacto standards and people might be loath to register plants that are going to get bad reviews. It would depend on your market of course. If you sell to people who read the reviews, then you'll be careful. If you sell to impulse buyers then it doesn't much matter.

There are lots of ways to cheat on reviews, but usually they wash out in the end if the review process is open to enough people.

As a person that has spent many hours at Keiths Bromagic Nursery I can state that the array of Freeman Hybrids is truly mindblowing and I nearly always leave with a headache after spending up to six hours at a time trying to hand pick 30 to 40 at a time of these beautifull neos. After many visits I have now aquired more than 160 and would keep buyng more if I could find room to grow them. They put to shame some of the very average neos that I have paid dearly for, including expensive imports and when I look at some of the neos being registered I can honestly state that I would have to be paid to grow them.
I regularly check FCBS to see if Keith has registered more and will be disapointed if he stops due to small minded people who can not concieve the vast array of Bromagic Freeman Hybrids available.
These neoregelias are highly bred and contain a vast array of genes that can combine in any way to allow hugh differences between many plants from the same grex and anyone who thinks different should maybe call all their children by the same name with a different number after that name.
So Keith please dont stop registering your Freeman hybrids because of a few whingers.

Hi grejo24,

Feel free to enjoy them, I quit looking at the new introductions from Bromagic months ago since I can't get them anyway without a lot of trouble, and there are so many that look alike that I can't say any stand out. Sorry it's all about the money the way I see it, and that's ok because that is what Kieth does for a living.

Now that you have come here and registered, evidently, just to make the above post. Do you have anything else to contribute?

John

I echo what John said. I initially used to look at all of them, but after a point just a few, and now, generally skip over all of them. Maybe they do look nice in person, but I also doubt I will ever see them on this side of the pond.

And as others have discussed much already, it puts into question the effectiveness of FCBS registration as a whole.

To John and philofan please note that I have made many attemps to join your forums only to blocked at the registration point where not having a five digit US zip code would not let me proceed and so I finaly had to ask for gardenweb help.
I agree that the FCBS should be revised but who will take the time to do the work that is needed, perhaps we have got to the stage wherewhat is needed is a seperate registrar for each of the sizable Bromeliad genera.
As for the concept of one plant from each grex to be named I will point you to a large US nursery that shows on a previous online pricelist five of Margaret Pattersons RED Planet series stating that they must have been so outstanding because so many cultivars were named. So it is nice to know that not everyone on your side of the "Pond" think that way.