You're hardly dumb. After spending time here and on HT, I even get mixed signals on what might be considered bad behavior given we all have different pain threshholds.

With some of Ink's posts, I have to read them once to mentally add punctuation, then again to grasp some meaning. I will admit to a sense of being somewhat "inadequate" when subsequent posters follow with "great insight", yadda yadda yadda. It might be considered bad form to ask to have it all parsed out.

No offense intended, but I often think back to college (or to staff meetings at work) with the usual brown nosers looking thoughtful and nodding in assent without really having a clue. Not calling anyone out though.

Hey(exclamation mark) I thought we were having a pop at pls over here, (comma) with a side order of yardvaark (full stop)Now we seem to be having a go at me (comma)not that there is anything unusual in that (full stop) Sob (exclamation mark)

"There are probably several people who contribute to this forum who have earned the right to a prima donna complex."

Hmm.

I never minded poster "attitude" here all that much. But it's surprising that those who display it are sometimes shocked, shocked at getting disrespect or snark in return.
An even more dismaying possibility is that if you announce your departure in a huff, the forum will keep moving merrily along without you. It's happened more than once.

A fundamental issue is that we rarely see ourselves as others see us, so it's always a shock to hear/read a description of yourself that's at odds with your internal image of yourself....

I find it interesting that people who make no other contribution to this forum come piling on when there is a chance to gossip about or complain about those who do contribute. I don't know what to call it but I do know that bees are attracted to nectar and flies are attracted to sh*t.

A sign of the times, people like to pile on when the situation presents itself. I don't know if it was really any different pre-internet days, but the "Jerry Springer" approach to discourse is so pervasive, there is no turning back. It is what it is, and people can choose to dwell in it or attempt to rise above it. At least it has never resulted in physical threats or name calling as I've seen on some other horticulture/design forums...

Or, perhaps, lurkers feel so strongly about the issue that they feel that they have to contribute?

After all, the original post, which created all the controversy, was against what most people love about internet forums, ie anybody is free to contribute in any way they want, and the only real constraint is to be civil to others.

This has been very informative and changed the way I think.I have never posted because I'm terrible at drawing, graphs, measurements and don't take photos. A purely verbal description of a design problem is a waste of other people's time. But if I become committed enough to improve some skills, I will think several times before I post about how to present the problem and how to convey the information and challenge succinctly.

You folks really opened up the process of exchanging information as well as the history of some personal interactions and feelings that periodically bubble up. I'll read this forum with a different perspective understanding what I do now.

Thanks,
idabean/Marie

who lurks here quite often.

"After all, the original post, which created all the controversy, was against what most people love about internet forums ..."

That comment reminded me that yesterday I was wondering, if we were to rate this forum on its level of success, what would we base that rating on? Would it be general popularity, how pleasant the forum is to visit? Maybe it should be based on the average number of responses to a thread. I've seen forums where a post gets no responses and that is certainly not a successful forum. Or should we rate Landscapes on the quality of the posts? What would "quality" be? Or something else? All of the above? None of the above? What say you.

Well, in case you were asking me :) , I see forums mostly as a place for people to discuss what they love/interested in and have fun while doing it. There are regulars (having fun), lurkers (trying to learn something), and bunch of annoying newbies with their silly questions ;). Overall, the participation is probably the major criteria for success. However, for regulars, the level of stimulating discussion (ie amount of fun) is probably more important, whereas for lurkers, it is how much they can learn, and for newbies, it is whether they can get a satisfactory answer to their question.
Personally, I mostly lurk on DIY and garden forums, and I find internet forums to be the most valuable learning tool.

I do see where one of the "controversial" threads has been taken down. Enough said.

Wonder if some folks who briefly stop by this particular forum by can't get passed the idea that good, bad, and indifferent aren't necessarily so simply because one says/thinks it is. Perhaps that's hard to accept; perhaps
shattering preconceived notions is thought to be cold and snarky. A thread on planting the resulting several thousand winter-sown seedlings would be "to plotz" in some quarters; improving curb appeal would be met with unbridled enthusiasm elsewhere. Picking your audience comes to mind.

I don't know what sustains this forum if not for the endless supply of posters who feel some inner drive to make their piece of God's Little Acre into more than it currently is. Responders are pretty generous with their time and expertise.

Theory is fine, intellectual stimulation is terrific. It's all good. If it weren't, this all would have dried up and blown away ages ago. And if someone gets antsy about the less toothsome threads, either start one that satisfies or scroll on by. If nature abhors a vacuum, it fills up - and so it goes with forum responders.

Fly here.

Probably shouldn't post now as I've been up half the night with a sick kid and lack of sleep makes me grumpier than an old timer on the landscaping forum, but I really have to take issue with the dismissal of all "drop ins" as ambulance chasers.

I think it's pretty clear that there are a significant number of people who are interested in participating in a forum on landscape/garden design, but havent felt that this was the forum for them.

Pls8xx (through his willingness to honestly share his perspective) has convinced me that he's right and that this forum isn't going to change and that it could be for the best. The topics brought up and discussed, benefit from the wicked back and forth you all are capable of. You seem to all agree you have thick skins and can take it (well, except for during the long winter when skin chafes).

What you have to understand is that, right now, there is no where else for those of us who desperately want to learn, grow and contribute to a garden design forum but dont have a googleplex years of experience and skin like an elephant. Some of us like holding hands and singing koom by ya at the end of a really significant thread.

The only way I can personally judge the success of a forum is how it works for me. I dont care if it's popular or not. I have a full-time professional job and a busy family, I just want a place I can go and learn (and contribute) a little bit about garden design I know I'm not alone in this.

So what is the solution?

daisychain you are exactly right. The link I actually click on is the garden design link, not the landscape design link. I think if a bunch of us contacted GW and asked for a new forum and the garden design link on the far side of the front page go to that new forum it would be beneficial for not only a lot of us but a lot of newbies coming into the forum. In fact I am going to do that next.

The thread that started the nasty one has been come back into and lectured to the OP about why they should do things another way and home forum has been blamed for taking down those links. I for one would love a nice forum for garden design.
CH

chohio, I've written several times about it before and could not agree with you more that "garden" and "landscape" design would be best as separate forums. Each discipline has it's particular direction and motivation that drives it. I think this would do a great deal to alleviate some of the pressures that are needlessly felt in this forum, where it's all lumped together. For myself, I cannot think of a reason NOT to separate these two areas into different forums. There is a forum for every plant type, garden type and locality. But for some reason, when it comes to design, GW seems to think there's only one kind. It's not as though it would take any more hard drive space!

Separate forums? I would disagree. Some on here might like for gardeners to leave so that all discussions were on principals and theory. The forum would dry up and blow away. It's the posters that come here not knowing anything that keeps the activity up and moving.

On the other hand, those new to gardening might find it more pleasant to have a forum of their own, where simple questions got simple answers from others new to the subject. What they give up is the exposure to those with experience that might spot an unseen consequence.

Suppose a poster has pared down a decision to one of three trees to plant. He posts a picture of the area with the tree location marked and asks which tree would look better. It's a simple question with a simple answer. Until someone notices that the photo shows a power line directly over the new tree location. Which forum will have members that notice the power line, the new garden forum or the old landscape forum with the guys that have been around the track a few times?

Below is a link to an old thread that might help to inform the discussion of whether a second forum is required. I've bumped it up as well, but it may not stay up for long.

My own opinion is that there is no harm in asking and no harm in trying. Since Chohio was so successful at getting threads removed here and on HD recently (in the last post on my thread, perhaps not seen by many people as it was so quickly removed thereafter, Chohio explained his/her complaints to GW), I have no doubt that a request for a new forum could be successful.

But it will be interesting to see where the traffic goes, both of posters and responders, and also, where traffic comes from. A lot of the people who might participate may not be currently here but rather on Perennials, or perhaps Cottage, or other specialty or regional forums. I don't know if they would abandon those forums, or add a new forum to their roster. Lurkers demand a good show and good behaviour, but they rarely seem to appreciate the donation of time and expertise that a good answer represents.

For potential posters, the American Idol rule may apply. Aspiring singers are more eager to hear from Simon Cowell, even if it might hurt, than they are to hear from Paula Abdul, sweet and beautiful though she is. They're nervous about hearing his view, but they know it is honest, which is sometimes useful. So people looking for input of a certain kind might still post to LD. But I'm sure others would like to just talk about the appearance. Is that the idea?

A test for those who want a garden design forum, and thus who I assume are eager to contribute in one, would be to look at some recent threads that got little response here, and see if you would enjoy responding to these. Perusal of more of the back catalogue might find more of the kinds of questions you like.

http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/design/msg0117104016153.html?1
http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/design/msg0208413932619.html?3

As a matter of fact, nothing is preventing you from answering these questions here. If you have good advice to offer, no one is going to bite you if you respond. And even if you don't have good advice to offer, as long as you're having fun and the OPs are happy, who cares, right?

Karin L

Here is a link that might be useful: Is good design really that important?

karinl you are a trip. I did surely complain about the post here but did not in homes. They removed the posts because of your awful contribution. Attacking someone is your mo and you don't quit. Intimidation is what you do and at all times blame others for your problems.
CH

I feel there would be many missed opportunities if there were two separate forums.
Garden and Landscape Design overlap broadly and by segregating them would limit the potential for further education and discussion.

Design threads do show up in Perennials. They also show up in Trees and Shrubs. I expect they also show up in Cottage Gardening, though I don't go there to know. So there actually are plenty of places to go to find less hard core design help, since I've never seen anybody chastised as being off topic for asking for help in arranging plants. So that all the specialty topics, regional topics and pretty much any other forum in garden web is capable of dealing with design. Some of the speciality topics have had loooong, well thought out threads on design with or around their particular plant.

So what do you want from here that is different?

What did you think of the threads I posted, Chohio?

I decided not to bump up the long one, by the way - creates a trap for an unsuspecting reader that I've fallen into too often myself.

Karin L

Pls, not sure why you're assuming a separate Design forum would attract only new gardeners. Most likely it would be a combination of newbies and those with years of experience ... just as it is on many of the gardening forums here.

Karin, I know who requested the HD thread be removed and it wasn't Chohio. I'm assuming that your attack thread here was removed after GW removed the other.

Pls, not sure why you're assuming a separate Design forum would attract only new gardeners.

natal, you could be right. I think a separation would be the death of this forum and then those left might migrate over to the new forum. It could end with the same thing we have now.

This forum and the long time members that stay here need the endless stream of situations presented by those merely seeking to make their property look better. And those people are better served by a forum with experienced and knowledgeable people. These two groups may not always like each other, but they darn sure need each other.

"Which forum will have members that notice the power line...?" It seems there are a good many posters here who's strong interest is garden design and also, they seem to have eagles eyes at noticing just about anything in photo...or perceiving what might be on it's edges. To think that watching out for a power line is not a garden design consideration and only landscape design pros can catch it, is not realistic. The principle that factors in would apply and be working equally well on both forums.

"I feel there would be many missed opportunities if there were two separate forums." Dividing a forum where there naturally occurs a division of theory and purpose (as there is between landscape and garden) means that those who's interest lies in one camp, don't have to be continually burdened by bothering with what does not apply. If an OP is interested in low maintenance landscape design--not garden design--is it really to their benefit to be encouraged into plant-centric, garden style solutions? By the same token, if they are interested in those kinds of solutions, should people like me (with my strong view of the difference between these disciplines) and my lack of interest in garden-esque design solutions, get much involved in that discussion? I'd sooner not have seen the thread because it's not in my area of interest, here. As the two forums are now combined, there always seem to be confusion--which is perceived as "tugging" by one discipline or the other--at the beginning of many threads. But what would stop a person from participating on both forums if their interest was in both areas? Nothing. Landscape design broadly overlaps with many other forums: shrubs, trees, stonework, and on and on. But it would be cumbersome to be including these other forums into this one.

To use a different "American Idol" analogy. If one watches that show, they'll notice, over the years, the phenomenon, where, as the final rounds approach, a competitor--who is top caliber and everyone knows should make it to the number one or two position--well, they get voted off in the number 3, 4, or 5 position! Why does this keep happening? Because a voting system that only picks people who should remain, utterly fails at accurately selecting who should be removed. A simple change in this system would solve the problem. (But for "political" reasons it will never happen.) Seems to me that a simple change in dividing two forums that have profound differences, would automatically solve some conflicts before they happen.

I know that some people will misperceive my comments and take them to mean that I'm someone who is against gardens or gardening. It's not at all the case. I just keep my interest in things garden separate from my interest in landscaping.

a lurker here, who felt the need to say something, as the only one who actually *showed* ideas sans a bucketload of words, had a thread directed at him...not in a nice way. ;)

soooo.... am i a fly?

Yard - I have trouble seeing the logic of saying they are separate issues with, presumably, separate design principles. If you don't like the posts you perceive as gardening, ignore them...

Count me in as another who fails to see the need to devolve into two different forums... unless we really want this debate about
"landscape vs garden design" to become like another Quebec - separate but distinct. Because that always works soooo smoothly :)

Woodyoak, the way I see gardening is as a very free, liberating discipline. At its heart, what one wants--an owner's sheer desire for a particular plant or collection of plants--may be it's most important principle. Beyond that, artistry comes into play: color, form, texture, line and all those standard elements of art... and time. But what does not necessarily come into play is the notion that NO plant belongs if it first does not contribute to the larger goal of what's around it and what it's part of. This is the domain of landscaping, where no plant or other material belongs, regardless of the owner or designer's passion for it, if it doesn't first exceed other plants and materials in its contribution to the larger space, belongs.

And it's not that I can't ignore posts that I perceive as gardening. If posts were marked as such, that's what I'd do. It's that during the early part of some posts, before the owners intentions are clearly evident, that there has to occur that "tugging" process as I mentioned. And if thread leans to landscaping, some "gardeners" refuse to ignore it!

Are there "separate design principles" for gardening vs. landscaping? I can't speak to a set of formal "garden design principles." But I can say that, for the most part, garden designers as a whole do not respect the subordinate role that planting plays to architecture. More often than not, they will pinch off a building entrance and make it smaller. They put their gorgeous plants in front of, and obstruct the view from windows. They put plants smack in front of views to entrances. They cover architectural details. They use corrals and barricades to keep people confined in tight places. They take what could be a great or grand object created of one or few types of plants and make it less grand, and deplete its visual strength, by making it many, or of many, objects. These are GENERALIZATIONS. (I'm sure no on here does these things.) Nevertheless, I recognize that all these things are legal. Many people want them. I just don't think of these kinds of things as landscaping or an understanding of landscaping.

pls8xx, I understand your concerns and still (basically) adore you, but what you've said is: you can only play in my sandbox if you follow my rules AND you cannot go next door and play in your own sandbox either.

And I'm really sorry, but there are people out there asking their 19 year old leaf raker what they should plant in their back yard. There are landscaping decisions happening this very minute that have not been vetted by the landscaping forum. I might go to cottage gardens and tell someone to plant an elm under a power liine, what's the diff if I do it in a forum called garden design. People make their own decisions. I've seen people give lousy advice on the bathroom and kitchen forums, others catch it - or not. Life goes on.

I do share your concern that one might succeed at the loss of the other. That would truly be a shame - for both. Natural selection happens - but not always for, what I perceive, to be the best. I've just started a gardening program at my school that is going to take my few free minutes so I don't have time to nurse a new entity. I hope others would, but who knows.

I'm liking this forum more and more (if I squint), but man I need to participate and feel heard without being whacked - I have very thin skin. I mean, did someone actually call me out for having a sense of humour they don't share? WTF?!

Yard - with all due respect... Stuff and nonsense! You seem to be trying to replay the old debate between William Robinson and Sir Reginald Blomfield (although I suspect you might not have Blomfield's formal orientation...) In the end, Blomfield summarized it as "The gardeners said the architects knew nothing about gardening, and the architects said the gardeners knew nothing about design, and there was a good deal of truth on both sides." It's a silly and artificial divide - good plants used well and creatively in combination with good basic design are going to produce the best result, and that's what needs to be encouraged. More from the historical debate:

'Garden historians have revelled in the debate that exploded between the irascible Robinson and the genial but combative Blomfield. Given his superb intellect and power of words, Blomfield undoubtedly got the better of the argument, but public sympathy lay largely with Robinson's naturalistic ideas.

There were two main outcomes, both rather surprising. The first was the emergence of the modern English style of garden-making, a compromise that combined the formal structure advocated by Blomfield with the informal planting championed by Robinson. Gertrude Jekyll is perhaps the best known of its early exponents, and she worked very closely with Edwin Lutyens, who was decidedly in the Blomfield camp. The second result was that Robinson invited Blomfield to visit him at Gravetye Manor in Sussex and the two of them got on rather well together.'

Anyone who is interested in reading more on this issue, check the link below:

Here is a link that might be useful: Blomfield

"...good plants used well and creatively in combination with good basic design are going to produce the best result..." WoodyO, I agree with this quote. But I disagree that the "garden" orientation has the greater likelihood of producing this result. In general, gardeners use too much "creativity" and too little design. I will bet it was because "the architects knew nothing about gardening" and "the gardeners knew nothing about design" that landscape architects were created.

There are enough examples of landscape architects out there who have mastery of both planting design and site planning/hardscape. So to assert that the two don't mix is just wrong, even if it is rare. Some designers that come to mind that do both well include Roberto Burle Marx, Steve Martino, Raymond Jungles to name a few. It may be worth noting that each of them are as adept at designing private residences as they are large scale urban design projects. I'm a firm believer that landscape architecture should give planting design greater value for their own merits.

Bahia, If your comment is referencing mine, I'm NOT asserting that landscape architects don't or can't have mastery of planting design, site planning & hardscape... just the opposite, actually. I'm asserting that many "garden" designers do not. Obviously, it's a generalization and like all, are going to have plenty of exceptions. And I don't think that there's anything wrong with using gardens as components in a landscape design. But, commonly, the garden designer's focus is directly on the plantings and does not seem to keep awareness of the bigger picture as they plan their plantings. As I said, I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions and I'm not pointing fingers at anyone so no one should take the comment personally. I'm just saying, as a general rule, that's what I observe.

If a house has different colors of wall-to-wall carpet in each room, is it design? Or the arbitrary imposition of art? Endless mixing is a primary design operative I see carried forth by many garden designers. I would say it's the rule more than the exception. Am I saying it's always not good? No. Can it have charm? Yes. Do people like it? Frequently. Is it landscaping? Not the way I see it. I view it as the arbitrary imposition of art. It can be lovely and good. As good as the artists skill. I can enjoy it for itself. But if "landscaping" is so broadly defined that any level of whim or arbitrary design qualifies to be it, then there needs to be another word that accurately describes outdoor design that is clean, uncluttered, organized and site-centric. ("Formal" does not work.) I don't see these two things as being the same.

Bahia - right on the money in my books!

Yard - I think you're making an issue where there shouldn't be one be one re trying to separate the two things, but clearly we're not going to reach agreement on what is 'right', so there's no point in continuing to discuss the issue.

Woody, I agree that we will disagree on this. I already quit talking about it right before you made your last comment. : )

I already quit talking about it right after I insulted half the people on the forum.

Glad we are finished talking about that.

Back to the OP - I thought of an analogy that may help some of the newer posters understand what some of us believe has gone awry.
4 years ago we added a new kitchen to our house as part of an addition. At first we were going to use a kitchen designer. I met with her and got a price and just the design was going to be $20,000. Not kidding. So even though that would have been really nice, it would have made the project unaffordable. We asked our contractor for other options. He suggested working with a cabinet company and have them do a design based on us potentially buying the cabinets from them. They gave us a great mock up of what the kitchen would look like, how all the different cabinets could be used, and we loved it. When it came time for the contractor to order the cabinets- he found the mock up was unusable because returns, hinge space, cabinets banging into one another, corner space was not considered at all. ( Sounds like a nightmare, and it did delay our project, but it worked out in the end because the contractor found a specialty kitchen carpenter who built us an entirely custom kitchen for half the cost of the cabinet company :)

So when someone posts a question here about their landscape, a mock up might appear to be a really good viable solution. It is simple clean and DIY. Unfortunately when you go to DIY it may not be as simple as all that and you could end up wasting your time on the forum and in the yard. Or worse, creating problems for yourself. You don't have to hire a $20,000 designer, although it probably would be nice. The "arguments" posters read here are the result of people who just want a a simple solution for everything and the people who realize that the reality of designing a landscape is not always a simple thing.

Which half? The half that design gardens or the half that design landscapes?

I'm pretty convinced now that it is more about getting the last word in and being agreed with .
I fully understand the virtue of standing ones ground and the importance of getting one's point of view across but beating the subject into exhaustion doesn't elevate the discussion nor the forum as a whole. .. it does just the opposite and turns people off .

I suppose you might say that this post, being the last ( but probably not for long) is calling the kettle black.
I'm not going to say much more but hope that there is less pulp making and more substance as it once was on this forum.

Black like "black hole" black.

Actually my post was more about how so many landscape architects have no real interest in plants and too often a rather limited planting vocabulary, resulting in funtional yet often rather bland designs. At least here locally, I don't see the dichotomy regarding gardenesque versus landscape approaches in many residential gardens designed by folks without professional schooling in landscape architecture programs. That may have something to do with a higher level of interest in gardens and design as a west coast thing, or greater exposure to good designs and a plentiful community of both landscape architects, garden designers and landscape designers. I'd tend to agree that L.A.'s in general place less emphasis on plants and more on overall design issues and creating a sense of place. No doubt Yardvaarks opinions are locally influenced by
what he sees as the majority around him. It probably also reflects client's tastes and budgets which are less concerned with broader design issues and more about simpler issues such as curb appeal or foundation shrub plantings. No slight intended towards these sorts of design problems, but they tend to limit more diverse design responses. A designer of any type has to work with what they're given, or work at broadening the possibilities through exposing potential clients to other possibilities. This whole conversation reminds me of similar posts by LAAG addressing the reality of the fit between design, client's briefs, the balance between design and meeting a client's objectives/expectations and their budgets.

To: Daisychain01:

It's great to have you with this bunch. There is a sense of newlife around here, and it's good.
I remember the very first post I made on this forum. I came to GW, scrolled down through the forums that were listed, and clicked on this one. I barely knew how to use a forum, so had no idea what this one was like. After reading just a few threads, I picked up on the humor, some of the sharp critique, and something of the breadth of perspective and expertise.
I posted a question about one small garden bed, just outside my front door. It had something to do with a tree we had removed and "what should I plant here".

Were I to post that original question in the mythical future, I'd be voted off the island, banished, exiled, excommunicated, quarantined away from the exclusionary landscape zone, told to go play in the garden forum.

Instead, I found an incredibly rich resource and a diverse group of regulars who are, for the most part, deep down, a bunch of softies. I learned how to think about a whole landscape, what a design process might be like, cool information about landscape aesthetics around the world, and very useful things about drainage, negative space, screening techniques, space, time, and the meaning of life, which is, of course, 42.

Geez, I read so much here and was applying what I learned all over the place, so that, after a time, I helped out on many of the questions posed by first time posters.

Truly worth it. My landscape is still a landscape, even if the garden function is one I'd require of any designer. So, no, I don't support segregation.

And don't tell about the "softies" part.

Some of the members may recall when a push was made here to create a separate Garden Restoration forum, seeing Restoration as a distinct element from Design. The effort was successful, and a very knowlegeable person took it upon him/herself to answer questions and engage participants in active discussions and problem solving.

The latest 2 threads in that forum were started Feb. 3rd and 5th; prior to that October 2011. Languishing, by any measure.

Division of topics makes sense when purposes are clearly distinct. Californing gardening has nothing in common with Florida gardening. Fruits and Orchards will have little overlap with Bonsai. I submit that the typical visitor to GardenWeb will not see any distinction between Garden Design and Landscape Design. Even those who would like to see a division admit to a significant degree of overlap.

I visit some very narrowly targeted forums, and even there, I will skip over maybe half of the threads because they do not interest me. Any post mentioning snow will give me a brain freeze. Others will avoid any thread involving a milder climate than their own. Still there is abundant information for everyone and enough overlap for everyone to enjoy the forum and coexist in relative harmony. In fact that forum is far more active than this one.

It's always a little disappointing to me when a new visitor asks a question and is immediately told to go to the tree forum or the cottage garden forum. I'd rather see people engage the questioner in a conversation about their garden first, and possibly stimulate some curiosity to learn more.

Like it or not, these are social networking sites. Social networking thrives on activity. Activity attracts more activity. The more we can engage people here, the livelier it will be, and the chances increase for attracting more qualified design experts. Nobody wants to tiptoe into an empty room to ask a question only to hear it echo on the walls.

Conversation: "exchange of sentiments, observations, opinions, or ideas." Not at all the same as jockeying for dominance.

Bahia, that was an EXCELLENT dig on two counts! Hopefully, no one missed how you do that!

Aaaaahhhhh, I get it now. You guys set these crazy threads up on purpose as bait when things are getting slow over here. I should have known there couldn't be characters as wacky as this in real life.

Thanks for the welcome wellspring. I'm going to clip your post and go back and re-read it when (not if) someone hurts my (easily injured) feelings.

Okay then: open season on daisychain (is that a Lady Chatterley reference BTW?) ....just kidding. What Kim said is just about how I see it too. I remember when Wellspring first spurted into this forum and she epitomizes exactly what Kim is talking about, Karin too. When Karin first came on the scene with a thread meant to show off her expertize and I criticized it she was injured but not defeated. Maybe, just maybe if I had said oooh! luvly thanks for sharing she would not still be here years later.

I'm honored, Daisychain.

And, I'm interested in your school garden project ... and where you are located ... and whether your sick child is feeling better now.

Well now we are really going off topic, but my school garden project is one of those things that I'll go on for hours about. Shortish version: I started the first version about 4 or 5 years ago because my kids school had a year round greenhouse that hadn't been used in years. I made unit plans for each grade (grades 1-5). Each unit had a different emphasis (including: bulbs, garden design, gardening in planters and garden sales), but each was academically rigorous. I did this program for a couple of years and the administration liked it so much they hired me to teach 4th grade full-time. Of course then I didn't have the time to run the garden program at the same level. So I scaled it back and another teacher stepped up to help. Right now we are starting the planting for what's become our annual plant sale (pretty small scale, but done by a group of about 15 5th grade students). This year the students are using the proceeds to buy something for our new outdoor classroom (my administrator is a dedicated gardener and went to great lengths to get this large garden space in place).

Next step is to help the non-gardening teachers plan to use the garden space with their classes (without making them hate me for adding to their already crushing workload).

Hmmm ... the older kids might get into some of the site analysis stuff. If only you had a software program that could demonstrate what happens when too much water on too great a slope causes a wall to collapse ...
My son (now 20) still appreciates a nice demolition demonstration.

And, someone around here ... it might even have been pls8xx ... gives a great explanation of how to use longitude, latitude, and height of a structure or tree to determine the shade pattern over the course of the year.

I wonder what 4th and 5th graders would make of the modern use of fertilizer? How did food crops grow before we had the pure chemicals (poison, in fact, in that form) to throw around on everything?

I am wandering, aren't I?

That may be my greatest and only real gift on this forum. Going tangential and then getting back on track ... well, sort of, right?

Well, I've had my say and I want to thank the many who have contributed to this thread. I titled the discussion to appeal to those new to the forum in hopes that it would give them insight into who and what we are here.

Landscaping is not a subject where one can turn to an authoritative reference manual to determine what is right and wrong. It is multifaceted. The long time regulars here all have different backgrounds and different knowledge sets. We come at landscaping from many different directions, each of us with our own mental definition of what landscaping is.

It may seem confusing to newcomers that we so often appear to give conflicting advice. But the truth is that even in disagreement there is merit in what each of has to say.

People of intelligence are often loath to repeat themselves. And among the long time regulars here I think that that is in play. You may refrain from repeating those ideas you have already expressed. But when; two, four years ago? There are new people here who have not heard what you have to say. And then there are us that heard what you said long ago and didn't understand it. We are not the same people we were then; give us another shot; this time we might get it.

I'm done.

And to take us to an even hundred posts on this thread, the classic:

{{gwi:9641}}

Hilariuuuuuuuus!