dear sirji, if i asked for some more details about the plants than what wrong i did, because i know that there are two more similar looking species in the same genus..
i never trust anyones identification done from the photograph.. if group is not happy about my post than i am not interested in discussing the things.. thanks.. On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it would help the group if more and more experts come forward to > share different jobs. For last so many years my self and Garg ji have been > doing our best to resurface the pending identifications and how tiring this > job is. Every body knows we have been giving all previous feedbacks and our > comments also. Seeing how difficult job it is Dinesh ji, who has been doing > all important job for the website, (which not every one can appreciate). has > given a lending of resurfacing. Rather than appreciating such efforts I find > one member has chosen to find faults with it. It would have been more > appropriate if he had found and supplemented the resurfacing efforts. I have > been requesting him repeatedly to take up some jobs on the group. He does > not want to do any job for the group, but is ready to find faults with every > body else. His consistent lines in the middle of the thread have been "I > think..............................." and there is not s single evidence to > support his conclusion. The other day he wrote on the group "there may be > other experts on the group who can identify your photographs > but............................". Such type of behavior only spoils the > atmosphere of the group. few days back when Dinesh ji shared some valuable > identified plants on the group, he consistently asked him to supply details > about the plants which were already identified and with useful information > of all regional names. I had to tell him that person sharing his already > identified plants is only doing service to the group, and every thing > supplied by him is a bonus for us. If we have any doubts we should do our > home work and if there are any doubts he should share with evidence. > I am sorry to share this in the forum, but I have tried in vain that he > does not spoil the harmony of the group, but it seems his intrusions are > increasing and are not for the good of the group. I request him again that > is a talented person and should use this for welfare of the group and not > spoil its harmony through his frequent non too desirable utterances. > > > -- > Dr. Gurcharan Singh > Retired Associate Professor > SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007 > Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018. > Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089 > http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ > > > > On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Samir Mehta <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I did just that yesterday & I am happy that the same is being >> suggested to the group for wider implementation. >> >> Please see: >> >> https://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix/browse_thread/thread/cff8bf25002f8c8d/a5847174c6cfc51a?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=boerhavia+diffusa# >> ] >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> >> Samir Mehta >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 23, 1:31 pm, H S <[email protected]> wrote: >> > One request to the group: >> > >> > no doubt its very clear that the plant photo is not 100 percent sure >> about >> > the identity if posted again as resurfing for identification. just one >> > request to those who are posting again for resurfing, if he or she can >> give >> > or add little comments on the earlier post by the member for the >> identity.. >> > than it would become easy to seperate them from another species.. or it >> can >> > be discuss by the moderator member of the group and than put for >> resurfing >> > with some extra details.. >> > >> > one question.. is it necessary to identify every not clear photos (i >> mean >> > some times photos are not so clear to identify the species level and if >> > someone is doing so, i think it can only be a guess and not a 100 >> percent >> > proper identification), than why to stretch on such things and waste >> time... >> > by putting again and again it for resurfing... >> > >> > regards >> > >> > -- >> > - H.S. >> > >> > A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart >> of >> > stone >> > > > > -- - H.S. A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart of stone
