Subjective comments in PDB

I've been thinking about something and want to post it for other's perusal.

In the PDB entry shown below, there are three negative comments. I believe that all of them are negative because the plant didn't survive and/or critters eating it. Of the two comments about plant hardiness, it's clear that the plant wasn't meant to grow in their zone.

http://plantsdatabase.com/go/40815/index.html

My question is: Should this plant have strikes against it when it wasn't meant for the zone it was planted in?

I agree that one shouldn't give a negative for a plant that is in the wrong zone. I noticed that they both came from Blooms of Bressingham. Evidently that company had it zoned wrong in their catalog. This should have been taken up with Blooms of Bressingham instead of giving it a negative, in my humble opinion.

Well, 'Limerock Ruby' has a checkered past. It was originally touted as being as hardy as the other threadleaf coreopsis, but it's not. (Not by a long shot.)

And Blooms of Bressingham wasn't the only vendor who listed it as perfectly hardy :(

I guess I have a little different take on the comments: I see them as a forum for individual opinions, kinda like the op/ed page of your newspaper. (And you know what they say about opinions, right? Kinda like toes - nearly everybody's got several, and some stink more than others.)

People can detest a plant for a variety of reasons (bloom color is either too muddy or too garish; the flowers tend to ball, the foliage is prone to powdery mildew, the plant attracts pests such as rabbits, etc., it's thuggish in their garden because the conditions are ideal, bloomtime is not what they were led to believe, etc.)

Just as your neighbor might hold a plant in low esteem and you positively adore it, the comments here are meant to give a very wide range of opinions on a plant, and as long people give a reason for their rating AND they don't slander or put down anyone else's opinion, I'd much rather see a staunch thumb's down than a milquetoast, mealy-mouthed neutral ;o)

Good point, Terry!

I remember the flack over Limerockk Ruby and it was rated to zone 4 or at least 5 I think initially in all the catalogs. (I probably still have the old catalogs! Ok, ok I have a sickness....can't throw them out.)

I agree with Terry, I'd rather see the Negatives in there. I can make my own postive comment if I disagree.

I'm learning a lot from reading all of your posts. I think everyone's opinion is important, both here and in the PDB. I appreciate the comments I've read. Terry, you always have such a great way of expressing your thoughts.

Ummm, well - hopefully you do know my post was intended to be an example of someone holding a strong opinion ;o)

That said, there is definitely a place for neutral comments in the PDB: if you're providing the background on a plant (where it grows naturally, who discovered it, etc.), you may not hold a strong feeling one way or the other and that's perfectly fine.

But when I want to know what someone really thinks of a plant, it's (IMHO) much more interesting to see a positive or negative rating, then read the comment. It's easier than trying to read between the lines of a neutral comment and figure out if the writer loves or loathes the plant, but was unwilling to take a stance with a rating - or whether they're truly neutral.