No More Co-ops??

Not what I meant to imply at all, and I don't think that I did.I just wondered why the interest in the co ops when I hadn't seen you around them before. I personally would love another hosta co op, remembering the one that got stopped before it ever got started when someone complained to the potential vendor about selling to the trade. :-)

Thanks for answering my question Penzer, I really was just curious.

Well, lets face it..we all want the coops to continue, I'll bet that Dave and Terry feel the same way. They are most certainly looking out for our best interests and their own sanity.

I dont think you will EVER have coops without some risk. But the benefits are so great....if not for Melissa...I would never have had some of the daylilies that I currently have and Cheryls hosta coop was great too. Honestly,...I havent done as well in the bulb coops and I dont think I'll go that route again..not necessarily anyones fault but they just havent been as worthwhile for me.

We all have the same finish line in view..our paths in that direction may be a little different. I dont think anyone is intentionally criticizing anyone ..we wont all agree..even if all the ideas have merit. But thank God we can at least discuss it. :)

I've known Melissa for awhile, and she wouldn't deliberately be unkind. To be honest Pennzer, when I saw you posting so often to this thread, I was thinking the same thing Melissa was thinking, and I expected to find you all over the co-op forum.

I also think it's a good idea to take a time out and think about things rationally, rather than trying to rush to the ten-second offense.

I really like Melissa's ideas about limiting participants. These things obviously need to be run by someone with a great deal of organizational skills and not everyone can pull them off. Limiting the participants may limit the confusion for those folks who might be willing to host a co-op, but get a little overwhelmed when the orders get too big.

I do believe that someone (even a vendor) who sets out to be deliberately dishonest will find a way to do so despite any rules, regulations and safeguards that may be put into place.



This message was edited Jul 5, 2005 7:38 PM

i agree Pen it looks like you are on a crusade and i was scared to say it. you are pushing this issue in my opinion a little to hard!

I have seen Dave shut down a forum and never ever look back. now i hate to see him come on this thread shut it down and say no more co ops ever ever agian. i have been here a long time and i have seen this happen.

We all know Dave is fair and does whats in the best intrest for ever one involved on this site but i want to remind you even though we pay for memeber ship and Dave is wonderful and Fair its STILL DAVE"S site and he has the final say.


PLEASE take a time out from this issue. GIve Dave some breathing room.

I cannot believe I am getting into the fray but I just couldn't stand it. I believe this is Dave's direct quote since I am cutting and pasting it.

"Now as for the future, there is a non-zero chance that we will reinstate them, but they certainly will work differently than they have through the present. If anyone develops any elaborate plans to successfully bring back co-ops, please do share."

That sounds to me like Dave is willing to hear any ideas we may have on this matter and I don't believe anyone on Dave's should tell someone else to quit posting.

Terrie

I don't necessarily agree with those that favor limiting participation. The tropical hibiscus co-op sold over 1,000 liners and the greatest problems it had: 1) Participants not following the guidelines; 2) Participants feeling I needed to be online, posting, each and everyday, throughout the day. (Something I did for a time and it caused the biggest problem in the co-op. That and letting someone get by with not following the co-op guidelines.)

My point? Limiting participation would have only helped if I had been allowed to excluded certain members. Otherwise, the amount of participation had no adverse affects on everyone getting what they ordered, when they ordered it.

Admitted, there have been other co-ops that wouldn't have been the true...

Also, having been a participant of the failed hardy hibiscus co-op and the first to scream 'Foul!', I could have sidestepped involving Dave and Terry had I known that it was okay to 'take things into my own hands'. I would have called her, then called the authorities long before anyone else saw there was a problem. (I was suppose to get my plants more than a month before anyone else.)

Finally, I lost $63+ in that co-op and probably wouldn't have ordered from it had more people in the poppy seed co-op spoken out about their disappointment sooner. (Once I saw it wasn't just me that thought the count was off I would have called her on it sooner and seen how she REALLY did business sooner.) I wish all the other participants of the co-op had cried 'Foull!' when they saw their seed counts weren't right - if not for themselves, then for the others involved. (See the Bloomingbulb co-op thread to see how well that concept worked.)

Of course, those are just MY thoughts.

Lets please get off Penns back and back on the coop.......please send personal comments in emails please and keep the thread open for suggestions, thanks

Ed

FYI, folks, I took my idea to Terry via E-mail first, and she suggested I post my ideas here. --Pen

My comments could have been read as a bit harsh but I really didn't mean for it to single out anyone. Instead I thought I noticed a similarity between another group and I should have been more clear so I'm sorry for that.

Co-ops are not always easy even when you're right in the middle of them, much less trying to clean up a mess from the sidelines. I think maybe one point is that as a previous organizer I understand that too well. It doesn't mean I don't want to have them anymore, only that I understand the reasons for all the previous rules and for the current decision.

I'm glad Penzer is so enthusiastic on everyone's behalf, but IF I understand right, we've already had the same types of co-ops that are being proposed. But all co-ops were stopped, not just certain kinds, and I can sure understand why. Of course, I'm still disappointed about not having them any more. I don't have any more ideas but I hope something can be acceptable from all these ideas.

This message was edited Jul 5, 2005 9:44 PM

Been keeping track of this thread now for the last 3 weeks, and although co-ops were one of the reasons I joined, discontinuing it is not the end all in my opinion. The way I see this thread is you all are "beating a dead horse into the ground". Let the dust settle. I am sure both Dave and Terry are fully awear of the popularity of this feature and are probably trying to work out details to bring it back but in a more controlled atmosphere....

I myself took part in only one co-op with the Plant Tags and was very pleased with the results.

Deann

I see this thread as an opportunity to find out what worked in the co-ops of the past and what didn't. (If you don't pay attention to history you're doomed to repeat it.) Now is the time to to fine tune the process before we add in another part to the equation.

Plus, brainstorming is one of the best ways to come up with a new and better ideas. That is what 'Think Tanks' are all about.

Hey, with Chris back and Terre safe and sound, aren't we looking at only Nadi as the one who messed up two co-ops? I think a bit of safeguarding so that all of a co-op doesn't fall into one person's hands would be wise, so nasty car accidents and honeymoons that go on and on don't delay the co-ops.

I feel, in general, Pen is on the right track. Vendor Direct is the way to go, whether it is a negotiated discount on one type of plant like Hostas, where we place the order on Daves and a member or a committee sends it on and the vendor does the rest ( or however you work it out) Or if it's a general discount coupon where members go to the vendors site and order .

My opinion ( and we all have one) is that the co-op of the past is dead and gone, even if you limit the number of people participating.I have never hosted one but I have ordered from several and followed many others and the depth of the problems is mind boggling.

If we want co-ops or VOD's or whatever, we have to be willing to try something new.If we can get Dave's blessings, we need to... Put together a committee of a couple of members who are vendors, a couple who have run successful co-ops and a couple of others who are committed to the whole co-op idea . Let them hash out the guidelines, run it by Dave and with his approval,see what happens. Start on a small scale, with trusted , known vendors and work out the kinks. Just my 2 cents worth

This message was edited Jul 7, 2005 1:34 PM

Deann, it's not a dead horse at all. It's just a horse with sore ankles that has been taken off the racing circuit for a rest until its injuries are assessed to see if it can run again.

Cheryl, you have put me in a defensive position again, and as long as you do that, I will feel compelled to respond. This is a quote from your post: (will someone tell me how to do those little blue box quotes?!?)

"I'm glad Penzer is so enthusiastic on everyone's behalf, but IF I understand right, we've already had the same types of co-ops that are being proposed."

The type of co-op I propose is different from anything I am aware that has been done in the past in a couple of important aspects.

1. A volunteer member committee selected by its peers will be responsible for selecting and approving which programs will be offered to the membership and will provide oversight and direction as the offering is underway. Offerings approved by the committee(s) will be taken to Admin for final approval only after the project has been thoroughly researched and defined. This gets Admin out of the line of fire and, although I'm sure they would still be monitoring everything, there should be a lot less staff time and effort (and headache) required.

2. Vendors can approach DG with a proposed offering. This is a big difference in how it has worked in the past. As it has been, a vendor must wait to be approached by a sponsoring member who is willing to organize and run a co-op. Think how few among us are willing and capable and have the time to do this, and you can appreciate how few vendors have been approached. I think this new aspect could open opportunities we've never even thought about. The vendor would not be allowed to make his proposal on the forums. I would think the proper process would be to approach Admin, and if Admin initially has no objections, he would be referred to the proper chairman who would in turn take it to his committe for research and assessment. If the committee approves the project, it would be sent back to Dave for final approval. When a project is approved, the committee would then find a host/manager among our members, if appropriate for that project, or give the vendor guidelines for posting if the vendor is to be given direct access to the forum. In either event, the vendor would accept payments and fulfill orders directly.

There could be various ways to achieve all this, and this is a rough proposal. I know that staff will have to evaluate this model from their own perpective, and I'm sure there are many aspects of this or any model that I haven't even thought about. But I think some version of this could work, and I'm quite sure it has never been done this way in the past.

I would like to stress again that I was asked by Admin to post my ideas to this thread, and I'm quite sure that they want to hear and are listening to everyone's ideas and wishes. We are not being naughty by discussing this.

I would also add here that I am in no way whatsoever related to, connected with, or employed by any possible future vendor, nor am I personal friends with any such vendor.

......Pen

Just one point of clarification. I agree that I directed Pennzer to run this idea "up the flagpole" - however, I also asserted several cautionary notes within our correspondence, both to slow down and to be prepared for a lukewarm response from Dave.

I think the dust needs to settle on the co-ops before we rebound into another variation on the theme. If we can agree to do that, we can then approach new ideas as a "fresh start" without constantly comparing them to the "old" model, and act instead of react.

And in the end, the answer may still be a no-go. Co-ops were a unique feature of Dave's Garden, but not the only feature we offer - nor are they the only issue admins must grapple with each day. I'm asking everyone to keep this in perspective; we have to prioritize the projects and features we can take on, and have confidence in our abilities to successfully create and maintain them over the long haul. As large as this site is, it's run by a relatively small staff of admins, plus the PF editors who keep PlantFiles running smoothly.

Lukewarm is good, Terry.

I agree with Terry. We need to give this horse a rest, I believe a couple months
or it may never heal.

Alot of times a good horse has to be shot. If there is any chance to revive the co-ops I believe is to sit back give it a rest and everyones thinking can be done more clearly.

Just my 2 cents

Also when I joined I wasn't aware of the co-ops till later. There is so much more here to be had, If they never come back.

Sandy

I would love to keep participating in coops. They really really helped bring this novice gardener out of Home Depot!

But I have a few thoughts:

On other sites (non-gardening) where I am active, there doesn't seem to be the climate of "running to Daddy" when there's a problem or disagreement among members. The owner of the sites are much less active, and volunteer moderators keep the peace when necessary. Why should Dave be held responsible or be involved at all with any problems?

If Dave made it clear that coops are at our own risk, and that he is merely providing the space for us to communicate with each other about a transaction among...let's face it...strangers, and is no way responsible for or will communicate with anyone about ANY of it, would that work? I didn't blame Dave for Nadi. But I KNOW he got a ton of complaints. I had hoped that he had some right or standing to have Nadi prosecuted that we as individuals didn't, but it turns out that it was up to us to just file complaints on our own. So why involve Dave at all? It's not like he knows each of us personally...why should we expect him to be responsible for a stranger who happens to join his site? It's not like it's an exclusive site.

If we as a group could just leave Dave out of any coop problems?

Or...could we just post here that we are doing a coop and do the discussion offsite?

The hosta one was really just perfect, imo.

Or/AND....how about to host a coop, you need x number of good trades?

Just some thoughts...would love to be involved in a coop again...sigh...

Sounds good razzie

I did not mean I never wanted to see them back, But the times I have seen
Dave post, he is a shepard who protects his sheep. This is his website and
he doesn't like those kinds of things on here. You can also tell he and Terry
hate to see members taken or burnt.

I am sure if there is a way to do this, I am sure Dave and Terry will come to a conclusion with all suggestions taken into consideration. But I don't think, I
could be wrong, that by hashing and rehashing the same matter over and over
or even by suggesting we have a trial run now will solve anything.
Even if a test run would pass and that wouldn't necessarily prove co-ops would
work. As was proven there were alot more good ones than bad.

When I first went to Plant Safari, and talked to them, I did not tell them I was a member of DG. I approached them about a small co-op and a discount,
then I applied and got approved. Then I told Plant Safari what web site I was a
member of.

I even invited one of the owners to join so he could share his knowledge with us,
and told him how much he could learn from lots of people here. I did not
mention him joining co-ops one way or the other. There is too much great info here for me to ever think of leaving daves.

Maybe that could be a poll. Would you consider leaving if DG had no more co-ops? Only because I see so many say they joined for that.

Again just my 2 cents.
Sandy ^8^

This message was edited Jul 8, 2005 5:53 AM

I have no intention of leaving Dave's for any reason I know of now or can forsee in the future! Dotti

No, I wouldn't leave for that reason. I am a novice, I need all the help I can get, lol!!

I havent been on DG's that long and only glanced at a few co-ops
and missed some i would have loved to get some plants from.
Then i seen some of the bad reports but never tracked or ask
what really happened that made them go bad.
But it got me thinking, 100's of orders, papers scattered all over
on the computer desk, and so on ,. So i thought, maybe some
soft ware to those with cluttered desks where running a co-op
would just take a few keystrokes and mouse clicks and packing
boxes ..

Well, I have been programming with visualbasic (programming Language)
for many years doing all kinds of programs in my spare time.
Im a truck mechanic by trade , you would have never gussed though.

Anyways I started one for the co-op's but got stuck so i tossed it on
the back burner till i get one of them dreams while im sleeping that
shows me how to handle the problem.

I'll post a few screen shot of the screens layouts and you can see
some of the buttons for some of the features and I'll list some here
and some of my ideas that could possible be implamented.

Theres only one problem with me writing software with this programming
language is that it will only run on a windows based computer.
It wont work on a MAC unless you run a windows emulator and there
no garrentee that it run under it.


Terry , Dave , feel free to contact me about this possible software
if you like the ideas since it could be possible to write this to talk directly
to the co-op fourm.


Program Ideas ....

To get the software you would have to get DG's ok for the co-op

Plants for the co-op would have to be entered into the program, prices, shipping.

Once the plants are entered and the Co-op's host data entered it would auto
post to the co-op fourm starting the co-op.

DG's user would post there orders like they do
host would enter there orders into the software,
the software would then auto post to the forum
showing the order has been recieved.

changes to a order would result in a auto post also to the forum.

when a order is done and checked off another auto post could be
sent.



Other Items in software would be...
Printing mailing labels.
Printing plant labels.
Printing a Recept/cost of the orders

next 2 post will be screen shots of what i have started
but could be changed due to features added.



This message was edited Jul 8, 2005 10:49 AM

post1

post2

Me too...I just want to post to say that the two biggest reasons that I joined DG were the co-ops and the great people on the Hosta forum. My membership is up for renewal soon, and I will likely renew even without the co-ops. The co-ops were one area that really set DG ahead of GardenWeb.

- Brent

I too will be truly saddened if the co-ops leave as this was the one place me and my Mom could get plants that are very hard to come by. I have never been in a co-op they hasn't went smoothly. I do understand the choice Dave has to make with the problems some have had with co-ops gone bad. I truely enjoy this website and have learned so much. I will probably not rejoin if the co-ops leave.
Christi

I can understand people joining Daves for the Co-ops but Daves offers so *much* more. The forums and PF are priceless to me, as well as the WatchDog.

I would certainly stay even without the co-ops but would participate in anything reasonable that would maintain them as part of the site. They are part of what brings a sense of sister/brotherhood to the site, which is very distinctive. When I look at every plant that I have acquired through the co-ops, I instinctively remember the significant effort of the host(s) and the kindness and generosity behind it. I wonder how Alice is, if Terre is improving. THAT is a garden!

A committee sounds like a good idea. We might consider a lottery system for participation if we reduce the size of the co-ops so that everyone has opportunity to participate. Some of us work and it has happened that the co-op was over within a day, before working people could get home and log in. And very frequently certain plants are sold out early, and usually to the same people, so perhaps limit the number of plants we can purchase also. Software could make the lottery concept relatively easy I assume.

I am all for taking the time we need to weigh the options, determine what will/will not work, take small steps, learn as we go. We have intelligent voices here, offering some worthwhile ideas. I am hopeful that we can find a way to make this work, even if it is on a limited basis.

Well, I am definitely a "low profile" DG subscriber.
I just feel that I need to say that I am truely disappointed with the decission to stop co-ops. I was fortunate enough to participate in a couple Daylily ones, a Hosta one, and a Marker one. All of which were great ! (at least from my point of view)
I certainly admire anyone who is willing to take on the challenge.
I sure hope to see co-ops again in the future.

Well, if all fails and we do not have co-ops on Dave's, we still have the contacts and perhaps we could do smaller private purchasing in groups. I have had many good trades here and have met many nice folks on my favorites forums which are Iris/Daylilies/Hosta.
Teresa

:( this makes me sad to see the Co-ops go, they were one favorite part of DG and a way to keep my DH more understanding about why I am online here so often and so long.

We saved quite a lot of money with Bleek's and langbr's co-ops of bulbs and hosta, I saved so much and the stuff was EXCELLENT!

Oh, well.
I hope it will all work out and co-ops will be revived. but I won't leave if they're not. It will just be harder to justify the subscriber fee.

But I'll figure out a way to do it.

I found this thread long after the discussion was over... I've been out of the loop.
Some excellent ideas shared here. Praying it all works out so we can all get wonderful plants this way.

I, for one, am glad Dave has put a stop to Co-ops for now. I have gotten a lot of good deals over the past few years, but this last co-op has really turned me off to them. This is the fourth time I've been burned on a co-op, you'd think I would have learned, but the deals sound so good. I was really looking forward to getting Heucheras, but I have been promised that my plants would be shipped several times, and still nothing, and now, again, no contact, no e-mails, no posts. There is a small group of us that are still waiting, while others are exclaiming about their wonderful plants, we just sit and wait. It's so frustrating!
Deb

This was posted to the Hosta Forum. Since it is on the subject of co-ops, I am copying it here to keep in this thread. --Pen

FROM:
gretaduck
Pittsboro, NC
Zone 7a
Jul 22, 2005
1:36 PM
Hi, for various reasons it's been a long time since I've participated in the Hosta Forum. We did a hosta coop with Brenda (langbr) last year and she was absolutely, positively, professional, responsible, and organized in the way she operated the coop. If the powers that be decide to allow future hosta forums, we would not hesitate to consider a request to do a coop in the fall IF Brenda (I apologize for putting her on the spot.) is the host. I completely understand DG gardeners' enthusiasm about wanting to continue the tradition. There are honest vendors, coop organizers, and participants out there who can be depended upon to be ethical. Did we make a lot of money on doing the coop? No, but it was still financially helpful to do it. Did we get a lot of repeat customers (i.e., coop customers who later ordered from us at regular prices)? No, but we got a few and we appreciated them. Do vendors who agree to do coops simply sell the plants they can't get rid of? Some may, but we don't. We do, however, tend to list those of which we have surplus, so we can make room for next year's new varieties. The strange thing (or maybe it's just a matter of "One man's treasure is another man's junk.:), there is no predicting which hosta is going to be popular in any given year. I'm constantly amazed when what I personally think is an average or mediocre hosta is THE hosta for the year but what I think is absolutely the best hosta on the market is not a best seller. Go figure! Thanks to those of you who privately asked for our input. We understand (being business people ourselves) some of the frustration expressed by Dave and Terre, but hope they are listening to the sincere input from their paid subscribers.
Greta at the Hosta Farm

Thanks for posting that. These are the nicest people and I will shop with them anytime I can. Every Hosta I got was and is growing great guns.
I also like the way Langbr runs her co-ops, she takes orders and money, they select, wash the soil off roots and mail the plants with a marker for each one.
This business of one person getting 1000 plants in their HOME, caring and sorting and repacking and shipping sounds like total craziness to me.
Please let us have these civilized co-ops like Greta writes of.
sidney

Changed my mind about posting,



This message was edited Jul 23, 2005 4:35 PM

Personally, I looked forward to co-ops and sung DG praise because of them. It's not as much fun for me anymore...I really looked forward to them, tho I didn't go crazy.

I'll never understand what would make DG, or Dave be responsible or liable for any wrong doings. We are all adults, we have eyes, ears, brains and free will--and I very much doubt if anyone here has NOT gotten a bad plant or ripped off from a mail order source or nursery? At least now we have wonderful resources like the Garden Watchdog and word of mouth.

Let it be a GWD vendor, I think we have already shown our buying power and deserve a break from them. I would expect any vendor would probably have a minimum order for shipping however--this where (friends) members could co-op and share an order, and our Dave wouldn't be bothered.

JMHO

((Co-Ops)) I Miss 'em!

I've not been in a bad coop till now. with the heuchera coop. But , I know this, Regardless of Daves decision on what he does. I'll never join in on another coop again. Even if I do get a refund from this coop. It's not worth it to me to have to deal with folks who lie, and treat us like !

This one I"m in on now, Well, I don'tknow what's going on with the host. But, She's played us for fools. Most of us got more dead plants than live ones, and there are 5 of us who never got a thing after being told they were shipped out 2 weeks ago. her having the plants since the beginning of June, she now wants to send us dead plants.

I don't know how the folks felt that got ripped off in the hibiscus coop, I wasn't in on that one, But I truly felt bad for those folks.

Dave Can't control the coops and how they turn out and how folks rip off other folks. Since this is his site, he should be able to control the coops, and if he can't, why the heck would he subject everybody to the treatment that they get with a bad coop host, or nursery involved. Which is why he canceled them in the first place. And now folks are saying they wouldn't do a coop if they had this and that checked on them. (personal references, financial checks.), Their entrusted with lots of money from lots of folks. There needs to be alot stricter regulations on coop hosts if he were to recontinue the coops. I can't imagine how he can do that. In turn there needs to be something done for those that back out after having ordered. Consequenses on both sides for folks that don't follow through.

I for one and sick and tired of being left in the dark with this heuchera coop. I now feel like she's not posting to make us mad, or pay for our posts of concern.

So, Co_ops, I can take them or leave them, but won't join in again. But The l0.00 I pay to be on daves. Is more than worth it to me, just to be a part of the rest of Daves Garden. No coops won't keep me from joining daves again when the time comes.

kathy_ann

kathy_ann........mmmmm you only paid $10.00 for your membership......You got a deal....I paid $15.00

Deann

Yes, LOL That was a mistake, I paid $l5.00 too. And it's getting near time to do it again I think. sorry about that. Yall know that was a type o though. (smiles)

kathy

Kathy,
looks like you are smiling again.Hope things got straightened out.