Summit Paper Release

Some days ago I received from Jonas Hallstrom an e-mail with information about a meeting, which was organised in Sweden.

Reading these documents and manly the conclusions that I am sending you, I was thinking with my buttons that  “Monsieur de la Palice” could not do better.

Here have you, dear reader, the Hallstrom´s document:
 
"SUMMIT PAPER RELEASES #7 AND #8
 
Dear friends of philately,
 

Three weeks ago Malmö 3rd International Philatelic Summit was conducted with 92 participants from 20 countries. This year's seminar content was dealing with the philatelic material in competitive exhibits representing all FIP exhibition classes. Why did the Summit deal with philatelic material?

 
(1) For all exhibition classes the philatelic material is fundamental for the constitution of the exhibit. The limit of the frame space allocated at exhibitions does not allow the exhibitor to display the entire collection.
(2) The exhibitor must select suitable philatelic material which will ensure continuity and understanding of the subject and the concept in the exhibit. 
(3) The judges’ evaluation of exhibits will only take into consideration the philatelic material and relevant information presented in the frames, which challenge the exhibitor to only select and display relevant material supporting documentation and text.
(4) The philatelic material displayed should be fully consistent with the subject and show the appreciation of the exhibitor as to what is available. The material should include the fullest range being relevant and of the highest quality available."
 
 
It is obvious that all exhibitors know that they must show in the exhibits:
1 – The best philatelic material, because it is fundamental for the constitution of the exhibit.
2 – The exhibitors know very well that must select suitable philatelic material which will ensure continuity and understanding of the subject and the concept in the exhibit.
3 - Judges’ evaluation of exhibits will only take into consideration the philatelic material and relevant information presented in the frames.
How can be conclude this in a meeting? How could the juror classified  the material that is not shown?? Incredible this conclusion. Perhaps in the future  the goals of Cristiano Ronaldo will also be valid after the game, when he is playing football games in his computer!!!! Is it not the same?
4 - The philatelic material displayed should be fully consistent with the subject and show the appreciation of the exhibitor as to what is available.
 
Is it obvious?
 
So, my question and doubt is: Is it necessary to organize a meeting with 20 countries to find only these obvious conclusions?
 
I am sure that we had a lot of show off, typical of THE SYSTEM.
 
But my fundamental question is: Are they the FIP jurors prepared and able to classify the exhibits from 87 countries, the FIP members?
It is obvious that they are not. They are not supermen.
 
One time in Austria I was asking a juror about the classification of an exhibit of pre-adhesive Portuguese material and the answer was: Sorry I do understand nothing about this.
 
Another time in Essen, I was Honorary President of the Jury, in my condition of FEPA President, and in the first reading of the results I found a Portuguese exhibit of Postal History with 83 points, which was  a very low classification. I was talking with the team leader and after the group and myself went together in front of the frames, where I had the opportunity to explain the entire exhibit piece by piece. I never talked in any points or any other classification. In the second reading of the results the exhibit grow up to 93 points!!
 
So Jonas Hallstrom we need urgently to organize various  meetings not to the exhibitors, but mainly to the jurors.
 
We need urgently meetings to educate the jurors, how they can solve their own problems to classify philatelic material and relevant information presented in the frames, suitable philatelic material which will ensure continuity and understanding of the subject and the concept in the exhibit, The philatelic material displayed should be fully consistent with the subject, when they do not know the material!
 
This is the question and problem that we have many, and many times in the international exhibitions, where a lot of jurors does understand nothing about the material, which is in the frames.
 
I give you another example in Stationary.
 
The private stationary of Portugal is 1000 times rarer than the Spanish material. However in the world exhibitions the Spanish exhibits got already 95 points, nevertheless the Portuguese exhibits never won more than a large vermeil, maximum 89 points!!
 
Do you know why? First because the juror does not know this Portuguese material, second because normally Spain has always a juror invited to participate in the exhibition, and he is able to defend the exhibits from his country.
 
I could give you more examples, because in 41 years as exhibitor, director and organizer of many exhibitions, I saw many, many wrong things, but at the moment it is enough.
 
So Jonas Hallstrom,  the problem is not only in the exhibitors, but many times in the jurors. The exhibitors must learn obvious things, like it is expressing in Hallstrom´s e-mail. Everybody know this, why to do a meeting to find these obvious conclusions???!!
 
It is incredible, how it is necessary to organize a meeting in Sweden, to find these obvious conclusions.
Like I said Monsieur de la Palice could not do better!
But Jonas Hallstrom, when a meeting to the jurors?? When? In this meeting they must try to discuss these kinds of problems and to solve them.
 
But if you do not want to do it, I have the answer.
 
Why to have not in all exhibitions one juror from each country, who had been nominated by the country? If the country had 3/5 exhibits it should have the right to have a juror.
 
If we are following this right principle, the other jurors can have a good help, when they are not able to classify an exhibit, because they do not know the material.
 
It is obvious Jonas Hallstrom, that if this happened in the future, we are losing games of the SYSTEM and it was not necessary to play THE SYSTEM better than the other, as you said in FEPA Congress in Opatia.
 
Europe must think about this, the European Federations must fight against the THE SYSTEM and never to give permission to their members to play any SYSTEM. We must defend the interests of exhibitors and National Federations.
 
Without jurors, we will have philately. Without philatelists, the philately will be over. So the philatelists are more important, than the jurors.
 
So Jonas Hallstrom, a meeting to jurors, could be a good solution to the future of the philately, looking the interests of the philatelists, or do you think that the jurors are the supreme of the philately, not needing to learn anything more?
 
So in the next year I hope to see organised in Sweden, a meeting to jurors!
 
This is the reason, because many times I do not believe in commissions and meetings, when we are seeing the obvious conclusions of this meeting held in Sweden, and when they do serve for nothing and are only show off.
 
It will better to spend this money in other philatelic actions.
 
Pedro Vaz Pereira
President of the Portuguese Philatelic Federation
 
Date: 
05/22/2014 - 11:29
Author: 
Pedro Vaz Pereira