2 ms·

Seriously, "tree of the year" is conceptually nonsensical. Unless, once a tree wins, it's disqualified for the next half-century? But then you're basically ma

Seriously, "tree of the year" is conceptually nonsensical. Unless, once a tree wins, it's disqualified for the next half-century? But then you're basically making a ranked list of the top 50 trees and then approximately repeating it. I dunno. Maybe restrict it to one of thirty or forty subcategories of trees each year?

haugf 2y ago
this is a good take, i think we should just let it be the tree of the year every year that it earns it though.
vasco 2y ago
We could find better looking trees every year. We don't currently have pictures of every single tree on earth to judge like that.