Judge evaluation

[Mike Hester]

Yes, of course it was what he intended. If you don't make the nats, you're 
scum and don't deserve a higher ranking. But maybe we can have a rank for 
the crotchety old guys that sit around, never compete and make all the 
rules?

For the comedically challenged: I'm kidding, I only post for Lamar's 
entertainment anyway =)

-Mike

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Del Rykert" <drykert at localnet.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: Judge evaluation


>I fly I see your in ointment is for those that don't make the Nats although 
>flying for years and very qualified and experienced are going to be in the 
>lower group.  Is that what you intended?
>
>                             del
>               NSRCA - 473
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jeff H. Snider" <jeff at snider.com>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Judge evaluation
>
>
>> Several kinds of judging problems have been raised here in the past
>> day.  I have too many thoughts on the various subjects to usefully
>> put in one message, and I've been unduly prolix this week, so I'll
>> limit myself as much as possible.
>>
>> In my opinion, we have (or really ought) to have some method of
>> ranking judges.  Two solutions present themselves to my overactive
>> mind, one computational and one personal.
>>
>>
>
>
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
> 


=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.