[NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge transparency

[Dean Pappas]

Hi Lance, Hi All,
Like Derek says, "made public" means by judge number and individual maneuver score. 
As it turns out, this amounts to anonymity, but only a very little effort will crack the code.
Really, it takes that little effort! Just look for the "regular" judges who were declined by the contest 
management at the last Worlds.  Everyone knew who handed out the famous zeroes in the Finals the Worlds before last.
 
The scores postings at the Swiss E.C. were in compliance with the rules draft up for vote now. 
It was a nice touch to post them on the web too.
It sure is a good thing. Here's a homework project for the ambitious among you: come up with a 
system for evaluatingf judges for bias and overall job quality. There's a whole pile or "real" raw data!
 
What's interesting is that the new draft proposals in FAI, right now, improve other things, too. 
The new draft says that the Team Managers must be given the opportunity to inspect that same 
by maneuver and by judge number  and given an opportunity to challenge bad tabulations. 
(arithmetic errors and score sheet to computer record transcription errors only)
The new draft says that the score board must be in plain view near the flight line, 
and both competitors and spectators must have access.
The new draft also loosely defines the format of the scoreboard: it must not be possible 
for a judge to casually walk by and see the rankings as of that round.
The piolts may be arranged in a varietey of ways on the scoreboard (alphabetic, by country etc) 
but never by ranking in the contest.
 
On the other hand, the book uses the word must instead of shall everywhere in this section of the draft.
Maybe that doesn't really make a difference, but shall says that the contest does not go on without compliance, 
and must suggests that there is some flexibility for extraordinary situations. Probably doesn't matter.
 
later,
Dean
 
Dean Pappas 
Sr. Design Engineer 
Kodeos Communications 
111 Corporate Blvd. 
South Plainfield, N.J. 07080 
(908) 222-7817 phone 
(908) 222-2392 fax 
d.pappas at kodeos.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:28 PM
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge transparency


It is my understanding that the scores be made public but that no assocation with judges will be made.

  _____  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Lance Van Nostrand
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 5:17 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge transparency


To all rule-meisters,
 
I know there are some on this list that have deep insight into the intent and history of the F3A sporting code.  I hope to either get a solid answer or pointed in the right direction.  This is not an idle request.
 
Part 5.1.8 Marking - last sentence 
The scores given by each judge for each competitor shall be made public at the end of each round of competition.

What level of transparency is mandated?  Is it enough to report the scores from judge 1-4 or is it expected that the identity of the judge be known as well?

--Lance

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20061120/09a91326/attachment.html