[NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
george w. kennie
geobet at gis.net
Thu Nov 23 12:31:09 AKST 2006
And probably not in need of repair................eh?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Black" <tkeithblack at gmail.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
> If I may be so bold as to summarize what I'm hearing from the opinions
> I've
> read, including mine (with exception of Lance possibly... not sure).
>
> Keep doing exactly what we're doing at both the local level and NATS
> level.
> It's a good system and working fine.
>
> Keith Black
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <jivey61 at bellsouth.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 9:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
>
>
>> I'm not Jim W either,but I would like to say about this hobby.... the
>> judge.. flyer relationship is the result of many hours of studying and
>> practice.Locally we know who we fly in front of and how they judge.Some
> are
>> tighter judges than others and we know this.We accept this.We are
> fortunate
>> in the southeast to have some very good high status flyers that judge and
>> give their opinions on various aspects of this hobby.They act like normal
>> people and don't think they are better than anyone else. Jason is one of
>> them and when he speaks I listen like a sponge........ I tried to sneak
>> the humpty 3/4 roll down(did a 1/4 roll down) three times and he drew a
>> circle 3 times,because a circle is easy to draw.hehe. I knew I did it
>> when
>> it happened. All this told me... that I needed to concentrate on what I
> was
>> doing and he was telling me this in his score. It got to be our joke
> between
>> us. The moral of all this is read your raw scores and learn from them .
>> They were given for a reason and you are the beneficiary.
>> If you have judges on the local level that will talk to you after the
> flight
>> ask them, what they saw, and why they did what they did. If they can
>> remember they will tell you. This is especially needed in the lower
> levels.
>> When I started... the only coaching or input I got was at the contests I
>> went to and that is the hard way to learn.
>> The business of defensive judging and initials on scoresheets on the
>> local
>> level is mute.We know who we fly in front of. At the Nats as RVP stated
> the
>> initials are used for other identity reasons and are necessary.
>> I won't go into my Nats judging experiences here.
>>
>> Jim Ivey
>>
>> Jim Ivey
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "JShulman" <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 10:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
>>
>>
>> > I'm not JimW, but I know there have been a few contests where we figure
>> out
>> > what judges gave what scores, if we don't already know who did. I'm
>> > open
>> to
>> > telling anyone what judge I am. Ask Jim Ivey if I'm afraid to give a
>> > zero...lol. Doesn't seem to be an issue here, that I've seen...
>> >
>> > One thing that I am glad to see here in D3 is that if there is an
>> > issue,
>> > then we will spend some time and figure out how to correct it. At
>> > Andersonville we discussed snaps and how they should be done after
>> > there
>> was
>> > some "discussion" about what looks right and what looks wrong.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Jason
>> > www.jasonshulman.com
>> > www.shulmanaviation.com
>> > www.composite-arf.com
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Lance Van
>> > Nostrand
>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 10:23 PM
>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
>> >
>> >
>> > Keith,
>> > This is a fun hobby. I submit that if you are afraid to give an
> accurate
>> > score that you witnessed then you are doing a disservice. At a local
>> > contest you are kidding yourself if you think you have any anonymity.
>> > Instead of pretending its there, some cool discussion will raise the
> level
>> > of pilot and judge. One big difference between a local and Nats is
>> > that
>> at
>> > a local its highly likely that we will fly in front of the same person
>> that
>> > we'll later judge. If there were some kind of inappropriate judging
> going
>> > on, this is a natural damper. Since this damper is not in place at the
>> > Nats, that might change the checks and balances.
>> >
>> > I don't see anyone joining this discussion. Even JimW has not
> responded.
>> I
>> > think we are in "no man's land". Thanks for responding.
>> >
>> > --Lance
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Keith Black" <tkeithblack at gmail.com>
>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 10:22 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
>> >
>> >
>> > > Lance, you make some very good points. For me this is a tough issue
> with
>> > > two
>> > > very strong arguments on opposite sides.
>> > >
>> > > Simply put:
>> > >
>> > > Pro> If judges initials score sheets they'll be more conscientious
>> about
>> > > their judging and less incline to gouge someone they don't like.
>> > >
>> > > Con> If judges initial score sheets they may be hesitant to give
>> deserved
>> > > low scores to big name pilots and may fear retribution when they fly.
>> > >
>> > > I think the Con is probably the more persuasive of these two points,
> at
>> > > least at the NATS level, because when judges are required to put
>> > > their
>> > > judge
>> > > number they still know they're accountable, but will be comfortable
>> giving
>> > > deserved low scores without fear of retribution. Also, at NATS if
>> > > you
>> see
>> > > Joe Blow's name by some really low scores you receive and you don't
> know
>> > > Joe
>> > > Blow human nature is to develop a bit of a grudge against Joe Blow.
>> > > We
>> > > don't
>> > > need this kind of ill will in our community. I for one tried not to
> pay
>> > > attention to who was in the judges' chair at NATS because I didn't
> want
>> to
>> > > subconsciously start associating my scores with individuals.
>> > >
>> > > At the local contest most people know each other and feel more
>> comfortable
>> > > discussing things so this is a different story. I initial my scores
>> > > at
>> > > local
>> > > contests (when I remember). However, if a judge feels uncomfortable
> that
>> > > Joe
>> > > Bigshot may grill them if they give a low score I don't think the
> judge
>> > > should have to give his initials as long as a judge number is used.
>> > >
>> > > Keith
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at comcast.net>
>> > > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > > Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 8:22 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> Del,
>> > >> This is unfortunate and I've had a similar experience. Still,
>> arranging
>> > > our
>> > >> rules to avoid behavior that we all know is inappropriate is a
>> > >> disservice.
>> > >> I would propose that anyone motivated to discuss CHANGING a score
>> should
>> > > go
>> > >> through the CD. But there are other valid motivations:
>> > >> 1. To learn what downgrades, either specifically or in general
>> > >> terms,
>> > >> were
>> > >> applied
>> > >> 2. to understand a judges perspective and what they consider very
>> > > important
>> > >> (weight heavily)
>> > >> 3. others...
>> > >>
>> > >> This is not to question a score but to both learn what the pilot can
> do
>> > >> to
>> > >> improve and (of equal importance) to learn how other judges approach
>> the
>> > >> evaluation. One thing I've noticed is that the "judgement" part of
>> > > judging
>> > >> can influence scores and these flying defects are often just as
>> > > controllable
>> > >> as the hard and fast rules. I recently was downgraded by a judge,
> whom
>> I
>> > >> had a very friendly conversation with, because my center manuvers
> were
>> > >> not
>> > >> at the same altitude. Many may say that this should not have been
>> > >> downgraded, but this judges point was that the pilot that controls
> the
>> > >> altitude better should get the better score. Don't flame on this
> rules
>> > >> point! My point is that knowing that this is a perspective of some
>> > > judges,
>> > >> and it is a thing that I can work on without disadvantaging myself
> was
>> > > very
>> > >> valuable information.
>> > >>
>> > >> We need to remember this is a fun hobby. If we are not disputing a
>> > >> score,
>> > >> we need to approach judge feedback with modesty and a sense of
>> > >> humor.
>> It
>> > > is
>> > >> a time of gathering information, not of making a counterpoint. Many
>> > >> times
>> > > a
>> > >> judge just can't remember, but I'm sure that they will remember more
> if
>> > > they
>> > >> know there will be no negative counterpoint. I would like to see
> judge
>> > >> initials on the bottom of the score sheets, given these guidelines.
>> > >>
>> > >> --Lance
>> > >>
>> > >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > >> From: "Del K. Rykert" <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
>> > >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 1:31 PM
>> > >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> >I still remember the confrontation I experienced by the father of a
>> > >> >local
>> > >> > competitor taking me to task on a maneuver that I gigged harshly
> and
>> > >> > the
>> > >> > ensuing 30 minute debate with my finally pulling out my rule book
> and
>> > >> > showing him the paragraph and specific reasons his son received
>> > >> > the
>> > >> > downgrades. Course he didn't agree the wings weren't level and the
>> > >> > model
>> > >> > had
>> > >> > noticeable climb when it should have been minor or no climb before
>> > >> > entry
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > spin. Wind was down the runway. Airplane fell out of spin in last
> 1/4
>> > >> > of
>> > >> > spin into spiral.
>> > >> > Yes I could have reported this to the CD and made a bad
> situation
>> > >> > worse.
>> > >> > How does that encourage participation in the sport? It did ruin
> the
>> > > rest
>> > >> > of
>> > >> > my flights as a contestant and left me with taste of why do I want
> to
>> > >> > subject myself to this kind of abuse.
>> > >> > Some in the sport are wound to tightly and will use any excuse
> to
>> > >> > try
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > increase their edge. Thankfully it is the smallest of minorities
> but
>> > >> > it
>> > >> > does still exist. For this reason I always have my rule book handy
>> > >> > whenever
>> > >> > I go to a contest and might be asked to judge. Shame the sport has
>> been
>> > >> > reduced for some of us as defensive judging.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Del
>> > >> > nsrca - 473
>> > >> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > >> > From: "george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net>
>> > >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> > Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:57 PM
>> > >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge
>> transparency
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >> In spite of the fact that when I sit in the chair I ALWAYS
>> > >> >> initial
>> the
>> > >> >> score
>> > >> >> sheet at district events, I can state from experience that it's
>> > > probably
>> > >> >> not
>> > >> >> a good idea and I feel that the reason it's probably not done at
> the
>> > > Nats
>> > >> >> is
>> > >> >> due to a "been there, done that" previous learning experience.
>> > >> >> There is just too much competitive passion on the part of
> individual
>> > >> >> pilots
>> > >> >> to avoid personal conflicts escalating into personality wars with
>> long
>> > >> >> lasting repercussions.
>> > >> >> Think about it,.........how many times have you heard it
>> > >> >> expressed
>> > >> >> that
>> > > a
>> > >> >> particular judge has a reputation as a tough or BAD judge?
>> > >> >> Too much knowledge can generate factional devisiveness which is
>> > > probably
>> > >> >> best avoided.
>> > >> >> G.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > >> >> From: "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
>> > >> >> To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> >> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 9:07 AM
>> > >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge
>> > >> >> transparency
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>> Hi Jim,
>> > >> >>> Good points. There is an easy way to start this. Every time you
>> judge
>> > >> >>> legibly sign or initial your score sheets.
>> > >> >>> To the conspirists, remember when questioning judges a little
>> respect
>> > >> >>> and
>> > >> >>> courtesy goes a long way.
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> Anthony
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>>From: "Jim Woodward" <jim.woodward at schroth.com>
>> > >> >>>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> >>>>To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge
>> > > transparency
>> > >> >>>>Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:09:31 -0500
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>I think posting judges names along with the scores is more than
>> > >> >>>>a
>> > >> >>>>fair
>> > >> >>>>idea
>> > >> >>>>and goes a long way toward increasing the transparency at a
>> contest.
>> > >> >>>>When
>> > >> >>>>you increase the transparency, the "pilots" have a better
>> > > understanding
>> > >> >>>>and
>> > >> >>>>good time. When the pilots are happy, they come back to the
>> contests
>> > >> >>>>and
>> > >> >>>>maybe bring someone with them. If you notice, after a contest
> when
>> > > our
>> > >> >>>>friend who did not makes it calls and asks, ". how was the
>> contest,"
>> > > the
>> > >> >>>>next question is ". how was the judging." Judging, or problems
>> with
>> > >> >>>>judging, is such an intrinsic part of the pattern experience
>> > >> >>>>that
>> you
>> > >> >>>>can't
>> > >> >>>>separate it from the "description" of how the contest went.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>1. What is interesting is that the "flight" takes place in a
> public
>> > >> >>>>forum - anyone can see it. As we watch it, more often or not it
> is
>> > >> >>>>watched
>> > >> >>>>in small groups which include fellow class-competitors, or more
>> > >> >>>>experienced
>> > >> >>>>pilots pointing out to younger pilots errors to look out for.
>> > >> >>>>2. The judges for the round are public information. IE - you
>> > >> >>>>can
>> > >> >>>>look
>> > >> >>>>out on the flight line and see who is judging
>> > >> >>>>3. The pilot for the round is public information. IE - you can
>> look
>> > >> >>>>out on the flight line and see who is flying.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Yet, "who" and "how" the scores were given remains a small
> mystery.
>> > >> >>>>A
>> > >> >>>>lot
>> > >> >>>>of folks do not want to be known as the guy who goes to the CD
> and
>> > > asks
>> > >> >>>>questions about the scoring and such. Or, is seen by their
> fellow
>> > >> >>>>competitors as being the CD hound.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Judge Training: Most judge training takes place in practice and
> at
>> > >> >>>>contests. There is no better forum for judge training than the
>> > > contest
>> > >> >>>>environment. When the tear sheets are posted for each round
>> > >> >>>>with
>> > > judge
>> > >> >>>>identification, you can go and ask ". I watched that and
>> > >> >>>>wondered
>> why
>> > >> >>>>you
>> > >> >>>>gave it xyz score." This is an incredibly valuable moment when
> all
>> > >> >>>>of
>> > >> >>>>us
>> > >> >>>>are gathered we do more to get the most out of it. As it
>> > >> >>>>stands,
>> > > after
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>round is posted the next comment is, ". well, I guess the judges
>> > > didn't
>> > >> >>>>catch that zero.. (and similar comments)." These conversations
> are
>> > >> >>>>already
>> > >> >>>>taking place at the contest. Posting the tear sheets for
> everyone
>> > > would
>> > >> >>>>bring these conversations into the open as a positive element of
>> the
>> > >> >>>>experience, and not add to the conspiracy theorists ammunition
>> (every
>> > >> >>>>district has a prime person/competitor who is a judging
> conspiracy
>> > >> >>>>theorists).
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Last thing, there are two judges for every 1 pilot, thus, there
> is
>> > > 100%
>> > >> >>>>more
>> > >> >>>>judging work taking place than piloting work. We are there to
> fly,
>> > > but
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>performance of the judges is every bit on display as the
>> performance
>> > > of
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>pilot. In the US we also tally the judges performance and keep
>> track
>> > > of
>> > >> >>>>them on the national scene. Posting the tear sheets with judges
>> > >> >>>>names
>> > >> >>>>would
>> > >> >>>>help this effort, allow for a GREAT training tool to be
>> > >> >>>>available
>> to
>> > > the
>> > >> >>>>CD
>> > >> >>>>and fellow pilots, and become a "self-correcting-tool" to those
>> > > persons
>> > >> >>>>who
>> > >> >>>>to judge with bias (intentionally or not). As a judge, at the
> end
>> of
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>round it would be great to know how my scores compared to the
> other
>> > >> >>>>judge.
>> > >> >>>>Each judge could discuss the round. When the tear sheets are
>> posted
>> > > in
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>open, it will "promote" this conversation and I believe, help on
>> many
>> > >> >>>>levels. Also, if you as a judge know the scores and names will
> be
>> > >> >>>>posted
>> > >> >>>>after a round, I bet a lot of judge-lazy behavior will go away,
>> like
>> > >> >>>>when
>> > >> >>>>they/we have our head down and write scores, thus missing 30% or
>> more
>> > > of
>> > >> >>>>maneuvers.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Just some ideas.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Jim W.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> _____
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >>>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
>> Wayne
>> > >> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 11:37 PM
>> > >> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> > >> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge
>> > > transparency
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Fred,
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>my point is post them...not leave loose tear sheets on a table
> for
>> > >> >>>>pilots
>> > >> >>>>to
>> > >> >>>>take away from the table. This has been the practice at the
>> > >> >>>>NATS.
>> > >> >>>>They
>> > >> >>>>need
>> > >> >>>>to be posted in some way. Not just tossed as loose sheets for
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>wind
>> > >> >>>>and
>> > >> >>>>pilots to remove from the public view
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>That is all my point was. I had a conversation with an FAI pilot
>> back
>> > >> >>>>after
>> > >> >>>>the NATS and he has been advocating this the past 3 years yet
> still
>> > > not
>> > >> >>>>happening.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>----- Original Message -----
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>From: Fred Huber <mailto:fhhuber at clearwire.net>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:13 PM
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge
>> > > transparency
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>To me, "public" can be debated somewhat....
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Its probably adequate to post them on a table where anyone WHO
>> WANTS
>> > > TO
>> > >> >>>>can
>> > >> >>>>see them.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>All the Pattern contests I have been to, the scores have been
> taped
>> > >> >>>>to
>> > > a
>> > >> >>>>table where anyone who wanted to look had access. Good enough.
>> > >> >>>>Don't
>> > >> >>>>make
>> > >> >>>>it harder than it has to be.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>----- Original Message -----
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>From: Wayne <mailto:Whinkle1024 at msn.com>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:21 PM
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge
>> > > transparency
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Public is not left on a table....Public is posted for the world
> to
>> > > see.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>check out the awesome job done by the Swiss at the last Euro
>> Champs.
>> > > Too
>> > >> >>>>bad
>> > >> >>>>we in the USA with more pattern flyers than anywhere else can't
> get
>> > > with
>> > >> >>>>the
>> > >> >>>>program.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>http://www.em06.ch/ranking_preliminary.asp
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Wayne
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>----- Original Message -----
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>From: Lance Van <mailto:patterndude at comcast.net> Nostrand
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 6:17 PM
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>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
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> _____
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>_______________________________________________
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> _____
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>_______________________________________________
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> _____
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>> > >> >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> > >> >>>>Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.7/537 - Release Date:
>> > >> >>>>11/17/2006
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> _____
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>_______________________________________________
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>>_______________________________________________
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> >>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> _________________________________________________________________
>> > >> >>> Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN
> Radio
>> > >> >>> powered
>> > >> >>> by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> > >> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> >>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> >> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >
>> > >> > _______________________________________________
>> > >> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >>
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > >> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> >
>> > --
>> > No virus found in this incoming message.
>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.11/543 - Release Date:
>> 11/20/2006
>> >
>> > --
>> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.11/543 - Release Date:
>> 11/20/2006
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list