[NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging

Ken Thompson mrandmrst at comcast.net
Fri Nov 24 06:12:06 AKST 2006 

Oh yeah!!!  I'm gonna' love D6!!!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at comcast.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging


> Alright.  I'll agree for now.  But there is a string attached. The next
> contest where you are in a near tie, and you fly a round you are proud of,
> and subsequently fall behind by 100 points you remember this.  Instead of
> bending our ears off on speculation about your flying, the halo for the
> other guy, and judging in general, you must now recite your mantra, "It's 
> a
> good system and working fine."
>
> --Lance
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Keith Black" <tkeithblack at gmail.com>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:51 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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