Re: Judging
- To: Multiple recipients of list <i*@rt66.com>
- Subject: Re: Judging
- From: "* G* C* <j*@erols.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:22:25 -0600 (MDT)
Steve Szabo wrote:
>
> I am a judge. I am a certified judge of fish. The kind you keep in
> aquariums. . . we do follow a set of guidelines to determine the quality of the
> fish. . .
Steve -- I think your analogy is an excellent one. The principles are
quite the same. However, you have also mentioned a very interesting idea
that just might lend some support to Ian's thinking, i.e., the "People's
Choice Award":
>
> Now, when you have the public judging, and many shows have a People's
> Choice Award of one sort or another, where the public votes for its
> favorite entry, is a whole different ball of wax. The full brunt of
> prejudice comes into play, and one cannot predict what the public may
> find enticing on any given day or weekend. Seldom does the public
> choose a fish that the judges thought was worthwhile. To use the public
> reaction to determine how something should be judged is not a very wise
> decision. The public is fickle. What they like one day is not
> necessarily liked the next. There is no consitency (sp?) in their
> judgement.
Having a "People's Choice" vote at shows just might be very instructive
for irisarians. The public, unaware of the criteria used quite
legitimately by the judges, might give us some valuable information
simply by informing us, through their choices (1st, 2d and 3d, perhaps?)
of what they like, PARTICULARLY if it differs from the judges'
selections. Fads, after all, usually begin with the aficionados, rather
than with the "great unwashed". I will suggest that the public be given
the opportunity to vote at our next C&P Iris Society show. Thanks for
contributing the idea, Steve, even if you may not agree with the
outcome.
Griff Crump, along the tidal Potomac near Mount Vernon, VA
jgcrump@erols.com
