RE: Mock Judging results

[Erik Olson <erik@thekrib.com>]

On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Ken Guin wrote:

> Ken writes: I agree with Erik that "pre-screening" or fake entries should
> not be a big problem.

Yes, this is my point; I think we're getting carried away here again with
the check boxes and the judging vs. pre-judging, etc.

> However I still think it is important that an entry
> NOT be eliminated just on the basis that one or more judges or even
> "pre-screeners" THINK_ the entry is fake. A simple phone call to the entrant
> asking some simple questions would clear the matter up. 

Yes, agreed.  To use the fish contest analogy again, when someone's
disqualified there, they get a chance to explain.  And since the judging
here is not in real time, I think it would be reasonable to e-mail or
phone this person.

On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, James Purchase wrote:

> I hope both you and your wife are right on this one. I'm willing to go along
> with people who have more experience in judging of aquariums on this one (I
> have none), but what happens when we state up front in the Submission
> Guidelines that images altered in ways other than Contrast, Brightness, Tone
> and Sharpness are ineligable, and then some Judge ignores our request that
> faked images not be scored (the Judge might miss the fact, depending upon
> how good the Photoshop work was done) and gives a score to an image which
> turns out to be fake??? Will that fake image and the score it received be
> included on the Web-site and CD-ROM in contradiction to our statement in the
> Submission Guidelines?

All that is needed is for one judge to figure out it's a fake, and
disqualify it.  Who cares what the "score" is... it's disqualified.

Sorry, but I beleive the issue was unduly pushed by the inclusion of the
faked image in the mock contest.  In usability tests at work, we usually
consider that a leading question or scenario, designed to promote some
feature that the particular developer wants in the product.

If we can't trust the judges to do their jobs, we shouldn't be using those
judges.  If we are so paranoid about "looking like fools" that we have to
pre-judge the entries, then we should be judging them as well.  *I* think
the judges will do a fine job at figuring this stuff out.  I don't think
we'll be getting a batch of very clever fakes.  Yes, I'd certainly be
e-mailing or phoning someone if they sent me something suspect, and I'd
certainly want to pass any unusual notes on to the judges where
appropriate.  I do not beleive we need to have a checkbox that says
"possible faked entry".

OK, that's the last from me on this issue.  Too many words to just say
"let's not worry about this."

  - Erik

-- 
Erik Olson
erik at thekrib dot com


  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@aquatic-gardeners.org
  with "unsubscribe aga-contest" in the body of the message.
  To subscribe to the digest version, add "subscribe aga-contest-digest"
  in the same message.
  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-contest