IC, VC, e6, JYW competetors and judges

[jdizzlean]

It seems like a lot of these build competitions all have the same thing in common. 10-15 chefs and no judges. Reveals go weeks w/o anyone coming forward to score them.

Yes everyone has a life, and things take time, and sometimes just getting 1 build done in time to submit is a colossal undertaking. However, in the interest of keeping things going, if everyone that does partake could decide ahead of time to just judge a round instead of build for a round, all these things would run much smoother. Plus, for all the folks on the fence about doing either, you learn a lot about the game doing either building or judging as well.

I pretty much judge for 100% of the e6's, but i think a break now and then would be nice, and would shake things up a bit so the chef's aren't just cooking to my tastes.

I also writhe in agony waiting for someone to judge VC and JYW's, sometimes for a month, or more, after the reveal.

And I flip flop on IC as to whether i'm inspired to cook or not as the determining factor of whether I'm judging it as well.

So there's my not so eloquent call for assistance from everyone to step up and do a little extra work now and then for the betterment of the community.

xoxo

[DeTess]

I think the main issue with the lack of judges is that most of the people interested will be competitors, and therefore banned from judging. In the case of the e6 competition I judge when I don't compete but that's less than half of the comps.

I will be judging the most recent one as hexblade just didn't work out for me.

[Darrin]

I hear you. I would be pitching in to help judge, but I keep jumping in as a competitor.

I haven't had any spark of inspiration for Hexblade, so you can pencil me in to judge E6.

VC I don't follow as much (and thus very rarely compete), but you could try PMing me if you're in desperate need of a VC judge.

[Telonius]

Not sure how it is in the other competitions, but VC's "protest the judge's rulings" round had gotten pretty bad a few competitions ago. I think it may have turned people off from judging. As the competitions get more popular, too, it's much more of a time and energy drain to sit down and sift through 10 builds (as opposed to 5 or 6), only to have to defend each of the rulings in excruciating detail. We also had some unfortunate cases of competitors actively disrupting the whole process (suspected fake accounts, etc etc). The last couple rounds have gotten a lot better, or at least more civil, but I think it left a bad taste in some people's mouths.

[daremetoidareyo]

I don't think that it's really a big deal. When I have time, I volunteer to judge. I tend to hold myself to a standard of one judging per 5 entries...ish. But judging can suck. It's real volunteer work.

The reality is that when there are 7 or more entries to a competition, judges become scarce. Partially because there is such a huge demand for in-depth discussion of builds and then multiple rounds of disputes. Early judges didn't have to justify every thought with a master's thesis. The had the luxurious option of simply disliking a build and scoring it low without having to psychoanalyze every facet of what they've committed to paper. If you use fewer words in your judgment, the disputes will try to pry a few more hundred words of explanation under an expectation of being able to further dispute the elaboration. That gets exhausting, especially if there are a huge number of entries, or heaven forbid, one or more chefs uses the dispute system to supplant a medal winning spot.

I suspect that waiting for judges can be a pain, but it's how the system has continued to work for years. But the economy of impatience is what coerces people to judge at all. Try waiting a few weeks before jumping in as a volunteer judge.

[jdizzlean]

i have been tempted to say "because" on more than one occasion, i'm not going to lie...

[MinimanMidget]

As someone who's been reading these for a long time, but only entered once, this is pretty guilt-provoking. On the other hand, I'm just not qualified to judge competitions at this level.

[daremetoidareyo]

As someone who's been reading these for a long time, but only entered once, this is pretty guilt-provoking. On the other hand, I'm just not qualified to judge competitions at this level.

I didn't judge till I entered 3 or 4 times in the board. Don't feel bad. Judging actually catches you up to speed faster than building for a round does.

[DeTess]

As someone who's been reading these for a long time, but only entered once, this is pretty guilt-provoking. On the other hand, I'm just not qualified to judge competitions at this level.

I didn't exactly think myself qualified either when I judged the e6 ninja comp. It worked out fine though (I think, at any rate). As long as you judge fairly, and are willing to correct honest mistakes, you'll do fine.

[daremetoidareyo]

I didn't exactly think myself qualified either when I judged the e6 ninja comp. It worked out fine though (I think, at any rate). As long as you judge fairly, and are willing to correct honest mistakes, you'll do fine.

You did great

[Doctor Awkward]

I am generally interested in all of the competitions.

My biggest issue is that my first attempt at judging a competition (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?507768-Villainous-Competition-XVII-It-s-Alive!&p=21555069#post21555069) was... not well recieved. And when I weighed the response it garnered against the fact that it took me two solid weeks to judge those builds, it's really left me unmotivated to repeat the attempt for any future competitions.

[daremetoidareyo]

I am generally interested in all of the competitions.

My biggest issue is that my first attempt at judging a competition (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?507768-Villainous-Competition-XVII-It-s-Alive!&p=21555069#post21555069) was... not well recieved. And when I weighed the response it garnered against the fact that it took me two solid weeks to judge those builds, it's really left me unmotivated to repeat the attempt for any future competitions.

That sucks. I thought you rocked it. I submitted some wild stuff that round and you took it like a champ, and oh my garsh, you were so flipping thorough.

[Long_shanks]

I didn't exactly think myself qualified either when I judged the e6 ninja comp. It worked out fine though (I think, at any rate). As long as you judge fairly, and are willing to correct honest mistakes, you'll do fine.

Also, judging in E6 will be a lot easier than in one of the 20-level comps. I mean, I've only entered E6 competitions so far, because my system mastery is still pretty poor.
My point : E6 is a pretty good stepping stone, either to enter or to get your feet wet as a judge. Work permitting, I plan to judge the next E6 comp I won't enter. Don't know when that'll be though ;)

[MinimanMidget]

Also, judging in E6 will be a lot easier than in one of the 20-level comps. I mean, I've only entered E6 competitions so far, because my system mastery is still pretty poor.
My point : E6 is a pretty good stepping stone, either to enter or to get your feet wet as a judge. Work permitting, I plan to judge the next E6 comp I won't enter. Don't know when that'll be though ;)

I was actually planning to have a go at judging the current one, since Hexblade completely failed to inspire me. That said, I suspect there'll be plenty of us in the same boat, because Hexblade is just so terrible.

[The Viscount]

I am generally interested in all of the competitions.

My biggest issue is that my first attempt at judging a competition (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?507768-Villainous-Competition-XVII-It-s-Alive!&p=21555069#post21555069) was... not well recieved. And when I weighed the response it garnered against the fact that it took me two solid weeks to judge those builds, it's really left me unmotivated to repeat the attempt for any future competitions.

I'm really sorry that some people didn't respond well to your judgings, and I feel partially responsible for that (I was the chef for Nick, Cage of Beasts, and I wanted you to know there were absolutely no hard feelings about your scores on my end). Your efforts really showed, and I greatly appreciated the thoroughness of your judgings, and I would be glad to see you again as a judge. Tensions were running rather high in that time in VC, and I'd like to think things have cooled down somewhat since.

[Thurbane]

I have judged on occasion, but between RL commitments and DM prep work, my time is very limited.

I'm happy to pitch in where I can, but I can't promise anything.

[Zaq]

Just for what it's worth, disputes are apparently inevitable. I routinely spend around 2,000 bloody words (or more) on each entry, and disputes still come up. It happens. We spend forever making these things, and the urge to defend one's baby from those judges who just can't see its brilliance is pretty dang strong.

I do kind of feel like perhaps the group as a whole disputes a little too much, though. There are times when it feels like we (collective "we") dispute just for the sake of it rather than because we believe that the judge in question actually misunderstood something about the dish. I'm not innocent here either. I don't think there's a way we can put in rules to prevent this (short of banning disputes entirely, which seems like a disaster in the making to me), but I wouldn't mind seeing a collective paradigm shift from "most judgments should be disputed" to "only judgments that fundamentally misinterpret the dish should be disputed."

[Nifft]

Just for what it's worth, disputes are apparently inevitable. I routinely spend around 2,000 bloody words (or more) on each entry, and disputes still come up. It happens. We spend forever making these things, and the urge to defend one's baby from those judges who just can't see its brilliance is pretty dang strong.

I do kind of feel like perhaps the group as a whole disputes a little too much, though. There are times when it feels like we (collective "we") dispute just for the sake of it rather than because we believe that the judge in question actually misunderstood something about the dish. I'm not innocent here either. I don't think there's a way we can put in rules to prevent this (short of banning disputes entirely, which seems like a disaster in the making to me), but I wouldn't mind seeing a collective paradigm shift from "most judgments should be disputed" to "only judgments that fundamentally misinterpret the dish should be disputed."

If disputes are rewarded by judges, then eventually disputing itself will become seen as part of the cost of doing business. If you don't dispute a judgment, you're not doing your best as a contestant.

As disputing judgments becomes the normal thing to do, it becomes less and less fun to be a judge.

It sounds like that's where we are right now.

Is that accurate?

[Telonius]

Not to "out" myself for future competitions, but I think I've only ever sent in a dispute once (when the judge accidentally missed something that was in the build). Personally I just take the competition as a fun thing to do, and hope that some other DMs out there can take the villain and run with it. Winning is certainly nice, but having fun putting it together is really the main point for me.

[Darrin]

As disputing judgments becomes the normal thing to do, it becomes less and less fun to be a judge.

It sounds like that's where we are right now.

Is that accurate?

It could be argued that the Dispute process has become a mini-game where if you raise a fuss or cause a judge to second-guess themselves (perhaps playing on the judge's insecurity or sense of fairness), you can scrape up another +0.5 or +1.25 and maybe bump yourself up a rank or two. And while that may not necessarily be fair in and of itself, in the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure that it can be easily separated from a judge making a factual error or misunderstanding a rule that's being interpreted unfairly. I've tried to think about solutions for making the dispute process easier or quicker to resolve, but there are very few solutions that aren't worse than the original problem.

Speaking only for myself, I only send in a dispute in three cases:

1) The judge made a factual error or came to a conclusion that can be factually and clearly refuted by the rules text.

2) The judge is applying a rubric or a systemic bias that is not being applied fairly to all entries.

3) The judge explicitly asks for clarification.

All other disputes basically boil down to some variation of: My *opinion* of the rules is different from the judge's *opinion* of the rules. If that's the basis for my dispute, then I try *VERY HARD* not to submit that as a dispute. I try to take my lumps and let the scores fall where they are. It doesn't always work out that way, because I can be very opinionated and I enjoy explaining my opinions to others. But that's my criteria for submitting a dispute: if we're just arguing opinions, then don't send it.

[Falontani]

I'll be honest. I am terrible. Every time I have disputed, it has been with Jdizzlean (I'm sorry!) And I know that I have essentially been judging the judge. It is bad and I'm trying to back off from it.

[jdizzlean]

I'll be honest. I am terrible. Every time I have disputed, it has been with Jdizzlean (I'm sorry!) And I know that I have essentially been judging the judge. It is bad and I'm trying to back off from it.

no apologies necessary. Like Darrin said tho, try to make it for a reason, not just to grade grub :)

[Nifft]

It could be argued that the Dispute process has become a mini-game where if you raise a fuss or cause a judge to second-guess themselves (perhaps playing on the judge's insecurity or sense of fairness), you can scrape up another +0.5 or +1.25 and maybe bump yourself up a rank or two. And while that may not necessarily be fair in and of itself, in the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure that it can be easily separated from a judge making a factual error or misunderstanding a rule that's being interpreted unfairly. I've tried to think about solutions for making the dispute process easier or quicker to resolve, but there are very few solutions that aren't worse than the original problem. Got it, and it sounds like it was what I had expected.

There is a solution though.

Judges should discuss problems that will reduce the score immediately, but not post any scores until all issues are resolved.

Basically, inject a stage of consensus building before it's possible to game the numbers.

This also helps in your case specifically -- the part about legit rules issues will be easy to separate from matters of opinion regarding value, so the sorts of things you prefer to dispute will be easier to discus, and the parts you try to avoid disputing will be easier to avoid.

[Troacctid]

That just sounds like extra work and more delays. Especially since inconsistent scores between contestants are a common source of disputes.

Personally, I don't worry if people dispute my judging. Answering disputes is like the easiest part of judging, IMO. I'm more concerned that the process takes like six hours of my life that I could have spent prepping an adventure, or playing one, not to mention doing homework, or work-work that I get paid for, etc. If you want to pay me to judge so I can justify the opportunity cost, I'd happily step in.

[Deadline]

For what it's worth, the reason I'm not judging right now is the same reason I'm not competing. Remarkably little free time. :smallfrown:

[Selene Sparks]

So there's my not so eloquent call for assistance from everyone to step up and do a little extra work now and then for the betterment of the community.Alright. Not normally my thing, but things like the Iron Chef are important enough that I'm willing to help out, at the very least for the Iron Chef(Or, I suppose, the Villain competition if it needs more judges more, but that's not my usual style), and may be able to jump in on others if there's a desperate need. How do I sign up?

[daremetoidareyo]

Alright. Not normally my thing, but things like the Iron Chef are important enough that I'm willing to help out, at the very least for the Iron Chef(Or, I suppose, the Villain competition if it needs more judges more, but that's not my usual style), and may be able to jump in on others if there's a desperate need. How do I sign up?

Just go to the most recent competition that you are interested in judging and volunteer! The best way to get good at it is to just do it.

[Nifft]

That just sounds like extra work and more delays. Especially since inconsistent scores between contestants are a common source of disputes. Nope. It's the same work, and the same delays. It's just that the structure puts the dispute before the numbers, rather than after.

This would be a structure that incorporates an expectation of dispute, instead of pretending that the work is over before the work is actually over.