I wish we could have some shows where politics weren't at play. I have judged a few local shows at my club and tried to be as impartial as possible but when you know the people behind their trees and the inequality of their incomes and one tree being checkbook and the other diy, it makes it really complicated.
I usually end up giving more points to the artist that does more of the work themself than having a pro do 90% of the work. But most of the time its the collector with the fatter checkbook that wins because its a better, older tree.
How could we have better voting? Do you think if we had 10 judges all judge the trees and then do a random draw of three of the judges scores and those would be used to judge the show?
the judges are the issue... it is just the nature of the beast...humans Only people care care about awards...never once I have seen a pissed off tree because it didn't get selected...
I've always been in favor of competition but as I learn more about how things really work perhaps we need shows without awards???
I'm totally aware of the problem with people's choice awards...at least is an honest award based on many individuals perceptions...
I always liked the peer awards at the CBE...voted on by participating club members only...still subject to problems but much less so than an individual or small group assigning awards....
Playing devil's advocate, but the old style of favoritism judging has some advantages. Bill V may know the history and work someone put into an ugly tree, so they get a prize vs "I imported this last year from Korea."
Although I do give Bill a lot of credit for everything he does, unfortunately, it is far more likely that it is completely the opposite scenario...