Nieminen Mika wrote:

>   I have an idea which may help a little bit to avoid the so-called
> category cross-contamination.

	My zwei Pfennig in this comes from scoring many proposals for
the US government. 

	This is the first time I have read about the scoring, being a
newcomer and all. 20 levels? Go to 6 levels, 0-5, with 3 as
average and 0 as [expletive deleted.] Or outstanding, above
average, average, below average, poor, expletive. 

	Unless people have nothing better to do and have no shame they
are not going to participate in the first place unless they have
done something noteworthy compared to what they have seen on the
web. All of us newcomers hunt for everything we can find and
compare, borrow, whatever. So users have a good idea what is
going on and if they are competative before spending the time. 

	Average becomes the state of the art in comparable renderings.
As in sports, the average goes up every year as does outstanding
as in 70 homeruns last year. Doing better than Babe Ruth is no
long for the record book. 

	1) This gets rid of the fine distinctions that cloud judgement.
It is either outstanding or it is not. 

	2) Evaluators tend to avoid 5 as much as 0. It lets things stand
out like a great technical accomplishment without artistic merit.
For example, the first realistic rendering of X used in a manner
that is almost not on topic and being nothing but the object in a
featureless background. People are not likely to be that extreme
but without a 4.4 available it causes differentiation. 

	3) It makes judging much easier and can get more judges. It is
much easier to judge between, ho-hum, impressive and if your jaw
drops on seeing it. 

	And from that government experience I am aware that categories
tend to go from 3 to 5 to 10 to 20 over the years and then
someone starts over again at 3. It is quite cyclic.

Post a reply to this message