Robert J Becraft wrote:

> There is always the possibility that people will submit whatever it is they
> are working on for the round.  To keep people honest and on topic, people
> have to stop giving them good scores for off-topic submissions.
> 
> Personally, my first pass through all the submissions is to eliminate
> off-topic pics.  Surprisingly, of those that are left, I rarely have to
> re-vote for more than 10 of the images that end up on the top of my pile.
> Comments are extremely important when I'm reviewing a picture... if I miss
> the on-topic nature of the image itself, the description will re-guide me to
> the artists intent.

	As an 11 month old timer at this, that is what I did on my first
competition and it worked out as you describe. 

	Then I mentioned doing that on the IRTC email list ... No one
actually said, "How dare you?" but that was the general tenor of
the responses. One clown was so indignent he started private
email lecturing me on how improper I was behaving. Of course this
newcomer isn't quite the type to remain silent. It was a bit of a
row. 

	There are two things I am reasonably certain of by now. One is
the majority do not give a damn about the topic. Note topicality
is not a category. 

	The other certain thing is the folks using the company software
(more likely pirated) take points off for POV if only by look and
feel. 

> Given that gardens can take many forms that do not necessarily include
> plants, any strange looking submissions that don't take the obvious
> plant-form version should be obvious or described in such a way as to lead
> the viewer through their relevence.

	But perhaps points for the degree of torture of the english
language to lead one to the relevence? How many topics can be
woven into one sentence to justify a pyramid. 

-- 
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Oh my God! They've rendered Kenny!

How to profit from the end of civilization as know it available 
here soon.

Post a reply to this message