Originally Posted by Dr Scott
The only problem with that is -- would they be winning every single week? That's unfair to the others who are great in that section. Look at RPing, you have SO MANY people who could logically get the point each week. Besides, it's a lot harder to actually write / draw up an actual entry than it is to judge it. Judging is more time work, while doing it is more critical thinking.
Last year, I really wished I would have went with .5. It seems broken that judges should make that much of an impact on the final score for doing maybe half the work. A for sure half a point is a lot better than maybe a whole point, if you ask me :P.
Yeah, I remember what happened last year, judging had a pretty powerful impact on the final scores. If people don't like the ½ point thing, what we could do is scale up the points given for the normal sections a bit, so it could be more like this:
Role Play: (6 points awarded each week, 3 points for top performer, 2 points for 2nd and 1 for 3rd place)
Fan Fiction: (5 points awarded each week, 3 for 1st place, 2 for 2nd)
Creative Writing: (5 points awarded each week, 3 for 1st place, 2 for 2nd)
Graphic Art: (5 points awarded each week, 3 for 1st place, 2 for 2nd)
Drawn Art: (5 points awarded each week, 3 for 1st place, 2 for 2nd)
Sprite (pixel-based) Art: (5 points awarded each week, 3 for 1st place, 2 for 2nd)
Debate: (6 points, 2 points for best individual Pro side, 2 points for best individual Con side, 2 for best overall team performance)
URPG (Ultra Role-Playing Game): (6 points, 3 for best individual performance, 3 for best overall team performance).
That way, 1 point for judging still has almost the same scaled value as a ½ point without the pesky and unsightly decimal or fraction. Plus I agree, judging a section is not as hard as taking part in it. It would also assume that the judge would have earned 5 points for getting 1st for one week and 2nd for another, only with doing judging instead of performance.
To me, that seems like a fair deal.
Originally Posted by -Pichu Boy-
I don't get why you're limiting the amount of judges on each team. Say Person A and Person B apply to judge Spriting. Person A is the better candidate, but 3 people from Team A got accepted as judges for being best in their category, so Person B is appointed judge of spriting, but might not be fully cut-out to be the judge.
I don't see how it's keeping it any fairer than it already is. As Temporal Snake pointed out, the judges would most likely be able to be win (or at least place highly) in their category anyway. So, in the old situation, Person A enters the spriting competition and wins every week, thus getting what they would've got in wages anyway.
I hope this makes sense, it does in my head xD
EDIT: Oh, and the point thing, Dr Scott hit the nail on the head. Judging might be work, but making it is a lot harder, so should be rewarded more (or, I suppose, judging is less work, so should be rewarded less). 0.5 seems fine to me.
Limiting judges per team ensures you don't have a massive load of judges on the same team with all of them essentially dictating the outcome of so many sections. Also, assuming the judge would ordinarily win each week in that section if they were participating instead of judging is a really unlikely scenario, but then again, a lot depends on how many and what kinds of people enter. If we go with my above plan, sure, the judge faces the opportunity cost of giving up the privilege of taking part themselves, but they are guaranteed 5 points if they do an adequate judging job for the entire WAR. To me, that sounds like a fair deal, if points are scaled like the way I mentioned above.
So if I was a talented graphic artist (I hope people think I am. XD) and I decided to judge instead of taking part, sure, I'd be giving up any potential points I would have earned if I just allowed someone else to become a Judge while I participated. However, me deciding to become that Graphic Art Judge and doing a good job for it during the entire WAR allows me to earn 5 points while I can concentrate my efforts and attention toward the other sections. So because I saved some time and energy by judging Graphic Art (which is easier) instead of taking part in it myself (which is harder), I might take part in Creative Writing or something like that instead when ordinarily I may not have had the time to if I had been taking part in Graphic Art as well.
Originally Posted by Lord Khajmer
If I may be so bold, only just now joining the conversation, why are the judges being given points at all? It's not difficult to go through entries and judge them. I can understand the RP judge getting points, because that does seem like a lot of work, but other than that, not so much.
Oh, and I also suggest a POL event. /two cents
Giving judges points ensures they do their job. If you want a good example, look at the kind of work paid employees do versus volunteers.
If Judges they don't do their job, Backup Judges will pluck the points they would have earned and give it to their teams instead, pushing the section Judge to do their job well and on time. Otherwise you have judges that quit midway, make excuses, or they don't do judging on time. And trust me, people easily say "oh, just put a new judge in there" but it is actually quite hard to do that mid-WAR and quite hard for that Judge to pick up the pieces of where the other Judge left off and find a way to continue. Very often a WAR Leader has to step in and do it themselves. The whole system of point rewards and Backup Judges is a safety net for Judges that drop out of judging their section. And yes, judges not judging their sections can really wreck a WAR if it starts happening left and right. Imagine how the participants feel when all of their work and time is now running the risk of never being considered when it comes to earning their team points. Meanwhile, no new theme is posted, so they're not even sure what they're supposed to do.
And also, the Judge that judges a section faces opportunity cost by giving up being able to take part in a section they are good in, meaning they're giving up points they could have earned with their submissions. If judges don't get some kind of reward for doing their job, it actually deters people from becoming them. If you're a talented graphic artist, why judge and bar yourself from taking part and earning points in a section you're good at? 5 points (under my suggested layout) gives them a substantial compensation for the job they do and for giving up taking part in the section themselves. Getting 5 points for good judging means the same as 1st place on one week and 2nd on another during the five week WAR. To me, the probability of that happening seems more likely than winning 2nd place every week.
As for a POL event, that could work. I wouldn't make it a weekly section though, I just don't think it has enough people yet.