To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients)
From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator)
Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet)
Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com
Precedence: bulk
Subject: JudgeNet Digest #1187 (Dec 29, 1995)
Date: 29 Dec 95 01:17:32 EST (Fri)
Message-Id: <9512290117.AA17576 at synchro.com>


JudgeNet Digest #1187				   Fri 29 Dec 1995


                               JudgeNet
			 The Beer Judge Digest

                 digest submissions: judge at synchro.com
          administrative requests: judge-request at synchro.com
    send cancellations & rank updates to the administrative address
	  messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored

        WWW Archives: http://www.umich.edu/~spencer/beer/judge

                 Editor: Chuck Cox <chuck at synchro.com>
             Archivist: Spencer Thomas <spencer at umich.edu>

      Publishers: SynchroSystems and the Riverside Garage & Brewery

            Anti-Prohibitionists may also be interested in 
                LiBeerty: The Libertarian Beer Digest
           Subscription info: libeerty-request at synchro.com

     For BJCP General Information contact: geninfo at bjcp.synchro.com


Contents:
  Learning how to judge                    (TPuskar)
  World Homebrew Contest Judging           ("In Himmel ist kein Bier, darum trinken wir es hier!  28-Dec-1995 0845")
  More                                     (Dennis Davison)
  RE: Monies                               (Mark Taratoot)
  Re:dues                                  (GSMITHBEER)
  Sam Adams Scoring                        (TMartyn)
  Dues                                     ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 07:35:09 -0500
From: TPuskar at aol.com
Subject: Learning how to judge

With all this talk about dues and money, it seems like judging beer is taking
a backseat to other issues.

I live in central NJ and would like to start the process of becoming a
judge--not for all the money judges seem to make ;-) but rather to improve my
skills at brewing.

My question is how do I go about it.  I don't want to be totally
"self-taught" and would like some structure and/or instruction to help me
with the process.  Can anyone here in Monmouth/Ocean/Mercer counties offer
suggestions on a local approach?  Any other suggestions are always welcome.

Post her or private Email is fine.

TIA
Tom Puskar

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 95 08:45:54 EST
From: "In Himmel ist kein Bier, darum trinken wir es hier!  28-Dec-1995 0845" <dalton at subpac.enet.dec.com>
Subject: World Homebrew Contest Judging

The inconsistencies in the scoresheets is probably due to the 
fact that there was no organization of judges at all.
People could sit with whom ever they wanted and judge with them.
Thus, there were lots of friends pairing up, leaving some people not
in the program to fend for themselves.

	Tim


------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 05:59:18 -0600
From: ddavison at earth.execpc.com (Dennis Davison)
Subject: More

 "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at pgh.nauticom.net> says:

>Subject: re: Jim Brennan's post
>
>Free lunch, hah, lets see, I drive 300 miles and pay gas and tolls, spend
>$xx on at least 2 dinners out; then the club collects money and the Program
>get the registration fees. And again I'm supposed to_pay_for this privilege?  

Nathaniel, did the BJCP force you to drive 300 miles? All you have to do to
stay in the program is collect 1/2 point in a two year timespan. At that
rate there must be something local that you could judge? You really have to
ask yourself why you judge?

The club collects monies. Have you ever organized a competition? The clubs
don't make a hell of a lot of money.


Dennis Davison                                       ddavison at earth.execpc.com

                           BJCC Midwest Region
                         Chairperson of the BJCP


------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 09:44:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Taratoot <taratoot at PEAK.ORG>
Subject: RE: Monies


on 27 Dec 1995 18:16:20 -0600
> ddavison at earth.execpc.com (Dennis Davison)  wrote:

- ---snip---
> Now you state that the BJCP get's $50. Well, out of the $50 the BJCP itself
> only receives $30. The Sponsor get's 10% for a facility, the Administrator
> gets 10% to give it, and the exam director gets 20% which is split between
> the two graders, associate, and exam director.

If we ask judges to PAY to take the exam, PAY to register their points,
PAY an annual membership, PAY the related expense to get to a competition
and, then why does the BJCP PAY exam administrators, directors and
graders?  As judges we volunteer to judge; we pay with our time as well as
our money to get to a competition and judge one or more flights.  Exam
administrators get points, right?  Why do they need both dollars AND
points.  What about volunteerism? 


> We now pull the one mailing that gives judges their current point awards in
> March at a cost $1500. ($1.00 per judge, to include postage, envelopes,
> toner cartridges, paper, xeroxing, folding). 

What about post cards?  No cost for envelopes, postage is less, and no 
folding costs.  


> With $2450 we can afford one more mailing a year. When the new by-laws 
> go out to the membership, that mailing cost will probably run us that 
> $2000 because the additional postage and xeroxing costs.

How about a voluntary "fee" that would entitle you to all the trinkets,
such as pins, wallet cards, goofy hats, and paper copies of newsletters. 
IF our real concern is judging beer and giving good feedback to brewers, 
then we perhaps we shouldn't even bother with superficial things like 
rank pins and wallet cards.  Do you really need to flaunt your rank?  Or 
does the quality of your judging (as indicated by the score sheets you 
fill out) speak loud enough?

Additionally, anyone who has access to this digest does not need to get a 
paper copy of
anything.  They can incur the cost of printing themselves if they want to. 
Those without email access may be willing to pay for a hard "subscription"
to a quarterly newsletter.  

I don't intend this note to be a personal attack on anyone, so pleas don't
take it as such.  I expect the heated debate to continue, and our opinions
are one of the only things that are truly OUR OWN. I just feel that those
of us who do not need the trappings shouldn't subsidize those who do. 


- --
Mark Taratoot            
taratoot at peak.org         


------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 09:57:34 -0800
From: GSMITHBEER at eworld.com
Subject: Re:dues


Regarding Dues
Nathaniel P. Lansing said

>Free lunch, hah, lets see, I drive 300 miles and pay gas and tolls, 
>spend $xx on at least 2 dinners out; then the club collects money >and the
Program get the registration fees. And again I'm supposed >to_pay_for this
privilege?  

Membership in any association is not free, all have expenses picked up
somewhere for their operation. Dennis points out very well how expensive it
is to run the "normal" functions of the BJCP. (I think his estimates for
income are a little rosy.) 

An unfortunate part of life is that we must all make decisions regarding
financial priorities. For example I belong to a couple of associations that
have great conferences that I will not attend because of the expense. It's
really too bad but that's the choice I make. I do however, pay dues to get
their newletters, support their work and to "keep my credentials updated"
(sound familiar?)  If it's to much a burden to pay dues and put in the travel
and pay for expenses etc while judging, it begs the question...."why do it"
Why not just stay at home and do just the local competitions. That's all I
did in a bad financial time about two years ago. 

The bottom line is if we don't come up with some additional $$$ the program
will die. I'm in favor of dues or whatever other action it takes to remain
solvent.

Gregg Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 17:29:51 -0500
From: TMartyn at aol.com
Subject: Sam Adams Scoring

I both entered a beer in and judged at the Sam Adams "World" Homebrew
Competition.  The score sheets I received back were adequate, in that they
were reasonably complete, although I disagree to some extent with the
evaluation.  But still, within the range of judge-sampling error.

>From a judging perspective, though, it doesn't surprise me that some less
than adequate score sheets might have gone out.  There were over 1600 beers
to judge in two days, and not nearly enough experienced judges.  I did
something like seven flights of beers, some with upwards of 12-14 beers.  It
was a rare occasion, if it happened at all, that there were more than two
judges per flight, which definitely increased the variability in scoring
consistency (against some Aristotelean "correct" score).  I met and judged
with several "judges" who had never judged before.  I certainly don't mean to
belittle the effort they made; after all, they showed up.  But there were
several flights where I was the only judge with any experience, and I have my
faults as a judge, too, without an informed counter-opinion.

Conclusion?  If Sam Adams does it again, come judge (especially those who
registered and no-showed).  Expect the second go-round to be better.
 Recognize that the "motive" behind the competition isn't the same as a
typical competition (there were several beers like a delicious American Lager
which made it to the BOS round, only to have Jim Koch flat out reject, saying
in effect, this beer isn't what we plan to be brewing).

Happy new year, and lots of brewing,

Tom Martyn
TMartyn at  aol.com
Brattleboro, VT

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 21:20:51 -0500 (EST)
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at pgh.nauticom.net>
Subject: Dues 

  Thank-you Dennis, I knew if I squeaked loud enough I would get oil, in
this case a breakdown of income/expenses. This will answer many questions to
many people. I really am not against supporting the Program; I hope you
remember an email, forwarded to you by Chuck Cox, stating my offer to
underwrite an ad in Brewing Techniques so we could let the clubs know we are
alive and well, and here to register their competitions. Maybe we can get
considerably more than 60 comps this year. Now that this offer is 'public'
you know it was not idle chatter.
  Let us know here on-line what the suggested "subscription" rate might be.
Would the subscription be optional? I know a few judges that only judge once
or twice a year in local competitions. One mailing may quite satisfy these
judges, would they be expected to ante-up? 

            
------------------------------


End of JudgeNet Digest
************************