Subject: Digest for the period 3/6/2004 - 3/7/2004 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 01:03:10 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Alternate Path to Master Judge (Michael L. Hall) 2. Paying Judges (Drew Beechum) 3. RE: Paying Judges (Alan Hord) 4. Re: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 (Greg Beron) 5. RE: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 (Michael Conard) 6. Re: Paying Judges (kevin pratt) 7. RE: Paying Judges (Ted Hausotter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael L. Hall Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:13:24 -0700 Subject: Alternate Path to Master Judge BJCP Judges, The Alternate Path to Master Judge post that was made to the 2004/03/04 JudgeNet Digest was a bit premature. The motion as presented in the post was indeed passed by the board, but the board was in the process of re-evaluating the issue and has now rescinded that vote. This is a volatile and important issue, and the board has had some difficulty in coming to a consensus on it. As an experiment, I am going to do something which has not been done since the early days of the BJCP: open discussion to the JudgeNet Forum. This may very well degenerate into flame wars, but I respectfully ask the august citizenship of JudgeNet to avoid this. If this works out well, we may do this for other topics. Below I will outline some points that have come up in the board's discussions to date. This is my version, and I'm sure the other board members would have a different perspective. I encourage them to jump in to the discussion as well. Your BJCP representatives are watching the comments here, so there is no need to copy them directly. There is no rush on this issue, but I expect it to take a month or two. I don't expect a consensus to emerge from this forum either, but if it does, so much the better. Basically, the representatives are looking for guidance, general opinions, and possible solutions. Cheers, Mike Hall BJCP President, Mtn/NW Rep ============================== Alternate Path to Master Judge Motivation: There are some very good judges in our ranks that are judging at the Master level without the benefit of the Master rank. These judges have the 40 necessary experience points for Master, but have not scored 90 or above on the BJCP exam. For various reasons, these judges don't want to take the test again -- maybe they don't perform well on essay tests, maybe they think that studying for an exam above a certain level won't improve their skills as a judge, or maybe there are other reasons. Some judges in this situation get discouraged and judge less or leave the program. It would be beneficial to find a way to retain these very experienced and very qualified judges. Proposal: The proposed way to solve this problem is to create an alternate path to get to the Master rank. This alternate path would not replace or change the current path (90 on the exam and 40 experience points), but would add to it. Judges would be able to choose whether or not they wanted to take the alternate path. If a judge wanted to go by the original path they could do so. Questions: Should there be an alternate path to Master judge at all? Does this idea have merit? If so, what should it involve? How should the higher ranks of Grand Master (GM) be affected? Possibilities: Requiring a certain overall exam score (in conjunction with other items). Requiring a certain tasting exam score (in conjunction with other items). Allowing exchange of experience points for test score points (by some factor). Requiring some number of exams to be graded. Requiring a separate tasting session with a couple of Master judges, after which scoresheets will be compared. Requiring some sort of extra education. Various combinations of the possibilities listed above. Other ideas? GM Possibilities: Leave the GM requirements alone. This preserves the number of points required for GM (100) for any scheme that changes points for Master, and requires a 90 on the exam. Leave the "extra amount of work" for GM alone. In this case, if a scheme required, for instance, 70 points for Master, which is 30 more than the standard path, then the GM would also require 30 more points (130). However, the less-than-90 exam score would still be sufficient. Other ideas? Issues: One of the reasons that this is a touchy issue is that everyone is affected. If you are less than a Master rank currently, you could use the alternate path. If you are already a Master or higher, then an alternate path could potentially "cheapen" your rank. You should know that many of the representatives that will vote on this issue could benefit from an alternate path if they chose to take it. Many of you making comments will also be able to benefit if you so choose. We must be careful to avoid the impression of impropriety and think about the good of the BJCP program as a whole. Some think that an alternate path to Master is not needed, and that the Honorary Master title which may be conferred by the board should be sufficient for this purpose. We do not want to weaken the rank of Master. If we weaken the rank, then it means less. No one wants just the rank of Master -- they want the meaning attached to it. We must preserve this. It has been suggested that it would be desirable to make the alternate path "harder" in some way than the current path. Requirements on the tasting portion of exam are problematic, because for various reasons that is the most variable part of the exam. Other issues? ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Drew Beechum Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:16:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Paying Judges Don, I'd like to say these two things. 1) I'm never offended by anyone offering me money. It's a compliment to my skills, my ego and more importantly, my bank account. 2) I don't like the idea. Now admittedly, I've judged in one of the two LACF Commercial Comps and I didn't make last year because I was too damn busty (was in Chicago at the time), but even then.. I'm not sure how it can be a good precendent to set. My fear would be then that in order to compete with the notion of paying judges anominal fee, every competition, homebrew and the like, would have to start hunting sponsorships or jacking fees in order to offer a nominal judging fee. (Granted this would be a number of years off, but I still don't see how it's good to offer anything but a "love of it" vibe to the amatuer judging world. Just my off the cuff thoughts. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Hord Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:42:09 -0800 Subject: RE: Paying Judges There are two state fairs in our neck of the woods and they pay compensation plus toss in a couple of tickets to the event. To be honest, I consider it an honor to judge; the money means nothing to me, and I make every event that I can if possible. Don, if I could drive your HBC in a reasonable timeframe - I would; pretty simple math and I'm the kinda guy that'd make time for you :o) Cheers on your success! Alan Hord, Nat'l near Seattle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Greg Beron Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:06:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 I wouldn't be offended. Recognition of the fact that we're inconveniencing ourselves to travel to Pomona would be greatly appreciated. --- JudgeNet - the beer judge digest wrote: > Table of contents > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1. Paying Judges > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: Don Van Valkenburg Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 > 20:31:36 -0800 > Subject: Paying Judges > > > I just want to get a general response about paying > judges. > > The Los Angeles Co. Fair competition (commercial, > not homebrew) is going > into its third year and we are constantly looking > for ways we can > improve our competition. We want to get the best > judges available and > we are thinking about paying the judges this year. > Would any judges be > offended to be offered $50 to judge this > competition? I know it isn't > much, but we hope to establish a basis and hopefully > we can increase the > amount in the future. > > What do you think? > > Don Van Valkenburg > > ********************************************************************** > * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest > * > * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text > or attachments * > * Send subscription requests & changes to > judge-request`at`synchro.com * > ********************************************************************** > ===== E-mail responsibly. Check this site before passing rumors: http://www.hoaxkill.com/ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Conard Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:09:57 -0600 Subject: RE: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 I have been asked to judge at the Calumet County (WI) fair's homebrew and wine competition every year for the past 3 years. The state pays county fair judges a stipend and mileage (it is really minimal- about $50 plus mileage.) I don't see why a judge would get too wrapped up over it as long as the funds from which the judge is paid are not provided by an entrant. Mike Conard Kewaunee, WI -----Original Message----- From: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest [mailto:judge`at`synchro.com] Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 12:01 AM To: Digest Recipients Subject: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Paying Judges ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don Van Valkenburg Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 20:31:36 -0800 Subject: Paying Judges I just want to get a general response about paying judges. The Los Angeles Co. Fair competition (commercial, not homebrew) is going into its third year and we are constantly looking for ways we can improve our competition. We want to get the best judges available and we are thinking about paying the judges this year. Would any judges be offended to be offered $50 to judge this competition? I know it isn't much, but we hope to establish a basis and hopefully we can increase the amount in the future. What do you think? Don Van Valkenburg ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kevin pratt Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 09:18:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Paying Judges I don't think I'll be alone on this side of the fence, but paying judges to participate is not the way to go. Besides the explicit directive that no participant in the BJCP will take money for their BJCP work, it just sets up a slippery slope on so many levels. That said, here are some ideas that might work: Spend that $50 per judge on improving the competition: Use the money to improve the flow of the competition and layout of the contest (perhaps a better space, I dunno, never been to your contest). Providing better tools for judging: Mechanical pens, SRM tables, Flavor wheels. Making sure that the food available is outstanding. Advertising to get more entries. Advertising to get better judges. Both of the above at brew-pubs, taphouses and publications. Asking the judges how many competitions they've judged in the last 12 months. Asking the BJCP to help you locate the closest and most experienced judges for your contest (for instance sending personal invitations to Master and national judges in your area). That way you would have a sterling reputation for a well run contest instead an attraction for a payoff. That said, I am always happy to get a club t-shirt or other tidbit as a thank you. Kevin Pratt --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ted Hausotter Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 09:35:41 -0800 Subject: RE: Paying Judges Drink beer, get paid, NO PROBLEM. Ted Hausotter Baker City, OR National Beer Judge _________________________________________________________________ Fast. Reliable. Get MSN 9 Dial-up - 3 months for the price of 1! (Limited-time Offer) http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/ ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** Subject: Digest for the period 3/6/2004 - 3/7/2004 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 01:03:10 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Alternate Path to Master Judge (Michael L. Hall) 2. Paying Judges (Drew Beechum) 3. RE: Paying Judges (Alan Hord) 4. Re: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 (Greg Beron) 5. RE: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 (Michael Conard) 6. Re: Paying Judges (kevin pratt) 7. RE: Paying Judges (Ted Hausotter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael L. Hall Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:13:24 -0700 Subject: Alternate Path to Master Judge BJCP Judges, The Alternate Path to Master Judge post that was made to the 2004/03/04 JudgeNet Digest was a bit premature. The motion as presented in the post was indeed passed by the board, but the board was in the process of re-evaluating the issue and has now rescinded that vote. This is a volatile and important issue, and the board has had some difficulty in coming to a consensus on it. As an experiment, I am going to do something which has not been done since the early days of the BJCP: open discussion to the JudgeNet Forum. This may very well degenerate into flame wars, but I respectfully ask the august citizenship of JudgeNet to avoid this. If this works out well, we may do this for other topics. Below I will outline some points that have come up in the board's discussions to date. This is my version, and I'm sure the other board members would have a different perspective. I encourage them to jump in to the discussion as well. Your BJCP representatives are watching the comments here, so there is no need to copy them directly. There is no rush on this issue, but I expect it to take a month or two. I don't expect a consensus to emerge from this forum either, but if it does, so much the better. Basically, the representatives are looking for guidance, general opinions, and possible solutions. Cheers, Mike Hall BJCP President, Mtn/NW Rep ============================== Alternate Path to Master Judge Motivation: There are some very good judges in our ranks that are judging at the Master level without the benefit of the Master rank. These judges have the 40 necessary experience points for Master, but have not scored 90 or above on the BJCP exam. For various reasons, these judges don't want to take the test again -- maybe they don't perform well on essay tests, maybe they think that studying for an exam above a certain level won't improve their skills as a judge, or maybe there are other reasons. Some judges in this situation get discouraged and judge less or leave the program. It would be beneficial to find a way to retain these very experienced and very qualified judges. Proposal: The proposed way to solve this problem is to create an alternate path to get to the Master rank. This alternate path would not replace or change the current path (90 on the exam and 40 experience points), but would add to it. Judges would be able to choose whether or not they wanted to take the alternate path. If a judge wanted to go by the original path they could do so. Questions: Should there be an alternate path to Master judge at all? Does this idea have merit? If so, what should it involve? How should the higher ranks of Grand Master (GM) be affected? Possibilities: Requiring a certain overall exam score (in conjunction with other items). Requiring a certain tasting exam score (in conjunction with other items). Allowing exchange of experience points for test score points (by some factor). Requiring some number of exams to be graded. Requiring a separate tasting session with a couple of Master judges, after which scoresheets will be compared. Requiring some sort of extra education. Various combinations of the possibilities listed above. Other ideas? GM Possibilities: Leave the GM requirements alone. This preserves the number of points required for GM (100) for any scheme that changes points for Master, and requires a 90 on the exam. Leave the "extra amount of work" for GM alone. In this case, if a scheme required, for instance, 70 points for Master, which is 30 more than the standard path, then the GM would also require 30 more points (130). However, the less-than-90 exam score would still be sufficient. Other ideas? Issues: One of the reasons that this is a touchy issue is that everyone is affected. If you are less than a Master rank currently, you could use the alternate path. If you are already a Master or higher, then an alternate path could potentially "cheapen" your rank. You should know that many of the representatives that will vote on this issue could benefit from an alternate path if they chose to take it. Many of you making comments will also be able to benefit if you so choose. We must be careful to avoid the impression of impropriety and think about the good of the BJCP program as a whole. Some think that an alternate path to Master is not needed, and that the Honorary Master title which may be conferred by the board should be sufficient for this purpose. We do not want to weaken the rank of Master. If we weaken the rank, then it means less. No one wants just the rank of Master -- they want the meaning attached to it. We must preserve this. It has been suggested that it would be desirable to make the alternate path "harder" in some way than the current path. Requirements on the tasting portion of exam are problematic, because for various reasons that is the most variable part of the exam. Other issues? ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Drew Beechum Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:16:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Paying Judges Don, I'd like to say these two things. 1) I'm never offended by anyone offering me money. It's a compliment to my skills, my ego and more importantly, my bank account. 2) I don't like the idea. Now admittedly, I've judged in one of the two LACF Commercial Comps and I didn't make last year because I was too damn busty (was in Chicago at the time), but even then.. I'm not sure how it can be a good precendent to set. My fear would be then that in order to compete with the notion of paying judges anominal fee, every competition, homebrew and the like, would have to start hunting sponsorships or jacking fees in order to offer a nominal judging fee. (Granted this would be a number of years off, but I still don't see how it's good to offer anything but a "love of it" vibe to the amatuer judging world. Just my off the cuff thoughts. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Hord Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:42:09 -0800 Subject: RE: Paying Judges There are two state fairs in our neck of the woods and they pay compensation plus toss in a couple of tickets to the event. To be honest, I consider it an honor to judge; the money means nothing to me, and I make every event that I can if possible. Don, if I could drive your HBC in a reasonable timeframe - I would; pretty simple math and I'm the kinda guy that'd make time for you :o) Cheers on your success! Alan Hord, Nat'l near Seattle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Greg Beron Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:06:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 I wouldn't be offended. Recognition of the fact that we're inconveniencing ourselves to travel to Pomona would be greatly appreciated. --- JudgeNet - the beer judge digest wrote: > Table of contents > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1. Paying Judges > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: Don Van Valkenburg Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 > 20:31:36 -0800 > Subject: Paying Judges > > > I just want to get a general response about paying > judges. > > The Los Angeles Co. Fair competition (commercial, > not homebrew) is going > into its third year and we are constantly looking > for ways we can > improve our competition. We want to get the best > judges available and > we are thinking about paying the judges this year. > Would any judges be > offended to be offered $50 to judge this > competition? I know it isn't > much, but we hope to establish a basis and hopefully > we can increase the > amount in the future. > > What do you think? > > Don Van Valkenburg > > ********************************************************************** > * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest > * > * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text > or attachments * > * Send subscription requests & changes to > judge-request`at`synchro.com * > ********************************************************************** > ===== E-mail responsibly. Check this site before passing rumors: http://www.hoaxkill.com/ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Conard Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:09:57 -0600 Subject: RE: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 I have been asked to judge at the Calumet County (WI) fair's homebrew and wine competition every year for the past 3 years. The state pays county fair judges a stipend and mileage (it is really minimal- about $50 plus mileage.) I don't see why a judge would get too wrapped up over it as long as the funds from which the judge is paid are not provided by an entrant. Mike Conard Kewaunee, WI -----Original Message----- From: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest [mailto:judge`at`synchro.com] Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 12:01 AM To: Digest Recipients Subject: Digest for the period 3/5/2004 - 3/6/2004 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Paying Judges ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don Van Valkenburg Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 20:31:36 -0800 Subject: Paying Judges I just want to get a general response about paying judges. The Los Angeles Co. Fair competition (commercial, not homebrew) is going into its third year and we are constantly looking for ways we can improve our competition. We want to get the best judges available and we are thinking about paying the judges this year. Would any judges be offended to be offered $50 to judge this competition? I know it isn't much, but we hope to establish a basis and hopefully we can increase the amount in the future. What do you think? Don Van Valkenburg ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kevin pratt Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 09:18:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Paying Judges I don't think I'll be alone on this side of the fence, but paying judges to participate is not the way to go. Besides the explicit directive that no participant in the BJCP will take money for their BJCP work, it just sets up a slippery slope on so many levels. That said, here are some ideas that might work: Spend that $50 per judge on improving the competition: Use the money to improve the flow of the competition and layout of the contest (perhaps a better space, I dunno, never been to your contest). Providing better tools for judging: Mechanical pens, SRM tables, Flavor wheels. Making sure that the food available is outstanding. Advertising to get more entries. Advertising to get better judges. Both of the above at brew-pubs, taphouses and publications. Asking the judges how many competitions they've judged in the last 12 months. Asking the BJCP to help you locate the closest and most experienced judges for your contest (for instance sending personal invitations to Master and national judges in your area). That way you would have a sterling reputation for a well run contest instead an attraction for a payoff. That said, I am always happy to get a club t-shirt or other tidbit as a thank you. Kevin Pratt --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ted Hausotter Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 09:35:41 -0800 Subject: RE: Paying Judges Drink beer, get paid, NO PROBLEM. Ted Hausotter Baker City, OR National Beer Judge _________________________________________________________________ Fast. Reliable. Get MSN 9 Dial-up - 3 months for the price of 1! (Limited-time Offer) http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/ ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * **********************************************************************