Subject: Digest for the period 4/18/2004 - 4/19/2004 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 01:04:03 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Judging Variance (Alan Hord) 2. World Beer Cup (David Houseman) 3. New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) (Ed Westemeier) 4. BJCP email policy (Ed Westemeier) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Hord Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 09:05:18 -0700 Subject: Judging Variance Steve Casselman writes: "...On the other hand we already collect judge scores and we could analyze them via a program. That analyses would be _some_ kind of feed back to both the organization and the judge. Right now there is no feed back on the judges.." Programs exist to do this now my friend; with a little bit of tweaking this could be done as you have described ~ and resolve the issue of adding up the scores to get the final average score :o) On that note: This has been an issue before - the ownership of adding up scores. Given, this would place a dependency on the data entry person rather than the lead judge to determine winners. Rhetorically, the by-product of this advent would have judges relinquishing their ownership of the final outcome. In my experience, there are two sides to this coin, however - if used correctly - people would benefit. I suggest this could be an optional feature rather than an implied invocation. So, would you like to graph this data? :o) hehehe Cheers to all! Alan Hord, Nat' Near Se'at ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Houseman Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 08:20:50 -0400 Subject: World Beer Cup Check out the winners (and the categories) in the World Beer Cup. http://www.beertown.org/events/wbc/winners_list/winners_2004.html David Houseman ********************************************************************** * 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: Ed Westemeier Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:19:45 -0400 Subject: New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) On behalf of our very hard-working Style Guidelines Committee, I want to pass on the message below. As everyone knows, our style guidelines are due for revision, and this is the year. Here's your chance to see the draft guidelines the committee came up with, and put in your own two cents. This message and the links can also be found at the BJCP website (www.bjcp.org). Ed Westemeier BJCP Communication Director communication_director`at`bjcp.org ------------------------------- The BJCP Style Committee has completed its preliminary review and update of the 1999 Style Guidelines. These draft guidelines are now posted for public review and comment. All BJCP judges and interested individuals are welcomed to participate in the review. The Style Committee will monitor the discussion and incorporate good suggestions. We intend to have an open comment period for at least one month, with the final guidelines being rolled out at the AHA National Homebrew Conference in Las Vegas, June 17-19. The guidelines can be viewed and commented upon in a web-based forum system found at http://www.hopmadness.com/bjcp/ They have been extensively revised, reorganized, and contain new style parameters and commercial examples. Eight new sub-categories have been added. Comments are welcome on the individual guidelines and on the overall organization. Identification of errors, omissions and misinterpretations are especially welcome. Note that these guidelines have not yet been approved for use by the BJCP. The 1999 guidelines remain in effect for BJCP- and AHA-sanctioned competitions. Gordon Strong BJCP Grand Master Judge Chairman, BJCP Style Committee ********************************************************************** * 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: Ed Westemeier Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:59:49 -0400 Subject: BJCP email policy JudgeNet subscribers, I need your help. As the BJCP Communication Director, I occasionally find a situation where simply posting information on our website might not be enough. =46or example, we're now beginning a period of only a month or so, where we want BJCP judges to comment on our proposed revision of the style guidelines. The Styles committee has been working hard on this for some time, and now they have a complete draft ready for review. I would really like some input on whether this is something that merits sending an email to the entire membership. This would amount to nearly 2,000 emails, based on a quick review of the database. While they're certainly not commercial in nature, they are definitely unsolicited. I believe they're justified for something like an election, and we recently did so for the election in the Northeast region (still looking for a few more votes there, by the way). Is asking people to review and comment on the style drafts important enough to justify such a mass emailing? Or would it lead us down a slippery slope to more emails over less important issues? I hate spam as much as anyone (I get nearly 200 a day), but I also recognize the need to communicate with the membership, so I'm really ambivalent about this. I would truly appreciate comments from you folks as to whether you think this would be a good or bad idea. Thanks in advance, Ed Westemeier communication_director`at`bjcp.org ********************************************************************** * 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 4/18/2004 - 4/19/2004 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 01:04:03 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Judging Variance (Alan Hord) 2. World Beer Cup (David Houseman) 3. New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) (Ed Westemeier) 4. BJCP email policy (Ed Westemeier) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Hord Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 09:05:18 -0700 Subject: Judging Variance Steve Casselman writes: "...On the other hand we already collect judge scores and we could analyze them via a program. That analyses would be _some_ kind of feed back to both the organization and the judge. Right now there is no feed back on the judges.." Programs exist to do this now my friend; with a little bit of tweaking this could be done as you have described ~ and resolve the issue of adding up the scores to get the final average score :o) On that note: This has been an issue before - the ownership of adding up scores. Given, this would place a dependency on the data entry person rather than the lead judge to determine winners. Rhetorically, the by-product of this advent would have judges relinquishing their ownership of the final outcome. In my experience, there are two sides to this coin, however - if used correctly - people would benefit. I suggest this could be an optional feature rather than an implied invocation. So, would you like to graph this data? :o) hehehe Cheers to all! Alan Hord, Nat' Near Se'at ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Houseman Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 08:20:50 -0400 Subject: World Beer Cup Check out the winners (and the categories) in the World Beer Cup. http://www.beertown.org/events/wbc/winners_list/winners_2004.html David Houseman ********************************************************************** * 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: Ed Westemeier Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:19:45 -0400 Subject: New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) On behalf of our very hard-working Style Guidelines Committee, I want to pass on the message below. As everyone knows, our style guidelines are due for revision, and this is the year. Here's your chance to see the draft guidelines the committee came up with, and put in your own two cents. This message and the links can also be found at the BJCP website (www.bjcp.org). Ed Westemeier BJCP Communication Director communication_director`at`bjcp.org ------------------------------- The BJCP Style Committee has completed its preliminary review and update of the 1999 Style Guidelines. These draft guidelines are now posted for public review and comment. All BJCP judges and interested individuals are welcomed to participate in the review. The Style Committee will monitor the discussion and incorporate good suggestions. We intend to have an open comment period for at least one month, with the final guidelines being rolled out at the AHA National Homebrew Conference in Las Vegas, June 17-19. The guidelines can be viewed and commented upon in a web-based forum system found at http://www.hopmadness.com/bjcp/ They have been extensively revised, reorganized, and contain new style parameters and commercial examples. Eight new sub-categories have been added. Comments are welcome on the individual guidelines and on the overall organization. Identification of errors, omissions and misinterpretations are especially welcome. Note that these guidelines have not yet been approved for use by the BJCP. The 1999 guidelines remain in effect for BJCP- and AHA-sanctioned competitions. Gordon Strong BJCP Grand Master Judge Chairman, BJCP Style Committee ********************************************************************** * 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: Ed Westemeier Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:59:49 -0400 Subject: BJCP email policy JudgeNet subscribers, I need your help. As the BJCP Communication Director, I occasionally find a situation where simply posting information on our website might not be enough. =46or example, we're now beginning a period of only a month or so, where we want BJCP judges to comment on our proposed revision of the style guidelines. The Styles committee has been working hard on this for some time, and now they have a complete draft ready for review. I would really like some input on whether this is something that merits sending an email to the entire membership. This would amount to nearly 2,000 emails, based on a quick review of the database. While they're certainly not commercial in nature, they are definitely unsolicited. I believe they're justified for something like an election, and we recently did so for the election in the Northeast region (still looking for a few more votes there, by the way). Is asking people to review and comment on the style drafts important enough to justify such a mass emailing? Or would it lead us down a slippery slope to more emails over less important issues? I hate spam as much as anyone (I get nearly 200 a day), but I also recognize the need to communicate with the membership, so I'm really ambivalent about this. I would truly appreciate comments from you folks as to whether you think this would be a good or bad idea. Thanks in advance, Ed Westemeier communication_director`at`bjcp.org ********************************************************************** * 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 * **********************************************************************