On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 02:26:12PM -0800, Bruce Dayton wrote: > You may be right. You have submitted some great stuff and I would > expect your level of submissions to be fairly consistent. If they are > rejecting as you surmise, it would be good of them to let us know so > that we don't waste time and bandwidth. I have always felt that the > final judges should be the ones to really finalize. In essence, the > peer voting would be to narrow it down to 'potential' candidates. So > if there were some quite good images, they should probably make it to > the final judges rather than the peer vote removing them.
And just how would that work, exactly? The minute you put a 'peer voting' process in place before the final judges get to see an image you're going to end up with images being rejected at the peer voting stage (if not, then the peer voting stage serves absolutely no purpose). Peer voting narrowing the list down to potential candidates is, in effect, what is happening today. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
