Wholly Fark is this true!!!
 

I am hearing grumblings that there is someone out there trying to put together a judges blacklist if they don't make it to the contest. Is this for real? Anyone else hear about this? I find it hard to believe that someone would think the worst of someone if they weren't able to show up. This is supposed to be a fun thing to do where life can sometimes interfere unfortunately. Does this person really think that a judge would go out of their way to sign up only to back out at the last second? What for? Snots and giggles? Why is it that the first thought is the worst thought. If it weren't for the judges we could all sell our rigs and cook in our backyards....now we want to punish those who unfortunately couldn't fufill their obligations? I find that as nothing more then a deterent to getting judges while also alienating the judging public.

Have not heard about this but if true, it is a shame.
If a judge signs up to judge and then has to bail for some reason or another, it is only right to notify the organizer by phone or email to let them know; that is the decent thing to do.
Sure, there are probably a few who fail to give any notice and just don't show, but hey, that is just people being people.
I imagine folks that did that consistently would most likely just fade away anyway.

But to organize some sort of blacklist/no-show/no-go is not going to do much other than antagonize many folks and I cannot see any real positive good come out of such an idea; sounds like another case of somebody with too much time and too much inflated sense self-importance.

dos centavos...

stuff happens and some judges just can't make a contest for one reason or another. I think that's why some organizer hopes to have more judges than teams signed up. I do kind of believe that there should be some sort of attendance report of judges, just in case there are some ones that are consistently no-shows, and KCBS or someone can keep track of those. A black list seems to be way over-kill and unfair.

Sounds awfully judgemental to me, Chit happens!

I agree with this. The first time I judged, my jaw about hit the table as the organizer was scattering to fill judging seats at the last minute - asking us judges to call anyone they knew would could get there. As a cook, I initially found this discouraging. However, I've judged a handful of times since and that was the only occasion that I noticed this happening.

Plus, based on the CBJ percentages the last few years this event organizer doesn't seem to stress KCBS judging. I judged the event twice and both times it had locals that mostly all seemed to know each other. Many from the same families. I guess that first year maybe a family or two had something come up as the next year didn't provide the scurry to get butts in seats. But I was one of the advanced judges (2-3 comps) and I got to table capt.

So even a blacklist probably wouldn't really have helped the situation outlined above.

Could someone from th board or a rep please confirm whether or not this is the work of the sanctioning body or the work of, as Wes so eloquently put it, "somebody with too much time and too much inflated sense self-importance."

Any organizers been approached?

I suggest you contact the Head of the CBJ committee and ask them if something is in the works. And you could also contact the rules committee in case they are being asked to consider a rule to report judges that don't show up and action that can be taken against them. Making posts and asking the KCBS BOD to comment implies that all committee heads are members here and we know they are not.

I think you're living up to your shirt today.

And IMHO judges that say they will attend and just don't show (no call to say sorry) are hurting the organizer. When they are CBJ's it's worse as cooks and the KCBS are asking for 100% CBJ's and that can be tough to get but especially with significant no shows. Some judges say yes months in advance then forget they were ever going to judge or just don't take the time to let them know they can't make it. I know some organizers that keep their own lists and last years no-shows may come the next year and find out there are extra judges and they won't be needed.

I know of one rep who has a blacklist of judges that he feels aren't consistent, and it isn't a secret either.

Coming at it from a different point of view, I think that it is innevitable that some judges are going to miss contests and that is a shame. It does not make them bad people worthy of punishment and torture....HOWEVER, there are two kinds of people in the world: Dependable, and unreliable. When a dependable person says he is going to be there, he is going to be there come hell or high water. He will also do everything in his power to be there on time, and if he can't be there, he will go out of his way to find a replacement. Unreliable people will not show up, be late, and if you're lucky enough to get a call from the person before he is a no-show, he'll do nothing more than say "Good Luck." While these unreliable people aren't necessarily bad people, they should not be counted on, and regardless of the reason, some one hwo has shown to be unreliable as a judge should be moved to the very bottom of a list when looking for judges to fill a contest. Call it a blacklist or backchannel communications, but it is perfectly reasonable for organizers to know whom they can trust. Obviously there are people who fall some where between dependable and unreliable, and the line is not always black and white, but I hope organizers don't have unreliable judges when I compete. What happens if they don't have enough?

Here's another way to look at it: Say you are on a comp team, you're comp team has three full time members, and you plan to compete every three weeks. Now say that every other competition, one of your teamates finds a reason to bail: His kids are sick, he forgot he has to go to his in-laws, he has a soccer game, his car broke down, and one time, you don't even know because he didn't bother to call and tell you. Now he pays his money, but every time he doesn't show up, you and your other teamate are left doing that much more work and getting that much less sleep. How much longer is that inreliable teamate going to stay on your team?

dmp

Well if they can't round up warm bodies in time then the Rep can do 7 boxes per table. I've seen this done. But the organizers are encouraged to find more judges and I've seen them grab people walking by and say would you like free food. We need judges. Very little time to instruct them and they had not planned on judging so have no idea what this is all about.

Organizers have a tough job getting judges. Now what happens when too many CBJ's show up and they ask some to table captain. I've heard that there can be some major yelling and screaming about not getting hteir food. Not a job I want.

ARGEE! 100%

Never saw one, but have seen them discussed before in several areas.

Makes sense to me. If a judge(or team for that mattter), consistantly is a no show or causes problems at events, I see nothing wrong with letting it be known to other organizers or reps that someone on their roster may be unreliable.

Not saying that someone who has a problem gets blacklisted immediatly, but those who consistantly dont show with no explanation are not doing anything for the sport and leaves the organizers scrambling. I think keeping track of judges, (and even teams) that consistantly have issues would help organizers keep things on track and/or be prepared.

This is similar in concept to FBA(I think its FBA ??), that tracks trending for judges to make sure tables get a fair spread of hard and soft judges.

Who will draw that line? Who has the proper definition. Allowing individuals to make that determination could lead to impropriety. This type of practice could ultimately make it harder to fill the ranks of CBJ's.


See life interrupts fun. All those reasons mean little to me. They are a team mate. We have 15 teammates. Some haven't been at a comp in 8 months....they are still teamates. In fact some have said they'd be there and didn't show....they are still teammates.

LOL... 15 teamates is a whole offensive unit plus 4 second stringers. with one down, YOU may not notice.. but!

I have 3 team mates. If one doesnt show up, it throws off our timing, and causes others to pick up additional responsibility. If someone didnt show up for 8 months they would be sitting in a chair when they came back.. (8 months is a whole season to me, i would have refilled the spot after the second no show). We were down 2 at troy and had to rethink our entire strategy.

We all have varying degrees of involvement. The main 5, which recently dropped to 4, are the key. Some would say the other 10 were just there to make noise but thats not true even when its late at night. But that would require a visual or a police report because hearsay is just that. You are right those who miss a bunch of time will find themselves sitting but not because they aren't teammates but because they are out of the routine.

How does this relate to judges? A judge who has life interrupt should not be punished or blacklisted. Yes we like 100% CBJ and if your area has had contests that shouldn't be a problem but if its 98% thats great too. We all know that those who haven't learned to be critical are usually great markers. We also know that in any group there are bad examples. From doctors to lawyers and yes even BBQ judges. To make this list about garnering 100% CBJ's seems like the horse pushing the cart. You want to blacklist CBJs so you can get 100% CBJ's.

The biggest problem I see is administering this. Who draws the rules? Who sets the bar? How do we allow rogues to create their own "enemies list" and utilize it without questioning their methods and MO. If I found out any organizer or organizers helper or rep were doing this I would make sure NOT to participate in their event. When all is said and done this is still supposed to be fun and for me the fun is gone when people are excluded for reasons hatched in the brain of one individual.

Just show up when your suppose to....easy.