I do not know if it is a burning question, but it sure will be smokin for a while!
I see your points for abuse, and they are valid. And in my mind, habitual high scorers are just as bad as the low ones.
But the data is golden for being able to level the tables. If your contest develops or has a reputation for fair and consistent judging, that does a lot to attract teams to your contest. Sky high scores invite questions and makes everyone wonder what is going on.
Being able to bring on less experienced judges with some confidence that they will do a good job when you do not have previous experience with them would make judge selection easier. Right now it is a crap shoot about who to choose to fill out what you need after the judges you know are being used and you still need some more.
The Reps I know do not want to black list anyone, but rather rehabilitate those who regularly score too low or too high. My attitude also.
Judges need the feedback about how they are doing. It is like taking a lot of tests, but never knowing what grade you got. Some of the lows or highs will self correct when they get feedback.
There needs to be a lot of education from KCBS to diminish the fear factor with judges being tracked.
After all, the cooks are tracked about how they do at every category at every contest. And the scores are there for the world to see! But they know that will be the case before they enter a contest.
Keeping the double blind private for judging is just as important as having scores public for the cooks.
Everything I see and hear about the new scoring system says it is a step in the right direction.
Interesting times - you said it right.
Carlyle, KCBS, CBJ, Organizer ( Judge Chair)