Wholly Fark is this true!!!

[dmprantz]

I vote that thiere is a DB for Judging attendance that shows by Sanction Body (FBA, KCBS, etc.) by Judge Title (Master, Certified, etc.) by Judges last & first name and Postal Code (ZIP). That is a DB with 6 fields as follows:
-Sanction Body: (LOV/Drop Down List - 10 alpha Numeric Characters)
-Judge Title: (LOV/Drop Down List - 10 alpha Numeric Characters)
-Last Name: (20 Alpha Characters)
-First Name: (20 Alpha Characters)
-Postal Code: (Zip) (5 Numeric Characters)
-Event(s) No Show (Not Including Proper Cancelations): (Intiger Numeric 2 Characters)

The software I am writing is designed to be generic enough to be used by any sanctioning body, with any criteria, any scoring system, and any type of competition really. It would be a bit more complex than what you list as it would have the complete address, phone, mailing address, some form of CBJ number.

To make it work across organizations, should some one want to track that would not be super difficult, but each entity (cook, team, judge) would then be assigned a unique identifier and a cross reference implemented so that a judge in one organization could be found in others. If people want me to move ahead with what I discussed earlier, I'll accept lists of judges form any sanctioning body and store them accordingly. Every one is welcomed to suggest fields to attach to those judges, and we'll go from there. This can feed into the larger comp management software really.

Also, I would love to track scoring for trending, but just don't think *I* am the person who should be entering that data and able to view it. If any one can come up with a way to allow that to happen where I am not "The Man" with access to all judges' scoring history, I'd love to have it...sorry, wrong thread. Maybe we need a web page so that organizers and reps can upload files, but I'd still have the database on my computers.

dmp

 

[Skip]

<~~~Is calling KCBS to have his name removed from the database of judges. Also asking how my info can be protected so that unautorized use can be minimized.

EDIT: SCORE!!! Anyone else looking to stay off this list just needs to ask the KCBS to remove their name from the website. Easy peasy and I can still judge. They will explain how. Better yet I won't be on the list.

 

[Divemaster]

Heh not my intention buddy. You know the wife would destroy me if I eff'ed with her next husband hahaha

So she finally told you about us... LOL

A lot of truth there but the question is....Is this the right way to deal with it? Is telling a judge to change their scoring the right thing to do or is that biasing a result.

You know, there are times that I swear that you are trying to hijack your own thread...

Is it the right way? I don't know, but it's the only direction the Reps have.

I work in quality control and R&D. There are many ways to do something but only one proper way.

Normally, I would agree with you, the problem is that you are not talking about some defined, systematic, approch to judging. There is always going to be some (remember the word 'some') subjective reflection in the scoring. Now if a judge stretches that 'some subjective reflection' of scoring to an extrema (listen to the words... extrema) where the table gives a score of 9-9-9-9-9-3. Yes, I would say that someone needs to talk to the judge that scored it low and find out why.

I guess what I'm saying is that there needs to be some flexibility. Not every thing fits into a 'Parted/Un-Parted' world. (Oh Lord, now I've done it!!! LOL)

I've helped at a bunch of judges classes and never heard any talk of marking outside the norm. In fact I have seen it at every class I was at. Some people you wonder if they like food. But if they are allowed to stand and recite the pledge and get their certificate why are we then trying to change them at contests? These people don't just pop up one day inside a normally average judge.

In the last judging class, we were all asked to stand and give our scores. If your score was out of line, you were asked to defend why you gave that score.

They are there from the beginning and have the personality to be this way. I would like to be a fly on the wall when someone tries to tell that person to change what they do. Hahaha

If they don't like it, they can be referred to my previous post and be walked out of the judging tent.

I vote that thiere is a DB for Judging attendance that shows by Sanction Body (FBA, KCBS, etc.) by Judge Title (Master, Certified, etc.) by Judges last & first name and Postal Code (ZIP). That is a DB with 6 fields as follows:
-Sanction Body: (LOV/Drop Down List - 10 alpha Numeric Characters)
-Judge Title: (LOV/Drop Down List - 10 alpha Numeric Characters)
-Last Name: (20 Alpha Characters)
-First Name: (20 Alpha Characters)
-Postal Code: (Zip) (5 Numeric Characters)
-Event(s) No Show (Not Including Proper Cancelations): (Intiger Numeric 2 Characters)

I am now going to take my asprin with a half bottle of Gentlemen Jack.

Can I have some?????

 

[BigJimsBBQ]

Can I have some?????

Big Jim passes Jeff the half bottle of Gentlemen Jack

 

[Divemaster]

Big Jim passes Jeff the half bottle of Gentlemen Jack

You're a good man... Look behind you, there should be a bottle of Single Barrel for later...

 

[Skip]

Normally, I would agree with you, the problem is that you are not talking about some defined, systematic, approch to judging. There is always going to be some (remember the word 'some') subjective reflection in the scoring. Now if a judge stretches that 'some subjective reflection' of scoring to an extrema (listen to the words... extrema) where the table gives a score of 9-9-9-9-9-3. Yes, I would say that someone needs to talk to the judge that scored it low and find out why.

Talk and ask why sure but direct them to change their vote? Whats to say they didn't get a gland, grizzle or just a plain ol' bad piece. With that advisory what is the reps next move?

 

[Skip]

You're a good man... Look behind you, there should be a bottle of Single Barrel for later...

Single barrel anejo tequila?

 

[dmprantz]

This is going to seem rude

First off, let me say that I am doing this publically in part because I have limmited PM space, and in part because I think it is an issue which should be discussed. I am not doing it to call any one out.

Next, I would like to point out that I am not a lawyer, but I like to think I have a relatively good grasp on the American legal system, and if need be, I can and will hire a lawyer.

This is a PM I received this afternoon in response to the proposal that I maintain a database of past judges. With the exception of name and signature, I am not editing it in any way:

This is going to sound bad

Please don't take it that way. I am making it known to you that I do not autorize you, or those who may work with you, to place me on a list of CBJ or subsequent lists for teams or other databases related to BBQ and KCBS affiliation.

Thanks buddy. I hope there are no hard feelings.

My understanding of the law is any individual has certain rights in this country. You have the right to privacy, so that you can prohibit people from contacting you or knowing anything about you asside from publically available information. You have the right to protect yourself from defamation, so that people cannot make false claims about you and hurt your character or reputation. You also have the right to free speech, and as long you are speaking the truth, no one is allowed to censor what you say. (Limmited exceptions apply, mostly involving the government and pornography).

As such, my intention is that if this database proceeds, since it will only be reporting factual data receieved from third persons, claims such as these will be ignored. If I am required to remove those who wish to be removed, I will not proceed to create a bad product. This only works if the facts are known, and your participation in a contest is a fact. Again, contact information is protected.

Additionally, I would like to point out that since I would only be publishing data provided by a third party, I would direct you to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 which immunizes Internet publishers from claims pertaining to data posted by third parties. Any person who wishes to remove his name should take it up with a contest organizer. I am of the opinion that any contest organizer who honors such requests should be banned from using the system.

dmp

 

[Ford]

REALITY CHECK TIME.
1. There is no national organization to monitor a database of judges. There is no need for a judge to be certified. There is no need for a judge to give an organizer anything more than their name, if they are a CBJ and contact info. The organizer should not share that info with anybody including the KCBS.

2. Judging is subjective and taste is very personal and subjective. Say what you want, a person that does not like hot will probably start at 6 and score down for other imperfections on taste. Same for not liking sweet. Under the old system they started at 9 and scored down to 8 or maybe 7 at worst for being too hot. We have judging system that will always have flaws. Having said that I trust Reps to watch scores after each category and if a judge is way out of line trust they will check with the judge. But like it or not that's the way it is. Tracking people for scoring of variance from others isn't going to happen.

3. If you are not a competition cook you have no right to comment on scores and judges. Shut the Fark up.

4. Did you see that 2 major long term contests have been cancelled this year. Keep pissing off organizers and there will be more.

5. Tonight is the title game. Can't stand Saban so hard to cheer for Bama and can't forgive Texas for beating MSU in bball so guess I'll pop the tabs on a few brews, warm up some chili and cornbread and vote for Idaho for national champion. Watch pitmasters tomorrow morning before I get on this Forum to read about all the language.

 

[Skip]

As such, my intention is that if this database proceeds, since it will only be reporting factual data receieved from third persons

Not to deviate as I think your post needs its own thread but does show that it may not be just me who has a problem with it but you can not assure that information received from third party sources is factual...can you?

Your reference to the safety of the internet publishing doesn't wash if you receive any of that info from fax phone or mail.

Wow guy I would be a little upset if you posted my PM in the forums. Are you limited by the day or do you not wish to delete any?

 

[HoDeDo]

First off, let me say that I am doing this publically in part because I have limmited PM space, and in part because I think it is an issue which should be discussed. I am not doing it to call any one out.

Next, I would like to point out that I am not a lawyer, but I like to think I have a relatively good grasp on the American legal system, and if need be, I can and will hire a lawyer.

This is a PM I received this afternoon in response to the proposal that I maintain a database of past judges. With the exception of name and signature, I am not editing it in any way:

My understanding of the law is any individual has certain rights in this country. You have the right to privacy, so that you can prohibit people from contacting you or knowing anything about you asside from publically available information. You have the right to protect yourself from defamation, so that people cannot make false claims about you and hurt your character or reputation. You also have the right to free speech, and as long you are speaking the truth, no one is allowed to censor what you say. (Limmited exceptions apply, mostly involving the government and pornography).

As such, my intention is that if this database proceeds, since it will only be reporting factual data receieved from third persons, claims such as these will be ignored. If I am required to remove those who wish to be removed, I will not proceed to create a bad product. This only works if the facts are known, and your participation in a contest is a fact. Again, contact information is protected.

Additionally, I would like to point out that since I would only be publishing data provided by a third party, I would direct you to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 which immunizes Internet publishers from claims pertaining to data posted by third parties. Any person who wishes to remove his name should take it up with a contest organizer. I am of the opinion that any contest organizer who honors such requests should be banned from using the system.

dmp

I believe that pertains to anonomized data... Unless I have opted into allow you to use my info ( which is easy enough to get, upon membership renewal) -- normally the defacto... you have to "opt out" as Skip has done with KCBS.... I would think you have to strip all personally identifable data prior to sharing.... you could look at trends - drops in a region, judges in area x, and publish that.... but only with anonomized data, no CPNI/personally identifyable stuff... Even within our organization, we have "chinese walls" to keep the identifable data siloed.... between sales and care, for example....

 

[BBQchef33]

anyone want some? Theres plenty.

 

[Skip]

anyone want some? Theres plenty.

What do I do with the little red x now that you are willing to offer one?

EDIT: Oooo popcorn!!!

 

[G$]

anyone want some? Theres plenty.

Yeah, let me grab my snuggie and I'll settle in.

 

[BBQchef33]

Yeah, let me grab my snuggie and I'll settle in.

snuggie huh? ok... (bad visual there).

btw, someone call the dog.. (I like having someone around to blame).

 

[G$]

snuggie huh? ok... (bad visual there).

btw, someone call the dog.. (I like having someone around to blame).

It's like these jokes write themselves:

 

[Scottie]

anyone want some? Theres plenty.

Man, I am not even getting mixed up in this stuff. If you can believe it, my boots aren't high enough... . Jorge would be so proud.

I'm with Ford, getting some chili and beers and watch the game. Also watch Pitmasters.

 

[dmprantz]

1. There is no national organization to monitor a database of judges.

Sure there is, it's called the KCBS Judges List. Do you not believe they are national or that they monitor a database of judges? True there is no body which encompasses all judges from all sanctioning bodies, but I don't think there really needs to be one.

There is no need for a judge to give an organizer anything more than their name, if they are a CBJ and contact info

I don't think any one has suggested anything else besides CBJ number, but AFAIK, organizers can ask for whatever they want in order to allow judges to participate.

The organizer should not share that info with anybody including the KCBS.

You and I disagree on a lot of things, and this is one of them. I think KCBS has the responsibillity to expect the names of judges used in santioned contests, and I think that organizers have the right to report factual data whenever they want.

you can not assure that information received from third party sources is factual...can you?

I will only accept data from contest organizers.

Your reference to the safety of the internet publishing doesn't wash if you receive any of that info from fax phone or mail.

I refuse to accept data from FAX or USPS. I only acept digital data, as anything else implies that I am transcribing - which I don't do.

I believe that pertains to anonomized data...

There are a couple of issues here, and it largely depends on use and purpose. Selling PII for profit is largely frowned upon and forbidden after opt out. Since this won't be for profit, I think it's okay. This is more closely related to publishing issues where factual data is being reported for free. Also, while a name is considered to be PII, it's not really in the same realm as an eMail address. Fortunately, I work for a company which specializes in PII protection and FCRA compliance, so I think I'll get the appropriate advice when the time comes.

dmp

 

[Skip]

I will only accept data from contest organizers.

That still doesn't assure factual information.

Its PII unless it is made available to the public by a branch of government. Last I check there was no Secretary of BBQ. So someone wishing to opt out has every right.

 

[Meat@Slim's]

anyone want some? Theres plenty.

I actually own a pair of these bowls.

And you are right (sniffle) this has been a special thread.