Forum

[Morrus]

Originally Posted by Meghan

Not quite. I have a problem with them declaring their favorites THEN the submissions come in and low and behold, the favorites are on that list. I would expect that a judge gets a pile of submissions and then delve into them with an open mind.

What makes you think they don't?

A judge should be impartial and let the products on the table sway their decision. If the nominations are just going to go to their favorites anyway,

Is it not possible that the five judges collectively (they ALL vote, you know) might have agreed that the products in question were good products?

I have a problem with them getting their personal favorites on the nomination list. That's slightly dirty any way you look at it.

Or maybe there's an underlying reason why that judge had a positive opinion of a product. because, just maybe, they were good products, and the judges agreed that this was so.

By your logic, any product a judge has seen before and deemed of quality is automatically ineligle for nomination. Crap, we'd have publishers trying to hide their best work from potential judges, just in case they saw it and formed an opinion!

But the issue- once again- is that the blame keeps getting put on podcasts.

Nobody is blaming podcasts for anything.

Ok- but then why have 4 of the 6 (including the honorable mention) be websites? Why make it sound like the "blame" lay with podcasts?

Again maybe, just maybe, the judges thought those websites were good? You seem very resistant to the idea that they could have a different opinion to you; and, as an entrant, it's somewhat unseemly to be basing a complaint on what - basically - amounts to "the judges didn't nominate what I think they should have".

It's OK for a general voter to express that - expected, even; an entrant trying to find reasons why the products he/she would have preferred be nominated weren't is somewhat questionable.