Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Teflon Billy" data-source="post: 2625500" data-attributes="member: 264">And you're certain that the way to draw interest from the crowd is to eliminate incumbency?  Answer it. I'll answer yours belowSimple. Worry about it when that happens. There has yet to be an identical 5 person judging comittee in the history of the awards. So far the judges have been...<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mark CMG</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">CRGreathouse</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Eric Noah</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Piratecat</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Joe G Kushner</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Crothian</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Alsih2o</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Psion</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Cthulu's Librarian</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Colonel Hardisson</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Teflon Billy</li> </ul>If I've missed anyone, hey; Bygones<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />And yes, the voting has favored the incumbents; but in the absence of misconduct or incompetence it should favor them.But that said, there has usually been one new face in the crowd each year, and again--on the absence of misconduct or incompetence--that's pretty good as well.All I'm saying is that the current system seems to be working. The Awards are growing in prestige, the job is getting done to the satisfaction of the electorate...even the number of voters participating grows every year (and seems to be this year as well) which is the concern you expressed.And yet you posit some kind of explosive growth in voter turnout--rather than the steady growth we've seen--if you eliminate (or limit) incumbency.I'm just not sure why you posit that.</blockquote>

Verification