Does entertaining to the audience mean not credited by judges?

[Lance]

Here is the ultimate solution.

Get rid of the on-field judges. Who cares what the show looks like from the back hash? Since DCI tries to compare itself to the olympics with all its medals and major league talk I'll use a sports analogy. You don't see figure skating judges out on the ice following the skater around for a closer look do you?

I believe I speak for the entire audience when I say this is a good idea.

You speak for me. lol.

I say get rid of judging altogether...or just don't pay attention to it if it's going to make you post hideous crap about kids running around on a field twirling things and tooting on things.

Jason's doing the right thing by not paying to see that which he does not like. I'll do the same for sure.

[WarriorHal]

My impression of GE is that it is a sort of "critic's choice" award. That is, it doesn't strive to measure which corps has the most "general" effect (i.e., has the most effect on viewers/listeners, generally), but instead it strives to measure how impressive a corps is to the most-highly-educated listeners. And by "educated", I mean by the corps community itself. It's even a bit like an Academy Award, or a Grammy, a sort of peer vote, representing which show designs were the most interesting to other show designers. Although that is certainly of interest, one could argue that it isn't really "general effect".

I think a lot of people continue to confuse effect with affect. I mentioned early in this thread that a show has an affect on the audience, it has an impact one way or another which can be determined by the reaction: golf clap vs. standing O or something in between. That's not GE. Effect has many meanings, but in this instance, it refers to a result or the way something turns out. So GE is basically how well all the musical or visual elements fit together as a whole, reflecting the established, agreed upon judging criteria. It really doesn't have anything to do with the crowd's response.

[Todd Tanji]

I think a lot of people continue to confuse effect with affect. I mentioned early in this thread that a show has an affect on the audience, it has an impact one way or another which can be determined by the reaction: golf clap vs. standing O or something in between. That's not GE. Effect has many meanings, but in this instance, it refers to a result or the way something turns out. So GE is basically how well all the musical or visual elements fit together as a whole, reflecting the established, agreed upon judging criteria. It really doesn't have anything to do with the crowd's response.

Quoted for sheer brilliance. Thanks, Warrior!

We are not American Idol. We are much, much more than that.

Edited July 30, 2010 by BDUFLS

[MikeN]

But the musical GE sheet does specifically mention "entertainment" value. And I can honestly say that I think that is not considered in the slightest.

Mike

[GUARDLING]

But the musical GE sheet does specifically mention "entertainment" value. And I can honestly say that I think that is not considered in the slightest.

Mike

You may be right to a point BUt whats entertaing to one prson is not to another

[Lance]

But the musical GE sheet does specifically mention "entertainment" value. And I can honestly say that I think that is not considered in the slightest.

Mike

The judge can only rate that for themselves, though, no matter the blurb on the rubric. Ask any 10 random people in an audience who was the crowd favorite, and you'll get a multitude of answers most of the time. Ask any 10 random people in the audience which moment was the most "entertaining" and you'll get a mulititude of answers. Ask any 10 people which aspect they personally pay attention to the most (gaurd, drill, brass, percussion, etc), and you'll get a multitude of answers. Asking the judge to divine it from 100000 people while at the same time rating the design of the show is just absurd. An applause-o-meter would be more objective.

Judging is ridiculous...yet there I am always paying attention to scores.

[MikeN]

I disagree. I could make the same case that all captions are ambiguous - after all, one man's top-ranked Cavaliers drumline is not another viewer's top-ranked BD drumline. At some point you have to go with what the sheets say and trust the judges are expert enough in their fields to analyze it.

I do not, however, think that GE captions are being given the same care and attention. I think a qualified judge could be found that could consider entertainment as effect as well, or at least factored in the total value as stated on the sheets. I just believe, rightly or wrongly (I somehow don't ever see an end to the debate) that the rubric on the sheets is not being fully considered when scores are given out.

But I do agree with you that I probably spend more time worrying about this than I should...

Mike

[jjeffeory]

We sometimes forget that the people who really don't like some of these shows don't boo. Nor do they come on here to be loud and critical of ( say) the 2010 BD. Nor do they give a golf clap, or even sit on their hands.

They don't do ANY of these things anymore. They've left. We sometimes forget that their silence speaks louder than any words could ever.

Many on here don't care about those people and have told us who are still here and sometimes complain that these people shouldn't let the door hit them on the way out....

Some people just don't care.

[N.E. Brigand]

I think a lot of people continue to confuse effect with affect. I mentioned early in this thread that a show has an affect on the audience, it has an impact one way or another which can be determined by the reaction: golf clap vs. standing O or something in between. That's not GE. Effect has many meanings, but in this instance, it refers to a result or the way something turns out. So GE is basically how well all the musical or visual elements fit together as a whole, reflecting the established, agreed upon judging criteria. It really doesn't have anything to do with the crowd's response.

While I understand the distinction you're making, it's not a question of the spelling. A show has an effect on an audience (with an E, meaning "power to produce results; efficacy; force; validity; influence"*) because it affects an audience (with an A, meaning "act on" or "move") -- the difference is just one of noun vs. verb.

Affect can be a noun meaning either "feeling or emotion" or "expressed or observed emotional response", but used this way it is mainly a term restricted to psychiatry. And it doesn't work in your sentence; substitute the definitions and you get either "a show has an expressed emotional response on the audience" or "a show has an emotion on the audience", which don't make sense.

*As you say, effect has other meanings, which may be more pertinent to the question of "General Effect".

[Lance]

I disagree. I could make the same case that all captions are ambiguous - after all, one man's top-ranked Cavaliers drumline is not another viewer's top-ranked BD drumline. At some point you have to go with what the sheets say and trust the judges are expert enough in their fields to analyze it.

I do not, however, think that GE captions are being given the same care and attention. I think a qualified judge could be found that could consider entertainment as effect as well, or at least factored in the total value as stated on the sheets. I just believe, rightly or wrongly (I somehow don't ever see an end to the debate) that the rubric on the sheets is not being fully considered when scores are given out.

Mike

Yeah, there's not right or wrong or end to this. I think audience enjoyment should be a factor, too, I just think it's patently absurd to ask a judge to do that for the exact reasons I already stated. It's stupid that it's mentioned on the rubric. A questionnaire or applause-o-meter would be much more accurate. A systematic approach to incorporating those things (say an average of every regional to compensate for homers and honks for backyard corps) would be 100000000000000000000 times more objective than individual judges throwing out their perceptions at individual competitions with homers and honks.