MikeD Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I think some fans can get caught up in the "I don't necessarily like show X as much as show Y, so therefor show X is not as entertaining as show Y" which isn't precisely, or at least necessarily, correct, for the same was that saying, "I cheered and laughed more watching AVENGERS than I did while watching ANTICHRIST, so there fore AVENGERS is more entertaining or engaging" isn't necessarily correct (no, I did not cheer at all during ANTICHRIST, and probably cringed several times). Personally, I find Averngers much more enterta....wrong Avengers??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Okay - there were several points mixed together. Which one you want clarified? a. People who believe the theory that G7 corps put more butts in seats (like Guardling) ought to be in favor of fan judging, as it would provide some proof of their theory. Conversely, if those people rage in opposition, maybe it is because they know fan judging would disprove their theory. b. Since Guardling brought up money - what better way to grow the financial pie than to establish a better connection with the customer base? Oh, OK, now it makes sense. Yep, I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Okay - there were several points mixed together. Which one you want clarified? a. People who believe the theory that G7 corps put more butts in seats (like Guardling) ought to be in favor of fan judging, as it would provide some proof of their theory. Conversely, if those people rage in opposition, maybe it is because they know fan judging would disprove their theory. b. Since Guardling brought up money - what better way to grow the financial pie than to establish a better connection with the customer base? ok so if youre saying that I AM SAYING the G7 PUT more butts in seats...Which I didnt say but anyway and who do YOU think are putting butts in seats? and all you do is argue why SPECTATORS should judge but never address all the reasons i give you why I think it would be a a horrible idea....other than a vote with NO points attached. what would it prove? whos the better corps?...hardly whos a fan fav?....ok so....and no it wouldnt just who happens to be in the stands that night. that people would get what they are exactly judging ( criteria ) without bias?...haha..yeah ok empowerment?...ok...falsely but yes it could do that i suppose please explain...im very ready to listen...as well as others im sure Edited March 17, 2014 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 ok so if youre saying that I AM SAYING the G7 PUT more butts in seats...Which I didnt say but anyway and who do YOU think are putting butts in seats? and all you do is argue why SPECTATORS should judge but never address all the reasons i give you why I think it would be a a horrible idea....other than a vote with NO points attached. Why on earth are you always so contemptible toward the DCI spectators who are apparently beneath your education, beneath your experience, beneath your intellect…. Oh, never mind, that just answered itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Why on earth are you always so contemptible toward the DCI spectators who are apparently beneath your education, beneath your experience, beneath your intellect…. Oh, never mind, that just answered itself. oh please...spectators arent beneath..just cant know the ins and outs of the judging criteria..( judges have a hard enough time of it.....stop baiting..and go back to your rants that make you hear your own voice.....which is what you love...and I KNOW YOU have heard that before stuie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 ...spectators arent beneath..just cant know the ins and outs of the judging criteria... Once again, I rest my case! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Once again, I rest my case! clever Edited March 17, 2014 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 clever As for "they just can't know"; here is a type of judging sheet which could be handed out, easily understood, and I for one think this, or something like this, would spice up the gumbo a bit more. It would also give the audience a sense of partial ownership in the performance results which I personally think is a good thing: You as the audience will help with General Effect Judging; your collective scores shall be tabulated and have an impact of 5% of the total score the corps receive... (A) From 1 – 25, how well did the corps transmit emotion (happiness, sadness, anger, elation, love, hate): 1 = Never; 25 = throughout entire show (B) From 1 – 25, how well did the corps transmit engagement communication (story line, musical expression, visual expression) 1 = Never; 25 = throughout entire show Total of (A) + (B) = Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) As for "they just can't know"; here is a type of judging sheet which could be handed out, easily understood, and I for one think this, or something like this, would spice up the gumbo a bit more. It would also give the audience a sense of partial ownership in the performance results which I personally think is a good thing: You as the audience will help with General Effect Judging; your collective scores shall be tabulated and have an impact of 5% of the total score the corps receive... (A) From 1 – 25, how well did the corps transmit emotion (happiness, sadness, anger, elation, love, hate): 1 = Never; 25 = throughout entire show (B) From 1 – 25, how well did the corps transmit engagement communication (story line, musical expression, visual expression) 1 = Never; 25 = throughout entire show Total of (A) + (B) = send it to DCI....... maybe todays audience member just wants to sit and enjoy....or better yet maybe you can teach a class before each show and monitor it and then make the audience accountable for their actions.....then you can go to every corps and explain what thousands of people meant, so that they can move on from there.....thanks for clearly explaining how it works, what it all means, how people are accountable, how it benefits, what outcomes mean and how a corps moves on....thanks....i got it...so we need not move on with conversation........but i do appreciate it. Edited March 17, 2014 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 But every time we try to fix this "entertainment" issue, we are told that you cannot define criteria for what is "entertaining". That is paradoxical. If this was any other facet of the evaluation, then sure, qualified and trained judges are warranted. But we are talking about "general effect" and "entertainment" - aspects which we all admit have frequently eluded the system. Please explain how judges are held accountable in DCI, because I honestly do not know what you are referring to here. Give examples, because I am not aware of any. And what is the role of the caption head in providing accountability? Great comments from you, dyslexic! Certainly things to think about. I hope you actually get some answers to your questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.c5835d2fff8aa6a4dd9650e16024ffd3.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.