by John Stewart on Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:58 pm
Well, seeing as I defined the judging criteria, a quick explanation:
After a couple of years you drop off the list to reflect:
1. The fact that you aren't likely to be up to date with judging practice on the circuit. (It does change)
2. The fact that you are inherently less likely to turn up at a random competition to judge (so you don't need a grading - assuming you are invited to judge something, the organiser will have a good idea how good a judge they think you are).
3. Sheer practicality - an ever lengthening list of judges is very hard to maintain, leading to discrepancies and omissions. It's also that much harder to verify judging credentials that are a decade old. Who can verify you were a semi-finalist at the Random IV?
So how do you get on the list / maintain your listing?
You have to be nominated by an SSDC institution, who will either:
1. Put you on the list as a grade 3/4 judge, as this list is determined by institutions themselves.
2. Propose you to the SSDC for grade 1/2 status, which will be voted on by the SSDC.
And the basic gist of the criteria is:
Grade 1: Worlds/Euros break judge standard.
Grade 2: IV Final judge standard.
Grade 3: Competent and experienced.
Grade 4: Beginner
There are various pre-requisite criteria for grade 1 and 2 status - for example, to be considered for Grade 1 you must have won multiple IVs, broken at Euros/Worlds as a speaker or a judge etc. Likewise, for Grade 2 you would be expected (generally) to have judged external IVs/internationals, broken at IV level/judged break rounds at IV level etc.
The whole idea of grading judges isn't anything sinister - it stems from the Mace and the need to have a grade 1 judge chair every round, and at least one grade 2 judge on the panel to ensure the quality of adjudication given the distributed nature of the competition.