I agree to a certain extent. I am in total agreement with the merit in this case and it is so obvious that it should not be questioned. However, that has no bearing what-so-ever on questioning the process. The question 'clear winners according to whom?' comes to mind.

>>Do you mean to say that Tamar and Rainer did not deserve their awards? As I see it, both Tamar and Rainer have been very involved in the VFP community for many years, and I can not name anyone who would deserve this more. So if two persons come to a conclusion, then it's a joke, but if 10 people come to the same conclusion, then it's OK?
>>
>>Tore,
>>
>>At first I was a little uncomfortable with JB's reply, but after thinking about it more, I agree in general with him.
>>
>>This is not to cast doubt on anyone who has won the award. But Tamar herself stated, "it's related to what you've done for the community, not the product"....therefore, I think the community should decide (or at least play a significant part in the role).
>>
>>The mere fact that we have so many people asking about the award, the selection process, what it means, etc., and that only a small handful knew the answer, in itself is revealing. Don't you agree?
>>
>>
>>Kevin
>
>I have no problems at all seeing it from both sides. But if you also add the surprise aspect, I think it's better to have fewer people who pick the winner. I agree that two may be is a little to few, but in these two cases we talk about here, I think the number of "pickers" is irrelevant. When we have clear winners, it's not necessary to add too much bureaucracy.