>>>>The "community rep" didn't represent me. Frankly I doubt any one would dare speak out against the judges, so that proves nothing. The panel is completely trustworthy and there was no need of a community rep.
>>>
>>>There's just no way to do something nice to recognize a lifetime of contributions to our community without making it political, huh? It's a wonder anyone sticks their neck out in this crowd.
>>>
>>>Doug
>>
>>Frankly, I thought including a " community rep" was a fantastic idea. Regardless, I think the results speak for themselves. Great choices! :o)
>
>I haven't been keeping up - who was the community rep ? ( just curious - choices were spot on )
I have no idea. However, for transparency reasons, I really think the "community rep" identity should be disclosed just as the judges are each year. If the individual selected to be the "community rep" does not agree, then they can choose another community rep. It should be a condition of the role to participate in the voting process.
.·*´¨)
.·`TCH
(..·*
010000110101001101101000011000010111001001110000010011110111001001000010011101010111001101110100
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
Vita contingit, Vive cum eo. (Life Happens, Live With it.)
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." -- author unknown
"De omnibus dubitandum"