>>I see results that could be received if you divide all point to 3, not by 4. For me this means that only three judges had entered their scores. Or you had changed the rules meanwhile. I am disappointed of the darkness in the judging. I collect the results after each scores change in order to have some more details. Do you afraid of something and therefore we cannot see the details of the judger scores?
>
>The scores you see are the final scores. In some events, not all judges were able to submit the scores within the timeframe. That's why your calculation results in less than 4 judges, where applicable.
>
>As for your darkness comment, as I already said, the extra feedback that you wish to receive are not under my control. If you wish to post a message here and try to collect some, go ahead. Maybe some will join your discussion and provide some comment. Their goal was to deliver a score not comment. This is why no comment is being indicated. If you saw that somewhere, let me know and I'll verify who provided that information.
>
>As for your afraid last line, I really don't understand what you're trying to tell me.

As far as see, that there are not developed parts of applications I am wondering how did they evaluated. I am filling like a full that I forced my team to develop all necessary features and therefore we have lower scores, because statistics report is very heavy for execution. Teams that had not developed that part have higher performance scores!?? In this aspect what does performance means? If we have only fancy JScript menu and pages with animated gifs, without any data processing developed, should we have 100% performance? I am also disappointed that other teams are proud with "third party" participation in the development. Then you should set that teams could be as many members as we wish!