The coordinator of the Belgrade Show, and his friend, sent comments, and asked me to post them. While I am not willing to debate this further, since it is going nowhere, it is only fair to post their comments. However, interspersed in their comments will be my own response to points that I feel need a response. That said, here are their comments:
MIKE (re: the Pine Tree Academy show): "I noticed that judges had their cars in the show...not a problem in my eyes, but if you folks (HotKarz) are going to BLAST Belgrade folks about this, you should point this out with all shows."
HOTKARZ RESPONSE: HotKarz did NOT "blast Belgrade" about judges having their cars in the show. Our readers did, and we simply posted their comments as we are posting yours. So HotKarz would appreciate it if you refrain from making untrue accusations. My article on judges' cars that was posted earlier states emphatically that we do not have a problem with judges' cars. Our only problem is with poor judges. A poor judge does not become a good judge just because you remove his car. And a good judge does not become a poor judge just because he has a car in the show.
SCOTT (Belgrade Show Coordinator): " We have LOTS of changes planned for next year. First, I am not judging..."
HOTKARZ: Good change.
SCOTT: "...however, I will be overseeing the whole operation since I am the coordinator.But we will be adding 4 more judges, we will hold judges meetings, adding more classes, more activities, also possibly adding some Saturday events, Early Bird specials."
HOTKARZ: Excellent. However, no one complained about the quality of your show - only about the quality of the judging.
SCOTT: "And the judges will be going around in groups of two this time. And the judges cars will be in the show, but in a (separate) class of their own, and judged by the top 3-6 car owners pulled out for outstanding detail, with the same judging sheets the judges use."
HOTKARZ: We do not have a problem with that, though it sounds a little "overdone" and unnecessary. And what qualifies those car owners to be judges? Just because their cars are well detailed? Whatever. But I could bring a new 2009 off the showroom floor, expertly detailed by the car dealer, and win, but that does not qualify me as a judge. Just my thought on this.
SCOTT: "Also in each class we are considering going with 4 trophies per class. As far as the comment someone else put up about pulling out the 4 cars from the rest. Well, that will be different as well. We will do that only after the judging. The point of doing that was to make it so not one person wins all the trophies like 1st in his class, best engine, best of show and peoples choice. This gives more people a chance to win."
HOTKARZ: Now that is where we see a real problem, Scott. Anyone concerned with fairness would not prevent anyone from winning a trophy they rightfully earned. If someone does such a great job as to be WORTHY of more than one trophy, then he/she should win as many as they are entitled to. If he wins 1st in his class, and he ALSO has the best engine, best paint and best car in the show, then he deserves the awards for being the best. To limit the number of trophies an entrant can win does nothing more than cheat a deserving person out of awards they worked for and earned. EXAMPLE: If you get shot saving your entire regiment in a war, and you EARN the Purple Heart, the Silver Star and the Medal of Honor, should you only receive the Purple Heart? Or, you bust your hump working two jobs. Should you only get paid for one, and the other paycheck given to some welfare guy because he needs it more? As for giving "more people a chance to win", you should reconsider that - if they are not the real winner, they should not win. They would not be "winning" anything. They would simply be getting the trophy that someone else earned - and that is wrong.
SCOTT: "I Think the Belgrade Show is run very much like every other show in this state..."
HOTKARZ: There is no "standard" in Maine - all shows are different. And no one had a problem with your show - they only objected to problems in the judging. And I think the folks would like to have seen you offer changes in the quality and fairness of the judging, since that was the source of their discontent. But that issue seems to be absent in your comment. I hope you give as much thought to choosing/educating GOOD judges as you apparently put into the other aspects of your show.
Again, HotKarz would like for those who attended the Belgrade show to submit their input/suggestions/criticisms to Scott at chevyshowtrucks@yahoo.com. Scott has asked for thoughts and ideas.
And as far as the Belgrade show is concerned, that is the last word. HotKarz is moving on...
Bill
Monday, July 21, 2008
An Update on Belgrade
I was going to let the Belgrade situation die an ugly death. After all, it is not the intention of HotKarz to do unnecessary harm. And the folks who attended that show lodged numerous complaints about how the judging was conducted (everything else seemed fine). The order of the day was "damage control" - move on. And I decided I would just go to their show next year, to see for myself, and hopefully to see that appropriate changes were made.
But meeting with the organizer of the Belgrade show (Scott) at Pine Tree Academy changed everything. He told me that HotKarz was not telling the truth (we were, of course - we did nothing but post actual, unedited emails). He also said we were unfair, to only post the negatives. But as readers of HotKarz know, I specifically begged people who liked the show to send me their opinions - stand up for the show if you liked it, please! But no one did. Not one person! But I did get several more emails that restated the judging problems.
I could not very well post positive comments if there weren't any. But Scott still insisted that "most folks loved the show and had no problem with it." Fine - if they liked it so much, why were they not willing to stand up and say so? Scott then copped the same attitude as Sanford by saying, "If they didn't like the show, don't come back next year. We don't need them." Nice attitude for someone who says he is trying to make his show bigger.
He then told me that, since some judges did not show up, he asked "Roy" to "follow another judge, but not BE a judge". I thought, "Hm-m-m! Judges who need groupies!" If the guy was not a judge, he had no business "following" a judge around and "helping" him. Either he was a judge, or he should not have been involved. If he was not a judge, then exactly what WAS his purpose - to hold the judges' clipboard??? Nothing against Roy - he's just caught in the middle, after only trying to help.
Then this guy Scott really floored me. First, he said he was the head judge, and there was no "good ol' boys" network. His judging was fair and unbiased. So I asked him how he votes in a peer judged show. He stated that in a peer show, he votes for his buddies, and not the best cars, and he saw nothing wrong with that. Bear in mind that this is the same guy who, in his previous breath, stated he was a fair and unbiased judge.
I asked him to repeat, and he did - in a peer judged show, he said it was OK to forego judging altogether and just vote for his buddies. I guess he does not realize that "peer judged" simply means the peers are the JUDGES, and therefore they are expected to JUDGE.
Now, I know a lot of folks do that, and I don't normally see a huge problem with that, since those folks do not profess to be judges who are experts at judging cars. But THIS guy claims to be a judge! And if he does not have the integrity to be a fair judge in a peer show, how can anyone expect him to be a fair judge in a judged show?
Maybe Scott is a fine man. But he certainly has zero qualifications for judging anything. He does state that one of the judges, named Bo, I believe, is an expert. I'll give him that. Fine. But if any or all of the other judges were not qualified, that taints the entire judging. One good judge does not make for "fair judging". All it takes is for one bad apple to spoil the entire barrel. Since Scott, himself, readily claims to be a "good ol' boy" type judge in peer judging, I would not have much faith in his objectivity when judging any show, or in choosing judges.
Having spoken with Scott face to face, I am tempted to believe the real problem was not the show, itself, but rather the person who arranged the judging. And I am just as certain there was no "evil intent" in the judging. Just poor judgement. I believe Scott is a good man, with honest intentions, but a poor judge who may not even realize it. If Bo is the expert Scott claims, perhaps he should be the person to choose judges, and teach them the basics. And perhaps Scott should stick to organizing the show, which I understand he did quite well. I simply think this is a case of a good banana trying hard to be a good orange. Stick with the part you are good at, and let others do what they are good at.
Scott says that he doesn't plan on making many changes for next year, so I see no point in wasting my time and money going to his show - if he cannot recognize that something is wrong, then he certainly cannot fix it. He also says next year will be "bigger and better." I wish him all the luck. But judging from the many, many negative comments I received from participants, I'm not sure that his show will get bigger.
Here's an idea - if you went to the Belgrade show, Scott encouraged you to email him (in his email that we posted earlier). His address is chevyshowtrucks@yahoo.com. Do him a big favor - if you really liked his show and you do not think any changes are necessary, email him and tell him so - he could use the support. But if you went to his show and were not satisfied, then do him a favor and let him know. If you do not, he will have no reason to make any attempt to improve.
We do not need any show to die. We just need to work at improving the ones we have. Some, like Sanford, refuse to improve. That is their choice. But most organizers are willing to listen when the folks speak. And since you are the people, you can do your part by emailing Scott either with praise, or with constructive criticism - or both.
But please, no matter how you feel, be civil and polite. As for me, I am closing the books on this issue. If I hear that problems are acknowledged, and appropriate changes made, that's fine - I'll do my part to make sure everyone knows the show is improving.
Otherwise, I'll just put this on the same dusty shelf as a certain show in Sanford.
But meeting with the organizer of the Belgrade show (Scott) at Pine Tree Academy changed everything. He told me that HotKarz was not telling the truth (we were, of course - we did nothing but post actual, unedited emails). He also said we were unfair, to only post the negatives. But as readers of HotKarz know, I specifically begged people who liked the show to send me their opinions - stand up for the show if you liked it, please! But no one did. Not one person! But I did get several more emails that restated the judging problems.
I could not very well post positive comments if there weren't any. But Scott still insisted that "most folks loved the show and had no problem with it." Fine - if they liked it so much, why were they not willing to stand up and say so? Scott then copped the same attitude as Sanford by saying, "If they didn't like the show, don't come back next year. We don't need them." Nice attitude for someone who says he is trying to make his show bigger.
He then told me that, since some judges did not show up, he asked "Roy" to "follow another judge, but not BE a judge". I thought, "Hm-m-m! Judges who need groupies!" If the guy was not a judge, he had no business "following" a judge around and "helping" him. Either he was a judge, or he should not have been involved. If he was not a judge, then exactly what WAS his purpose - to hold the judges' clipboard??? Nothing against Roy - he's just caught in the middle, after only trying to help.
Then this guy Scott really floored me. First, he said he was the head judge, and there was no "good ol' boys" network. His judging was fair and unbiased. So I asked him how he votes in a peer judged show. He stated that in a peer show, he votes for his buddies, and not the best cars, and he saw nothing wrong with that. Bear in mind that this is the same guy who, in his previous breath, stated he was a fair and unbiased judge.
I asked him to repeat, and he did - in a peer judged show, he said it was OK to forego judging altogether and just vote for his buddies. I guess he does not realize that "peer judged" simply means the peers are the JUDGES, and therefore they are expected to JUDGE.
Now, I know a lot of folks do that, and I don't normally see a huge problem with that, since those folks do not profess to be judges who are experts at judging cars. But THIS guy claims to be a judge! And if he does not have the integrity to be a fair judge in a peer show, how can anyone expect him to be a fair judge in a judged show?
Maybe Scott is a fine man. But he certainly has zero qualifications for judging anything. He does state that one of the judges, named Bo, I believe, is an expert. I'll give him that. Fine. But if any or all of the other judges were not qualified, that taints the entire judging. One good judge does not make for "fair judging". All it takes is for one bad apple to spoil the entire barrel. Since Scott, himself, readily claims to be a "good ol' boy" type judge in peer judging, I would not have much faith in his objectivity when judging any show, or in choosing judges.
Having spoken with Scott face to face, I am tempted to believe the real problem was not the show, itself, but rather the person who arranged the judging. And I am just as certain there was no "evil intent" in the judging. Just poor judgement. I believe Scott is a good man, with honest intentions, but a poor judge who may not even realize it. If Bo is the expert Scott claims, perhaps he should be the person to choose judges, and teach them the basics. And perhaps Scott should stick to organizing the show, which I understand he did quite well. I simply think this is a case of a good banana trying hard to be a good orange. Stick with the part you are good at, and let others do what they are good at.
Scott says that he doesn't plan on making many changes for next year, so I see no point in wasting my time and money going to his show - if he cannot recognize that something is wrong, then he certainly cannot fix it. He also says next year will be "bigger and better." I wish him all the luck. But judging from the many, many negative comments I received from participants, I'm not sure that his show will get bigger.
Here's an idea - if you went to the Belgrade show, Scott encouraged you to email him (in his email that we posted earlier). His address is chevyshowtrucks@yahoo.com. Do him a big favor - if you really liked his show and you do not think any changes are necessary, email him and tell him so - he could use the support. But if you went to his show and were not satisfied, then do him a favor and let him know. If you do not, he will have no reason to make any attempt to improve.
We do not need any show to die. We just need to work at improving the ones we have. Some, like Sanford, refuse to improve. That is their choice. But most organizers are willing to listen when the folks speak. And since you are the people, you can do your part by emailing Scott either with praise, or with constructive criticism - or both.
But please, no matter how you feel, be civil and polite. As for me, I am closing the books on this issue. If I hear that problems are acknowledged, and appropriate changes made, that's fine - I'll do my part to make sure everyone knows the show is improving.
Otherwise, I'll just put this on the same dusty shelf as a certain show in Sanford.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
An Unplanned Post...
Should a judge have a car in the show? This is a perplexing question with no simple, cut-n-dried answer. If you need a simple answer, it would have to be "NO". But a simple answer is not the best answer.
It is always nice to have judges with no horse in the race. It simplifies things. But it does not make them better, and here's why:
If a judge is so weak as to be biased about his own vehicle, then in the absence of his vehicle, he is weak enough to give points to his buddies, rather than to the best vehicles. In other words, a poor judge is a poor judge, whether he has a car in the show or not.
The corollary, of course, is that a good judge is a good judge, whether he has a car in the show or not.
If a show chooses judges who a) know cars very well, b) have integrity and can be trusted, and c) the judge is not permitted to judge his own class (just to avoid any possible appearance of impropriety), then it should not be a problem if the judge has a car in the show. He cannot vote for himself, and his integrity and qualifications keep him unbiased in other classes. You simply cannot expect anything better. A good judge is a good judge. He is the kind of person who, in a peer judged show, will always vote for the best cars in their class - even if they are not his best buddies. He is trustworthy, and his judgment is sound.
And that's good enough for me! As for my "buddies", they understand that they will only get my vote if they earn it. I vote for cars, not people. They accept that.
(NOTE: One commenter stated, "Look, Bottom line, If you are a judge in a show and you do not want to hear any b.s., forget the trophy for that one day! I mean, one less trophy, is it really that big of a deal?!?I'm sick to death of these judges whining about how they don't want to come off bad! "
With all due respect, I think he is missing the point - once more: a good judge does not become bad by being in the show, and a bad judge does not become good by staying out of the show. If good judges are chosen, there is no legitimate reason why he cannot be in the show, as long as he IS a good judge, and does not judge his own class. Either he is honest, or he isn't. If he isn't, taking his car out will not make him more honest! And, one more time, it is NOT about the trophy. But if he has EARNED it, he should be entitled to try for it, just like anyone else.)
It is always nice to have judges with no horse in the race. It simplifies things. But it does not make them better, and here's why:
If a judge is so weak as to be biased about his own vehicle, then in the absence of his vehicle, he is weak enough to give points to his buddies, rather than to the best vehicles. In other words, a poor judge is a poor judge, whether he has a car in the show or not.
The corollary, of course, is that a good judge is a good judge, whether he has a car in the show or not.
If a show chooses judges who a) know cars very well, b) have integrity and can be trusted, and c) the judge is not permitted to judge his own class (just to avoid any possible appearance of impropriety), then it should not be a problem if the judge has a car in the show. He cannot vote for himself, and his integrity and qualifications keep him unbiased in other classes. You simply cannot expect anything better. A good judge is a good judge. He is the kind of person who, in a peer judged show, will always vote for the best cars in their class - even if they are not his best buddies. He is trustworthy, and his judgment is sound.
And that's good enough for me! As for my "buddies", they understand that they will only get my vote if they earn it. I vote for cars, not people. They accept that.
(NOTE: One commenter stated, "Look, Bottom line, If you are a judge in a show and you do not want to hear any b.s., forget the trophy for that one day! I mean, one less trophy, is it really that big of a deal?!?I'm sick to death of these judges whining about how they don't want to come off bad! "
With all due respect, I think he is missing the point - once more: a good judge does not become bad by being in the show, and a bad judge does not become good by staying out of the show. If good judges are chosen, there is no legitimate reason why he cannot be in the show, as long as he IS a good judge, and does not judge his own class. Either he is honest, or he isn't. If he isn't, taking his car out will not make him more honest! And, one more time, it is NOT about the trophy. But if he has EARNED it, he should be entitled to try for it, just like anyone else.)
Pine Tree Academy
The Casco Bay show at Pine Tree Academy in Freeport was quite different this year. Last year, I was disappointed that we won. Yes, you heard that correctly. It was a judged show, by points, but the judges last year were lax, and in a true points show, my car should never have won. It simply is not a "points" car, and I know it.
This year was greatly improved (though some folks were not happy that it was a strict points show). But as a points show, this one was bordering on exceptional. They were almost too strict. I saw the sheets the judges had to use, and it was even more comprehensive than the standard. If your car was not perfect, you should not be disappointed if you did not win. In a points show, perfection is sought.
The field was well laid out, as usual, and well planned. Organization was the key, and this show was well organized. And the hosts did not intentionally permit any "jumping the fence" - those who tried it were moved to appropriate classes quickly. That, too, was as it should be. The hosts understood the value of class integrity. And the judges were thorough, and if there was any bias, it did not show. (If I didn't know any better, I'd think they were readers of this blog!)
But nothing is perfect, and neither was this show. There was one obvious, and in my opinion serious flaw that is easily corrected for next year - some of the judges were "handlers". I'll be frank (if Frank doesn't mind): judges are not supposed to touch any part of any vehicle at any time. If the judge cannot see something, then he/she is to simply not apply any points in that category. Judge only what you can see without touching. If the doors are not open, then do not give full points for interior - only what you can see. But do not open the doors! And do not climb in and make yourself comfy, as I observed two judges doing. If the hood is not open, do not give any points for the engine compartment. Do not open the hood without the owner's permission.
I saw judges run their hands on the inside of bumpers, where dirt accumulates, then ran those same gritty hands over the rain-soaked finish. A serious no-no.
Judges: do not touch any part of any vehicle at any time, for any reason. You may ask the owner, if present, to open things for you. Otherwise, you do not give points for things you cannot observe.
Other than this one flaw, I found the Pine Tree Academy show to be otherwise nearly flawless. I'll be back next year, even though I do not own a "points worthy" vehicle :o)
P.S. One reader did make a good point: The Academy should seriously consider including a class for CUSTOMS next year. The lack of such a class today caused problems with at least one or two fine vehicles, and resulted in a class "mis-match" that was unfair to some.
This year was greatly improved (though some folks were not happy that it was a strict points show). But as a points show, this one was bordering on exceptional. They were almost too strict. I saw the sheets the judges had to use, and it was even more comprehensive than the standard. If your car was not perfect, you should not be disappointed if you did not win. In a points show, perfection is sought.
The field was well laid out, as usual, and well planned. Organization was the key, and this show was well organized. And the hosts did not intentionally permit any "jumping the fence" - those who tried it were moved to appropriate classes quickly. That, too, was as it should be. The hosts understood the value of class integrity. And the judges were thorough, and if there was any bias, it did not show. (If I didn't know any better, I'd think they were readers of this blog!)
But nothing is perfect, and neither was this show. There was one obvious, and in my opinion serious flaw that is easily corrected for next year - some of the judges were "handlers". I'll be frank (if Frank doesn't mind): judges are not supposed to touch any part of any vehicle at any time. If the judge cannot see something, then he/she is to simply not apply any points in that category. Judge only what you can see without touching. If the doors are not open, then do not give full points for interior - only what you can see. But do not open the doors! And do not climb in and make yourself comfy, as I observed two judges doing. If the hood is not open, do not give any points for the engine compartment. Do not open the hood without the owner's permission.
I saw judges run their hands on the inside of bumpers, where dirt accumulates, then ran those same gritty hands over the rain-soaked finish. A serious no-no.
Judges: do not touch any part of any vehicle at any time, for any reason. You may ask the owner, if present, to open things for you. Otherwise, you do not give points for things you cannot observe.
Other than this one flaw, I found the Pine Tree Academy show to be otherwise nearly flawless. I'll be back next year, even though I do not own a "points worthy" vehicle :o)
P.S. One reader did make a good point: The Academy should seriously consider including a class for CUSTOMS next year. The lack of such a class today caused problems with at least one or two fine vehicles, and resulted in a class "mis-match" that was unfair to some.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Showdown At Lincoln
Well, I wouldn't call it a showdown. A couple of folks connected with the club that put on the Lincoln show told me not to expect too much. They were right.
Oh, the folks were friendly, as usual, and George Giroux (Prez of ECCC) was gracious and a fine gentleman. I like him. The problems were a couple of the "usual suspects", which were allowed to happen because of either a lack of planning, or a lack of interest. I doubt these problems exist very much in the bigger shows they put on "down south". Personally, I feel if you are going to put on a show, give it your best, even if it's a small show. Otherwise you are telling the participants that they are not as important as the folks in the bigger metro areas. If it's not good in your "big" shows, it's not good for the little ones, either. A little respect, please.
One person found it questionable that a Camaro took Best of Show at a show run by a Camaro club. I just chalked it up to the fact that 1/3 of the participants owned a Camaro, so it stood to reason that 1/3 of all votes would go for a Camaro. Simple human nature - you vote for what you like. These folks like Camaros. No one could expect any other outcome. Show me the largest single class in a show, and 9 times out of 10 I can tell you which class will produce Best of Show - unless the spectators vote, or it is a "judged" show.
The first problem was the now-famous "Sanford Debacle". There were classes, but no one could find you because everyone was told to park wherever they wished. This, as you know, makes voting both difficult and frustrating. Again I had folks tell me they were not going to bother to vote because they did not want to have to spend the morning "hunting" for the vehicles in 20 different classes (I gave up after just 6 classes). One man told me he was just going to vote for the first car he saw in each class. As you can easily see, this method of "park where you please" creates an unfair voting system for all, and tells the participants that the host is not concerned with their needs.
The second "problem" isn't really a problem, because participants were aware of the strange "classing" at this show. What does a Mustang, an AMX Javelin and a Camaro SS have in common? Other than the fact they are all cars, not much. But at this show, they all were assigned - by intent - to the same class. Strange, yes. Fair? Probably not. But it is the way the classes were set up, so participants really have no gripe if they chose to participate. Even on HotKarz.com, our listing of this show specifically stated "Please check classes - all vehicles not included". If you are told to expect this, then you have no right to complain when you find it is true. But I can certainly empathize with those who got caught in this sort of classing.
The third problem, as usual, concerns those unscrupulous "trophy poachers" who jump over the fence, registering in classes where they do not belong, all for the sake of stealing a trophy they do not deserve. This problem is growing in scope because WE, the people, not only allow it, but encourage it by voting for those cheats. Every time someone votes for a vehicle that is out of its class, that person encourages that bad behaviour. And it WILL come back and bite you - sooner or later, someone will pirate YOUR class, and steal the accolades for YOUR accomplishments. And who will you blame?
Well, you can certainly blame the jerk who jumps the fence, like the guy who owns a certain custom Ford - he jumps the fence in almost every show he enters. Certainly, he has a remarkable car - a '51 Red & White Custom Ford. A real winner - as a CUSTOM. But it belongs with all the other custom Fords, and not in Special Interest. By registering in Special Interest, that '51 Ford finds easy pickin's, since most Special Interest vehicles are not very imposing when it comes to beauty. And even though there is nothing "Special Interest" about a custom Ford, he wins 1st place handily, because many voters vote by their eyes, and not their heads. They do not stop to realize that the vehicle is in the wrong class, and therefore is not entitled to ANY votes in that class. None! If I enter a righteous Mustang in the Camaro class, it would be a travesty if anyone voted for my Mustang, no matter how perfect it is, because they are supposed to be voting for a Camaro! It's the Camaro class!
EXAMPLE: A stock truck, fresh off the showroom floor - did not enter in "Stock Trucks". Entered in "Special Interest". A custom, shaved Chevy did not enter in "CUSTOMS - ALL". Entered in "Special Interest". A custom '51 FORD did not enter in "CUSTOMS-ALL". Entered in - you guessed it - "Special Interest". One more time for old times sake: SPECIAL INTEREST is NOT just a catch-all class for everyone who is either an orphan, or who cannot compete in their own class. This is as much a class as any other, and deserves the same consideration. I did not try to enter my Woody in Customs, or Trucks. So please show me the same respect by keeping your vehicles in their own class. I'm sorry, but it irks me when a car with class is owned by someone who doesn't know the meaning of the word.
Don't forget that everyone who has ever voted for a vehicle out of its class is just as guilty as the person who jumps the fence. When a person votes for a vehicle that obviously does not belong in that class, that person does a disservice to everyone in the show. That person is saying, "It's OK to cheat - as long as you don't do it in MY class!"
Even though the show in Lincoln was very small - about 50 vehicles - there were at least (7) instances where owners jumped the fence for the express purpose of trying to poach a trophy that really was earned by someone else. And most succeeded, which effectively cheated (7) deserving entrants. And again I say, if those cheats need trophies so bad, come by my house - I have (4) tubs in the shed filled with trophies - take your pick! After all, you obviously do not care how you get your trophies!
I would like to make a very strong recommendation here. If you care about honesty and integrity of shows, and about the right people winning the praise they (YOU) deserve, then simply follow this little rule of integrity:
When you vote in a class, vote only for a vehicle that legitimately belongs in that class. Do not encourage the cheats and trophy poachers by voting for them. Let them know we do not appreciate having anyone being the prositute in the neighborhood. Let them know that if they jump the fence, they will lose, as they should. Finding a vehicle that is obviously in the wrong class is just the same as finding someone's spouse in the wrong bed. It does not deserve praise, nor awards. It deserves only disdain.
If we do not follow that simple rule, understand that the shows, and the awards, will be meaningless. And I, for one, am not interested in winning a meaningless award. You can buy awards, and they would have as much meaning as those that are not honestly earned.
It takes a lifetime to earn respect. It only takes one case of cheating to throw it all away!
That said, I am now preparing to be "Banned in Lincoln" :o)
Bill
Oh, the folks were friendly, as usual, and George Giroux (Prez of ECCC) was gracious and a fine gentleman. I like him. The problems were a couple of the "usual suspects", which were allowed to happen because of either a lack of planning, or a lack of interest. I doubt these problems exist very much in the bigger shows they put on "down south". Personally, I feel if you are going to put on a show, give it your best, even if it's a small show. Otherwise you are telling the participants that they are not as important as the folks in the bigger metro areas. If it's not good in your "big" shows, it's not good for the little ones, either. A little respect, please.
One person found it questionable that a Camaro took Best of Show at a show run by a Camaro club. I just chalked it up to the fact that 1/3 of the participants owned a Camaro, so it stood to reason that 1/3 of all votes would go for a Camaro. Simple human nature - you vote for what you like. These folks like Camaros. No one could expect any other outcome. Show me the largest single class in a show, and 9 times out of 10 I can tell you which class will produce Best of Show - unless the spectators vote, or it is a "judged" show.
The first problem was the now-famous "Sanford Debacle". There were classes, but no one could find you because everyone was told to park wherever they wished. This, as you know, makes voting both difficult and frustrating. Again I had folks tell me they were not going to bother to vote because they did not want to have to spend the morning "hunting" for the vehicles in 20 different classes (I gave up after just 6 classes). One man told me he was just going to vote for the first car he saw in each class. As you can easily see, this method of "park where you please" creates an unfair voting system for all, and tells the participants that the host is not concerned with their needs.
The second "problem" isn't really a problem, because participants were aware of the strange "classing" at this show. What does a Mustang, an AMX Javelin and a Camaro SS have in common? Other than the fact they are all cars, not much. But at this show, they all were assigned - by intent - to the same class. Strange, yes. Fair? Probably not. But it is the way the classes were set up, so participants really have no gripe if they chose to participate. Even on HotKarz.com, our listing of this show specifically stated "Please check classes - all vehicles not included". If you are told to expect this, then you have no right to complain when you find it is true. But I can certainly empathize with those who got caught in this sort of classing.
The third problem, as usual, concerns those unscrupulous "trophy poachers" who jump over the fence, registering in classes where they do not belong, all for the sake of stealing a trophy they do not deserve. This problem is growing in scope because WE, the people, not only allow it, but encourage it by voting for those cheats. Every time someone votes for a vehicle that is out of its class, that person encourages that bad behaviour. And it WILL come back and bite you - sooner or later, someone will pirate YOUR class, and steal the accolades for YOUR accomplishments. And who will you blame?
Well, you can certainly blame the jerk who jumps the fence, like the guy who owns a certain custom Ford - he jumps the fence in almost every show he enters. Certainly, he has a remarkable car - a '51 Red & White Custom Ford. A real winner - as a CUSTOM. But it belongs with all the other custom Fords, and not in Special Interest. By registering in Special Interest, that '51 Ford finds easy pickin's, since most Special Interest vehicles are not very imposing when it comes to beauty. And even though there is nothing "Special Interest" about a custom Ford, he wins 1st place handily, because many voters vote by their eyes, and not their heads. They do not stop to realize that the vehicle is in the wrong class, and therefore is not entitled to ANY votes in that class. None! If I enter a righteous Mustang in the Camaro class, it would be a travesty if anyone voted for my Mustang, no matter how perfect it is, because they are supposed to be voting for a Camaro! It's the Camaro class!
EXAMPLE: A stock truck, fresh off the showroom floor - did not enter in "Stock Trucks". Entered in "Special Interest". A custom, shaved Chevy did not enter in "CUSTOMS - ALL". Entered in "Special Interest". A custom '51 FORD did not enter in "CUSTOMS-ALL". Entered in - you guessed it - "Special Interest". One more time for old times sake: SPECIAL INTEREST is NOT just a catch-all class for everyone who is either an orphan, or who cannot compete in their own class. This is as much a class as any other, and deserves the same consideration. I did not try to enter my Woody in Customs, or Trucks. So please show me the same respect by keeping your vehicles in their own class. I'm sorry, but it irks me when a car with class is owned by someone who doesn't know the meaning of the word.
Don't forget that everyone who has ever voted for a vehicle out of its class is just as guilty as the person who jumps the fence. When a person votes for a vehicle that obviously does not belong in that class, that person does a disservice to everyone in the show. That person is saying, "It's OK to cheat - as long as you don't do it in MY class!"
Even though the show in Lincoln was very small - about 50 vehicles - there were at least (7) instances where owners jumped the fence for the express purpose of trying to poach a trophy that really was earned by someone else. And most succeeded, which effectively cheated (7) deserving entrants. And again I say, if those cheats need trophies so bad, come by my house - I have (4) tubs in the shed filled with trophies - take your pick! After all, you obviously do not care how you get your trophies!
I would like to make a very strong recommendation here. If you care about honesty and integrity of shows, and about the right people winning the praise they (YOU) deserve, then simply follow this little rule of integrity:
When you vote in a class, vote only for a vehicle that legitimately belongs in that class. Do not encourage the cheats and trophy poachers by voting for them. Let them know we do not appreciate having anyone being the prositute in the neighborhood. Let them know that if they jump the fence, they will lose, as they should. Finding a vehicle that is obviously in the wrong class is just the same as finding someone's spouse in the wrong bed. It does not deserve praise, nor awards. It deserves only disdain.
If we do not follow that simple rule, understand that the shows, and the awards, will be meaningless. And I, for one, am not interested in winning a meaningless award. You can buy awards, and they would have as much meaning as those that are not honestly earned.
It takes a lifetime to earn respect. It only takes one case of cheating to throw it all away!
That said, I am now preparing to be "Banned in Lincoln" :o)
Bill
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
More Super Cruise Trophies
The HotKarz Super Cruise has become quite a race. With just a few more locations left to hold balloting, there are many fine vehicles in the running. We expected that. But what we did not expect is just how close the race would be.
We figure that more of these fine vehicles deserve to win, particularly if they are only one or two votes behind another (out of over 300 votes). So we have decided to double the number of Super Cruise trophies to be awarded at the Kiwanis Show in Standish on August 10th.
HotKarz will be awarding a 1st, 2nd and 3rd place trophy as previously advertised, but we will also be awarding three very nice trophies for Honorable Mention, because this race is so very close. Anyone who gets that close deserves to win.
Truth be told, HotKarz thinks everyone is a winner. But our pockets are not that deep, so only the Top 6 will receive awards. But that doubles your chances, so make sure you come to the cruises where balloting is held. This week, balloting will be held tonight at the Big Dipper (Riverside Dairy Bar) in Lisbon Falls on Rte 196.
After that, it's at Shaw's Ridge on the 22nd and Sonny's (Lyman) on the 28th. And don't forget - there is still one "mystery" location where balloting will be held. It's anyone's guess where and when we will show up with the ballot box.
So far, 86 vehicles have received votes. Of those, 16 are serious contenders, but only 6 owners will walk away with the trophies.
Good luck to you all.
We figure that more of these fine vehicles deserve to win, particularly if they are only one or two votes behind another (out of over 300 votes). So we have decided to double the number of Super Cruise trophies to be awarded at the Kiwanis Show in Standish on August 10th.
HotKarz will be awarding a 1st, 2nd and 3rd place trophy as previously advertised, but we will also be awarding three very nice trophies for Honorable Mention, because this race is so very close. Anyone who gets that close deserves to win.
Truth be told, HotKarz thinks everyone is a winner. But our pockets are not that deep, so only the Top 6 will receive awards. But that doubles your chances, so make sure you come to the cruises where balloting is held. This week, balloting will be held tonight at the Big Dipper (Riverside Dairy Bar) in Lisbon Falls on Rte 196.
After that, it's at Shaw's Ridge on the 22nd and Sonny's (Lyman) on the 28th. And don't forget - there is still one "mystery" location where balloting will be held. It's anyone's guess where and when we will show up with the ballot box.
So far, 86 vehicles have received votes. Of those, 16 are serious contenders, but only 6 owners will walk away with the trophies.
Good luck to you all.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
The Sky Is (still) Falling!
Well, the Chicken Littles are at it again. The Pew Center for Climate Change is once again trying to lay a guilt trip on me for taking my little PT Cruiser to cruise-ins.
Their latest insane report is so crazy, they must think Americans are brain-dead (though many appear to be). Let's see...
They say that hurricane seasons have been getting longer since 1915, due to our burning of fossil fuels. Hm-mm. Lemme see. Just how many 747's were flying the skies in 1915? How many SUV's on our highways? In fact, how much fossil fuel were we burning in 1915? Almost none!
Hurricane season begins on June 1st. It is now July 15th, and we are now looking at a single, minor hurricane limping along toward the Bahamas. Wow! Everyone take shelter. Place your head between your knees and kiss your butt good-bye.
Last year there were fewer hurricanes than is normal, and not a single one made landfall in the U.S.
And now a new study links kidney stones to global warming! Just how ridiculous are these people going to get?
Look, maybe global warming is real; maybe not. The real question is whether or not it is a temporary, natural cycle as indicated by the real data, or if it is caused by us, and is having a permanent, disastrous effect as indicated by the "pick n' choose" data. I tend to think it is the former. Science has already proved the Earth was subjected to a "mini" ice age for nearly 500 years, during the middle ages. Now the pendulum is swinging the other way. In nature, nothing stands still for long. Everything changes, by design.
And even if it is the latter, I think it is a bit too late to do much of anything about it, so we may as well get out the credit cards and enjoy life while we can. And go to cruises...
Their latest insane report is so crazy, they must think Americans are brain-dead (though many appear to be). Let's see...
They say that hurricane seasons have been getting longer since 1915, due to our burning of fossil fuels. Hm-mm. Lemme see. Just how many 747's were flying the skies in 1915? How many SUV's on our highways? In fact, how much fossil fuel were we burning in 1915? Almost none!
Hurricane season begins on June 1st. It is now July 15th, and we are now looking at a single, minor hurricane limping along toward the Bahamas. Wow! Everyone take shelter. Place your head between your knees and kiss your butt good-bye.
Last year there were fewer hurricanes than is normal, and not a single one made landfall in the U.S.
And now a new study links kidney stones to global warming! Just how ridiculous are these people going to get?
Look, maybe global warming is real; maybe not. The real question is whether or not it is a temporary, natural cycle as indicated by the real data, or if it is caused by us, and is having a permanent, disastrous effect as indicated by the "pick n' choose" data. I tend to think it is the former. Science has already proved the Earth was subjected to a "mini" ice age for nearly 500 years, during the middle ages. Now the pendulum is swinging the other way. In nature, nothing stands still for long. Everything changes, by design.
And even if it is the latter, I think it is a bit too late to do much of anything about it, so we may as well get out the credit cards and enjoy life while we can. And go to cruises...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)