|
Post by the showing register on Oct 23, 2017 19:01:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Oct 23, 2017 19:33:27 GMT
Well done TSR! What will happen to these results? Are they to be sent to all societies/associations for consideration in their rules governing showing? Will we find out from individual societies/associations on how these results will be applied/not applied within their rules? Will the Showing Council be interested in debating this at their annual conference?
It's patently obvious that the survey results indicate a NO to judges showing and judging in the same sections in the same year is a resounding NO? Will all who voted finally be heard and listened to? Let's hope so!
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Oct 23, 2017 19:51:09 GMT
We have sent a copy of the results to all the socieities for their information.
TSR are having a meeting of their independent panel on the 12th November to discuss the results and what happens next
|
|
|
Post by chloesmum on Oct 24, 2017 7:39:12 GMT
Interesting. What is the definition of compete? Ride; own; produce? I would hope it would cover all 3 rather than just ride. Also glad to see that this might only apply to major qualifiers as I do think smaller shows is how judges gain experience and also shows can widen the pool of available judges and to be honest those that do compete (ride or produce) are often the most knowledgable. I would hate to see our young judges put off from going on to panels.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Oct 24, 2017 8:08:11 GMT
All 3. Younger persons are applying for panels and have to spend 2/3 years judging at smaller shows before being able to apply to be on the HOYS panel. What we are seeing is applications from people of all ages who have never stewarded or offered their help in any voluntary capacity wanting to become a judge. Some even object to taking part in the voluntary part of the training and we do feel that in some cases they are seeing being appointed as a judge a definite boost to their exhibiting success.
|
|
|
Post by chloesmum on Oct 24, 2017 8:28:19 GMT
Totally agree stewarding and probationing and of course a thorough assessment should be part of any judge appointments. Obviously can't speak for TSR but BSPS and NPS have very rigorous procedures so it is no easy task becoming a panel judge. There are some excellent, professional judges out there who do also compete in some way it is a shame that perhaps a small minority have tarnished their credibility.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Oct 24, 2017 11:14:15 GMT
There were over 700 comments and the most repeated was 'conflict of interest'
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Oct 24, 2017 11:29:46 GMT
Is 700 really a representative number? I for one did not even know about this survey. Should I have done? Was it a selectively targeted group (eg: via FB, which I very rarely venture onto. If and when I do, it is only to friends pages (my real, genuine friends, not "FB wannabies"!) - or did this survey go out to a genuine cross-section?
ie: was it, for example, submitted to all (TSR) and other Societies/Association's Panel Judges? Again - apologies if I'd inadvertently missed it, but, this one absolutely passed me by.
As for 'conflict of interest' - it is very sad when genuine integrity of the majority is taken into question.
|
|
|
Post by Tsr not logged in on Oct 24, 2017 14:08:12 GMT
Caroline the survey was very widely publicized and an e mail link sent to all TSR judges plus it was put on here. We had 1163 respondents and the 700 referred to additonal comments.
We do try very hard to make our surveys open to everyone and I think in this case we have managed a wide sample.
I am sorry you missed it your views would be welcome but I dont think you should belittle our survey or the views of a great many people from across the showing spectrum by suggesting we only took a facebook sample or other dubious methods
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Oct 24, 2017 16:34:06 GMT
Caroline the survey was very widely publicized and an e mail link sent to all TSR judges plus it was put on here. We had 1163 respondents and the 700 referred to additonal comments. We do try very hard to make our surveys open to everyone and I think in this case we have managed a wide sample. I am sorry you missed it your views would be welcome but I dont think you should belittle our survey or the views of a great many people from across the showing spectrum by suggesting we only took a facebook sample or other dubious methods TSR - Gail & Sarah - with respect, I suggested nothing. Simply, somehow this questionnaire absolutely passed me by. Naturally, as an individual, I have no intention of 'belittling' this recent TSR Survey. I would suggest however, that 700 people is not wholly representative and therefore does not represent " a great many people" within this quite large Industry. Edited to add - regarding the criteria of the survey, I have no feelings either way, providing that 'newcomers'; who are NOT Judges, are not rudely vindictive upon those who are time-served, honest and honourable - and cut their teeth - learned the trade, in this industry which we all love. We must do, or we wouldn't still be in it!
[/i]
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Oct 24, 2017 16:35:12 GMT
Is 700 really a representative number? I for one did not even know about this survey. Should I have done? Was it a selectively targeted group (eg: via FB, which I very rarely venture onto. If and when I do, it is only to friends pages (my real, genuine friends, not "FB wannabies"!) - or did this survey go out to a genuine cross-section? ie: was it, for example, submitted to all (TSR) and other Societies/Association's Panel Judges? Again - apologies if I'd inadvertently missed it, but, this one absolutely passed me by. As for 'conflict of interest' - it is very sad when genuine integrity of the majority is taken into question. Over a good length of time I have read many of your comments; some are acidic, belittling, patronising and, frankly, you blow your own trumpet! This is one too far to not respond. TSR are doing a good job of publicising the concerns of exhibitors and judges! You are insinuating that they have taken a biased survey! Please, Caroline Nelson, before you raise your acidic tongue again, think before writing! And please, control yourself and not belittle how people write or phrase their posts; we are mere mortals, you, are obviously one of the gods! I don't often get rattled but your over presumptuous post takes the biscuit, regardless of your apology if you had inadvertently missed this survey.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Oct 24, 2017 19:54:17 GMT
This was a public survey open to anyone who wished to respond and we e mailed our judges and members , put it on the web site on facebook and had it available at HOYS plus it had a link on here and a reminder. It was not manipulated or the responses filtered in any way. The data is exactly how it is recorded on Survey Monkey.
|
|
not on facebook and I saw it
Guest
|
Post by not on facebook and I saw it on Oct 24, 2017 21:42:39 GMT
I am not on facebook or a judge but a very serious competitor and I saw and took the survey .
There are some people on here who I know well who should take a long hard look at at what they write on here and how they come acoss . Judges are not gods but mere mortals like the rest of us I know thay give up their time but so do we as competitors with considerable costs both in time and money.
All most competitors want is to enjoy their sport and to be judged fairly not to have their spelling mistakes pointed out at every opportunity by someone who Ireally beleive has had alot to offer but let themselves down by their attitude.
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Oct 25, 2017 7:14:37 GMT
This was a public survey open to anyone who wished to respond and we e mailed our judges and members , put it on the web site on facebook and had it available at HOYS plus it had a link on here and a reminder. It was not manipulated or the responses filtered in any way. The data is exactly how it is recorded on Survey Monkey. I'm concerned that I didn't receive the Judge's e-mail. Very occasionally some people's e-mails don't get through (it's set up with quite a tough spam-guard - I've no idea why not otherwise). So unfortunately I didn't see this survey. I've received your TSR Judges' mailings alright in the past and have completed your other surveys, which were well-constructed. I knew that you used Survey Monkey. So there was no thought that this one was manipulated, as has been suggested by the other correspondent. My apologies if my post was taken to mean otherwise. Regretfully I don't get on (anyone's) websites with frequency, so that's a lesson to me!
|
|
|
Post by Oh dearyme on Oct 25, 2017 18:27:26 GMT
I think the Showing Register should be congratulated for the way they are interacting with the public. I completed the survey and hope the results will be acted on. I've been impressed with the way suggestions and comments are taken on board even though l may not agree with all of them. This type of communication is exactly what's needed in the showing world along with a good dose of common sense and maybe a return to old values, however things do move on and sometimes it's advisable to 'live and let live!' Something which one learns to accommodate with age and experience. Caroline you have a lot of experience and as you say you've been in the game a long time, everyone has good and bad days but a more relaxed approach may help everyone. Exacting standards are important but on a forum such as this l really dont think the odd typo or spelling mistake, unless taking a comment out of context, is of huge concern, although it would be to me, if l was asked to comment on someone's uni or job application.
|
|
|
Post by gillwales on Oct 25, 2017 19:12:21 GMT
I think the survey is a good thing, I saw it on here and completed it. I am glad to hear that it will be circulated around the various showing societies, but to really hold it's worth I hope that the Societies return this to their members to ask them to participate. On one other note I think it should be asked of the Judges whether it will put them off accepting Judging posts as it will be needed to find our if it will have an impact on if shows will have difficulties in finding Judges to Judge for them. It needs further clarification on the level of shows where this rule would apply.
I think it would also need to be made clear that this introduction would be no reflection on the integrity of any Judge and furthermore that Societies including the TSR would vigorously uphold any trolling, threats or bullying in person or online, without this I think you may well find a reduction of people prepared to judge.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 25, 2017 21:15:44 GMT
Hats off to the TSR for taking the time and making an effort to find out what the customer , and judges, think about certain issues in showing.
|
|