| Subject: Re: Varsity Results |
Author:
Tim
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 13:48:38 05/20/03 Tue
In reply to:
Di
's message, "Re: Varsity Results" on 17:12:32 05/19/03 Mon
I agree with you about needing experienced scrutineers, and about the software. With today's technology, there's no excuse for having software that doesn't store results electronically in a form that is transferable to Word, Excel, or at least downloadable onto a pdf. To require organisers to buy the software in order to get the results electronically is very poor.
I wonder whether there would be a market for a new system? Or even better, and I think this is the future of dance competition judging and scrutineering, for a wireless electronic system that allows judges marks to be entered using an electronic tool (which would also prevent them voting for the same couple more than once, etc.) and processed straight through, without the need for either a scrutineer or someone to collect the marks.
Given today's mobile technology, it could easily be done.
The total cost of a system could probably be brought down to about £1000. (including the central system and 7 judge's entry portals).
Total savings per competition: £100+.
For a big compeition organiser running ten competitions a year, that means a PE ratio of 1 - ie it takes just one year to make back the money spend - a real no-brainer of an investment decision.
Perhaps one of the more technologically minded people reading this board should look into it! Maybe IVDA should consider commissioning such a project?
>>I believe that problem with the software is that the
>>programme (which is about 15 years old) automatically
>>deletes all record of the match as soon as you click
>>'print'. Which these days is frankly ridiculous.
>
>Yes, it's totally stupid. Though I don't think that's
>the case any more. I asked Estelle Grassby, who did
>our scrutineering at Sheffield Social (and who
>designed the software which she now sells for vast
>sums of money), about it and she just said that it
>would be possible to have the electronic versions but
>only if we bought the software (which costs several
>hundred pounds, I think).
>Scandalous, isn't it?
>
>However, there are very good reasons for using
>professional scrutineers, George! When you look at the
>job they have to do at comps like Sheffield Social and
>IVDA, it is a nightmare of a task.
>I scrutineered the team match at Manchester this year
>and it took ages to figure out all the marks, even
>though there were only something like 10 teams.
>Admittedly it would have been easier if team captains
>had all actually entered legal teams (you know who you
>are!!!). For a big comp, an experienced scrutineer and
>a good system is vital unless you want total chaos to
>ensue!
>
>
>
>>The Varsity match tends to use a different system,
>>since the traditional scrutineer pack is not equipped
>>to cope with its strange format.
>>
>>Nonetheless, thankyou and well done to Paul for
>>getting them up quickly. :)
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 
