The old judging system took longer for us to use (i think it took me about 5 days to do a pack challenge) but, fact of the matter was, members seemed to like it more as it helped them develop as writers and, well, it helped them critique themselves more.

On the contrary

version two was faster for the judges, but honestly, did not help the members out. This site is about you guys. Let us know which you prefer.

you may reply below with reasoning, opinion, etc.

I adored how specific the old one. It let me know exactly what to change and exactly what I did wrong, and also gave less room should people in the future try and contest the judging by calling bias/etc., since there was reason behind practically every point loss/gain.

I voted for old because it was a bit different than most judging systems I've observed, and it encouraged improvement and reward it. Although, I will not be fussy if it isn't added back considering it does indeed seem like a bit of work, work not all staff could have time for. Maybe volunteer members (who have proven themselves knowledgeable of realism and so forth) could step in if it's a major issue? Unlikely, but an idea.

We will be reverting to the old judging system for the efficiency which means I'll be training more judges.