putting-this-out-there

I was reading [this blog(?) post by Robin Sloan](https://www.robinsloan.com/lab/specifying-spring-83/) that was linked from [Midnight Pub](https://midnight.pub), and I got through the preamble of “just this person ‘putting their idea out there’, and what they wanted to do with a “Spring 83″ protocol”. Good ideas there, sorta, didn’t read all the way through, because I started to think of my *own* idea I had floating about, and if I wanted to write a blog post about it. So I will, for S&G’s.nn**The Judge Show – Judge Wars**nnI don’t watch TV. Ever. I haven’t seen a full episode of anything whatsoever in probably 5+ years. I used to watch *American Idol* back with the earlier seasons, but never went into *The X Factor* or “The Best Singer”, or whatever the hell TV stations came up with over the past decade+. I *did* see an episode of *Deal Or No Deal* when I was in an American Lines bus terminal in Southern Montana while I waited for the evening bus to arrive. Watched it with the clerk at the front desk, we laughed, we joked, it was entertaining. Good times.nnBut let me break it (the idea) down; a show with “talent” and then “judges” usually goes as:nn- a person of questionable (or favorable) appearance come on stagen- they sing a songn- the three(3) (almost always three) judges say their bit about how great the performer was, or wasn’t, the audience reacts, people watching TV at home react – there’s a fussn- then they narrow down *who* the “best” performers/singers are, and there is a sort of “vote off” towards the end of the season – people call in, the democratically “elect” their performer of choice, and they win (millions of dollars?) a recording contract, and then in time the free market music industry puts out this “elected” artist’s music, and they either sink or swim, no one can *make* a star, afterall, and whatever comes of it, it is what it is nnSo, with *my* (dumb) idea, there would be *more* to the judge element of the show in question. And more power/opportunity given to the performer, as well.nn- the person of questionable (or favorable) appearance comes on stagen- they sing a songn- then, three **panels** of judges are consulted – meaning, three panels of three (so nine judges in total)n- each set of three judges represent a record labeln- the first set of judges to “critique” a performer is chosen at total and complete random – a “randomizer”, so to speakn- the randomizer lands on one of the three panels, and then they either “accept” or “reject” the performer on the spot. Now, they can accept/reject the performer, but they *have* to first critique that performer before the accepting or rejecting themn- if the first (randomly chosen) panel of judges takes a pass, the randomizer fires up again and randomly selects which of the two remaining panels gets to critique/accept/reject the performern- then, if a pass happens again, the default third panel gets the hot potato, and they have to critique the performers…performance, and accept/reject themnn**why is this good?**nnIt probably isn’t. It *would* be ENTERTAINING, for sure, but “good” – no way. There could be feelings hurt, and being rejected by three record labels in a single day could be some traumatic shit for the performer. Being “accepted” on the first go would be uplifting, though, for sure.nnThere’s more nuance. More detail. More hypothetical scenarios of drama and action/reaction.nnIt’s a thing that could happennnIf it does, I’ll miss it. Because I do not watch TV.

Subscribe to from the desk of TMO

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe