Well I was just explaining my thoughts. The theme was solidly about the connection between you and your favourite animal, this is why I put aside maybe 1 point for it, 2 at the very max but mainly one. I didn't think that was terribly unfair, but ok. I will not do it again if you didn't think it was ok. That is why I said it was optional. I said I didn't know how to word how I judge the description well and I should have worded it differently, maybe then it would have been more agreeable, but if I do wish a description for judging I will mention it.

I didn't say it was Impossible, just that i didn't like to hand out full marks because it is such a subjective concept. I would give out full marks for a piece that is top quality, however, I am weary about it because I know some could improve. I know it isn't giving the wrong message but if I make it easier to get top marks, then why would that be ok as well? How could it be wrong if I myself have not come across a piece that i feel, yes, that is 100% perfect, so I don't give the full marks out and then be picked up on it. However, I have found some that are close, that's why some have got 9/10 in some areas. I think that is a little unfair to say. Especially with art as it is so dependent on the eye of the beholder, so if you see something 'Perfect' I or someone else may not.

Yes, I admit the things I put down may have been a little unclear, that I apologise for and will make sure it does not happen again, but I think it is a little unfair as you have picked up on maybe half or more of the ways I judge that you think is not right. The things you said seem really restricting, I hate to demote marks, that's why I evaluate the piece, see if they have used it too much and I think to myself 'Is that possible without the use of editing software?' In terms of glows, then yes, it is, I have created them myself without the use of editing software so that is why I do not demote marks for that, as I can not be completely certain if the software was used, which would also be wrong if they did not use the editing software and were penalised, is it not?. Gradients are also tricky, they can be created authentically by using tools such as a watercolour tool and any other water based brush tools, which I again have also used and experimented with, which I don't see as taboo in this contest, as watercolours can be used on paper too. So I evaluate if i think it looks authentic and if not, I then re-evaluate based on that. I, however, will mention next time if I feel that they have used editing.

To summarise, I agree that some things should have been clarified better and some may need to be changed, but it is a sweeping statement to say that, a) It is wrong not to give full marks, and b) all effects should be banned, even if I know for a fact they can be done authentically. I don't really understand, to be completely honest, why this has blown to such an extent. I wanted to offer a fun creative environment for artists to collectively come and submit art, but now, it seems like there are some really big restrictions. I am welcome to any ways to improve my judging scheme and style, but I honestly feel that this is a little unfair to me as it is basically saying that a big part of how I judge is wrong. I know it wasn't meant to be the least bit offensive or anything, but this has really made me feel bad about how I judge. It wasn't enough for me to feel bad for some of the entries that didn't place for some of the weeks, but now I have to feel like my judging is failing every one of them. I will defend some of the ways I judge, but I do agree that some need to change a bit.

If you want me to re-judge the week 2, I shall do that along with week 3. I don't have the time to do it now because I'm overloaded with College homework and I just want to have a day to relax, and then I will get on it.
Please respect the reasons for my judging and I judged in an almost identical way in WAR season I, So I don't understand why I am picked up on these 'bad' things now. I am not being stubborn, I am just defending myself and I do agree on some areas, but some I do not.