To begin with, as the posting was not from an account, we can not conclude that it was from Jake Newby. Although, I can also see how it can be Jake, because the post was a criticism of a subject he is experienced with – adjudication. Whether you agree with Jake or not, his comments should not simply be put down to a case of sour grapes – we can not determine that from one post on the internet. However, it is fair to be critical of his motives. He may be irritated he wasn’t asked to be a judge. But it also should be noted that, if the judges were not as experienced as they ought to be, he has just cause to be annoyed, doesn’t he? There has been some negative feedback regarding Jake’s adjudication at Bunbury? Therefore, using the same logic, can we dismiss that as sour grapes? No. Although I do think some people were upset because he disapproved of some productions (some comments, I thought were valid). On the other hand, I do agree with Stingers remark made on another thread that he did not clarify what the distinction between best director and best production was. I was present for most of the adjudication at Bunbury, and found, even before he gave me glowing feedback, that his judgements were sound and rational. I respected his opinions because he a) had experience (in all fields of theatre) and b) critically engaged with each production and c) had a great knowledge on theatre history and theatre practises. Last year, Bunbury had Stephen Lee as the adjudicator, whom I also respect as a judge, even after he gave some very strong criticisms about the play I was in. I was not upset about the feedback, because he is a man who definitely knows what he is talking about and I agreed with his comments. I go to competitions because I want to improve as a theatrical artist, not be given sugar covered responses that make me feel good for a little while.

I do not want to be in a competition where the adjudicators lack experience. It’s patronising and demeaning. I would liken it to a high school teacher who thinks that the students did really well, considering they were just students. If I personally find myself in a position like that again, I will simply pull any production of mine out, preferring to boycott the event, rather than being the subject of mediocrity.

Read into that however you want, sour grapes or not.

Kerri karefully kommented: "...I am aware that people put different names on different postings, when they wish to "hide behind someone else's name" . I would be curious as to the laws of defamation however, on this one."

The laws of defamation on this one would probably do bugger all. There is an inference that "Jake Newby" may have written such a post, but as Kerri (WHO KNOWS EVERYONE!) has pointed out, he's elsewhere at present (appearing in a Tortilla in Mexico?) so it's unlikely it is He.

Also, please note that it is "jd newby" and not "Jake Newby" who originally put up the post. I think Jake the Lighting Guy is big enough to use his OWN name and SIGN the post.

Let us not discount the possibility that there is a perfectly valid "JD Newby" out there wishing to make comments who ISN'T Jake The Lighting Designer/Adjudicator.

Also, there's no point chasing "jd"- chase Walter; he made the scurrilous accusation against Jake The Lighting Designer/Adjudicator. I bet that "Walter" isn't their real name either.

Frankly, could anyone be bothered with this exercise in futility? Let's just put it down to children behaving like f@*&wits and ignore 'em; just like we always do.

El

"It ain't braggin' if you can back it up."- Jaco Pastorius

And now after reading this pointless bunch of posts really. (beside the adjudication stuff which I'm not getting involved in)

Congratulations to those who have made to finals. I'm looking forward to seeing what you got as I got my tickets in the mail earlier this week! Can't wait.

Good Luck to all.

~ Tari

The Writer is a child forever listening at the keyhole of the adult world.

As Tari has rightly stated, good luck to all the finalist.

Grant Wrote:

All unmoderated discussion boards run the risk that they might be used inappapropriately or illegally - regardless of whether contributors are registered or not. People contributing defamatory, illegal or unauthorised content can be tracked down whether registered or not.

- very doubtful that you could prosecute.

Yes, I do realise that some anon. users, like Andy Fraser have very constructive comments to contribute to this site. But, I am of the strong opinion that if people who really want to make a positive contribution to this site would be willing to spend five minutes to sign up. I must stress that this comment is simply not a knee-jerk reaction, but from many posts I have read for anon. readers that add nothing to the discussions besides venting their ill feelings towards other theatre practitioners and companies. You are right however, that before any action could be possible, there needs to be supported through an informed debate.