I'm going to differ slightly from the consistent senior judge message in this thread and say you absolutely can play in some side event while you judge. If you were in my region and asked, I'd say the same as there is no enforceable rule against it. I'd also be unsympathetic in the event you come tell me no stores will offer you judge spots any more after 3 months because you blew off the task they were paying you to do. I'd never encourage you to provide subpar service, but I certainly can't invent a rule against it. If a store came and complained, I'd advise them to use a different judge. I'd certainly not entertain the idea of you advancing in certification level nor would a recommend you to a store asking me for help in finding a judge. Your freedom of choice exists as you say, as does the freedom of choice exist in those who would hinder or impact your ability to continue to get paid to do it.

Edited Justin Turner (July 21, 2016 03:42:12 AM)

I was under the impression that GPTs should only be run at Competitive if significance prizes were being offered? I therefore assume that this criteria has to be met before the event is run at competitive?


Sent from my iPhone

Also in regards to your challenge, I'll pass because GPTs are boring and I'd rather spend my time on things I like to do. ;)

Originally posted by Graham Theobalds:

I was under the impression that GPTs should only be run at Competitive if significance prizes were being offered? I therefore assume that this criteria has to be met before the event is run at competitive?


Sent from my iPhone

That's the guideline, however there's no bar on what constitutes a significant prize and “should” doesn't mean the criteria is mandatory.

Originally posted by Justin Turner:

I'd also be unsympathetic in the event you come tell me no stores will offer you judge spots any more after 3 months because you blew off the task they were paying you to do. I'd never encourage you to provide subpar service, but I certainly can't invent a rule against it. If a store came and complained, I'd advise them to use a different judge. I'd certainly not entertain the idea of you advancing in certification level nor would a recommend you to a store asking me for help in finding a judge. Your freedom of choice exists as you say, as does the freedom of choice exist in those who would hinder or impact your ability to continue to get paid to do it.

Thank you for your honesty.

I would never do anything against recommendations, but having a blatant “NO” to a new situation without at least discussing it rubs me the wrong way. With this thread I feel that the discussion have been healthy and now we know that it is absolutely not recommended, which is ok.