Jury selection
Run contests judged by people, with proof the judging was fair.
Some winners can’t be picked at random. Photo contests, design awards, and pitch competitions are decided by judgment, not chance. Our jury selection tool lets a panel of people score, vote on, or rank your entries, and records every step so the result holds up to scrutiny.
Four ways to judge
Voting
Judges pick their favorites, up to a number you set. The entries with the most votes win.
Ranked
Judges order their top choices. Position counts: a first-place pick carries more weight than a fifth.
Rubric scoring
Judges score each entry against weighted criteria you define, like composition, originality, and technique.
Manual
You curate and pick the winners yourself, with the same audit trail as every other Raflia tool.
How it works
Run a judged contest in four steps
1. Pick a judging method
Choose how your panel decides: voting, ranking, rubric scoring, or manual selection. The method locks as soon as the first judgment lands.
2. Invite your judges
Team members sign in and judge as usual. External judges get a personal link by email, no account needed, so you can bring in outside experts or partners.
3. Judges evaluate
Each judge gets a screen built for the method you picked. When a judge submits, their ballot locks, so nothing can be quietly changed later.
4. Publish the results
Finalize the ranking and winners are set. Every contest gets a public results page with the winners, the judging method, and a timestamp, so participants can check the result themselves.
Why Raflia jury selection
More than a form and a spreadsheet
Most teams judge contests with a form and a spreadsheet — tallying scores by hand, with no proof the numbers weren’t adjusted afterward. Jury selection gives you four judging methods, a fair aggregation engine, and the same verifiable public record Raflia uses for every drawing.
Four methods, one engine
Voting, ranking, rubric scoring, and manual selection all run on the same aggregation engine, the same winner record, and the same public results format. No juggling a different tool for every contest shape.
Every judge’s ballot counts equally
When judges rank their top choices, each judge contributes the same total influence — no matter how many entries they ranked. A judge who ranks 5 entries doesn’t get less say than one who ranks 50. Weighting happens only within each judge’s own picks, so the panel stays balanced.
Trimmed average to cushion outliers
For rubric scoring, you can automatically drop the highest and lowest score on each entry before averaging — so one judge scoring far out of line doesn’t skew the result. With fewer than three judges on an entry, the system falls back to a plain weighted average and flags the row.
External judges, no account required
Send a personal link by email and your judge lands on a focused scoring page — no signup, no team invite, no clutter. Ideal for guest experts and industry panels who shouldn’t have access to your account.
Locked at three levels
The method locks once judging starts. The tool locks when you finalize the last round. The project locks when you mark the campaign complete.
Recommended vs. final, both recorded
If you reorder the panel’s recommendation before finalizing, both versions are saved — the record shows the panel recommended one ranking and the organizer finalized another. Full transparency, no hidden overrides.
Live ranking
The dashboard updates as each judge submits. Switching between weighted and trimmed average re-ranks instantly without touching the stored scores — compare both side by side before you decide.
Cross-tool winner exclusion
Jury winners are excluded from later drawings automatically, just like raffle and instant win winners. Run a judged contest first, then a follow-up raffle among the entries that didn’t win.
Public results page
Every judged contest gets the same shareable results page as a raffle, with configurable winner anonymization and a downloadable PDF certificate.
Self-verification lookup
Participants can type their email or phone number on the public results page to confirm whether they entered and whether they won — no technical knowledge needed.
Multi-round judging
Shortlist a big field in round one, then judge the finalists on their own terms. Each round is finalized and frozen before the next begins, so the record shows how the field narrowed.
Use cases
Who uses jury selection?
Photo and video contests
100 submissions, 3 judges, rubric scoring on composition, technique, and originality. The top 5 average scores win.
Design awards
50 entries, 5 judges, ranked judging where order matters — the top-ranked entry takes the cover.
Startup pitch competitions
20 pitch decks, 7 judges, voting where each judge picks their 3 favorites. The most-voted pitch wins the prize.
Employee of the quarter
30 nominees judged by 12 colleagues who aren’t on the Raflia team — each gets a personal judging link by email and votes for one nominee.
Editorial curation
200 article submissions, manual selection. The editor reviews everything and picks the winners directly — no scoring, no panel.
Hackathon judging
30 projects, 6 judges, rubric scoring on technical execution, originality, presentation, and impact. The trimmed average keeps one outlier score from tipping the result.
Comparison
Jury selection vs. a form and a spreadsheet
| Feature | Jury selection | Form + spreadsheet |
|---|---|---|
| Judging methods | Four (voting, ranked, rubric, manual) | Whatever you build by hand |
| Multi-round judging (shortlist, then final) | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No, you rebuild the sheet each round |
| Built-in aggregation engine | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No, you tally it yourself |
| Trimmed average to drop outliers | ✅️ Yes | ✅️ Manual |
| Method locked after judging starts | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No, easy to change mid-contest |
| Recommended vs. final ranking recorded | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No |
| External judges without accounts | ✅️ Yes | ✅️ Form links only |
| Each judgment locked after submit | ✅️ Yes | ✅️ Trust-based |
| Live ranking as judges submit | ✅️ Yes | ✅️ Recalculate by hand |
| Cross-tool winner exclusion | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No |
| Public verifiable results page | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No |
| Winner notification & confirmation | ✅️ Yes | ✅️ Manual |
| Self-verification lookup | ✅️ Yes | ❌ No |
Frequently asked questions
What’s the difference between voting and ranked judging?
Voting is “pick your favorites” with no order — each judge selects their top few, and the entries with the most picks win. Ranked is “order your top choices,” where position matters: within a single judge’s ballot, a first-place pick counts for more than a fifth-place pick. Both combine every judge’s input into one ranking.
How do you keep every judge’s ranking fair?
When judges rank their top choices, each judge’s ballot adds up to the same total influence — regardless of how many entries they ranked. A judge who ranks 5 entries has exactly as much total say as one who ranks 50; the difference is only in how that judge weights their own picks. This matches the way voting already works: everyone’s top picks count the same.
What happens when judges disagree wildly?
For rubric scoring, switch to the trimmed average — it drops the single highest and single lowest score on each entry before averaging, so one outlier judge can’t swing the result. It needs at least three judges on an entry to apply; below that, the system falls back to a plain weighted average and flags the row so you know.
Can I invite people who don’t have Raflia accounts?
Yes. In the tool settings, add an external judge by name and email, and Raflia creates a personal judging link just for them. They click it from their email and land on the scoring page — no signup, no team access, no account of any kind.
What if a judge can’t finish in time?
A judge’s input only counts once they click Submit. Until then, their scores stay in draft and don’t affect the ranking. You can finalize with whatever subset of judges has submitted — there’s no need to wait for everyone.
Can a judge change their decision after submitting?
No. Once submitted, a judge’s decision is locked — both to keep the contest fair (no last-minute swaps) and to keep the record clean. If a judge genuinely needs a do-over, the organizer handles it case by case; the original submission stays in the record.
What happens if there’s a tie at the top?
The ranking flags any tied position so you can see it. For the recommended ranking, ties are broken automatically using a consistent rule (earliest entry first). You can always reorder or choose among tied entries yourself before finalizing.
Can I change the rubric or voting rules once judging starts?
No. As soon as the first judgment is recorded, the method and its settings — rubric criteria, how many favorites each judge picks, how many entries they rank — are locked. Set these up before judging begins.
Are the external judge links secure?
Treat them like passwords: anyone with the link can judge as that person. The links expire automatically, can be revoked at any time (any decisions already submitted stay in the record), and can be regenerated, which immediately disables the old link and emails a new one.
Can participants verify the results?
Yes. Every judged contest gets a public results page showing winners, the judging method, and a timestamp. Participants can also use the self-verification lookup to confirm whether they entered and whether they won, just by typing their email or phone.
Can I run a multi-round contest with a shortlist round and then a final round?
Yes. Judge a first round, finalize it, and advance the entries you want into the next one. The pool narrows each round, so you can shortlist a large field first and then judge the finalists properly. Each round keeps its own ranking and record, and a finalized round is frozen.
What plan do I need?
Jury selection is available on every plan, including Free. External judges are included on all plans at no extra cost. Your plan determines how many entries a contest can hold — not whether you can use the tool.
Setting one up? The jury selection setup guide covers choosing a judging method, building a rubric, inviting judges, and finalizing winners.