Let me offer a few comments from maybe a slightly different angle
Wait, hold up. Then what's the point of having a "Contact an MCA Judge" right below the Judging Test portion of the MCA site?............
Don't know how other judges over the years handled "requests" I used that opportunity to help "lead" , when possible, the potential judge to the information. Teaching rather than telling. But of course these were the days when we knew what was on the test and often knew or assumed by the question that the caller was taking the test. I knew what was on the Shelby and other tests as I had copies of all of them.
Never was much of a supporter of the "open book" idea or publishing a study guide since on the day of judging you will not have any of the resources available to you. Best MCA can hope for by using the open book method is that some education can take place during the test taking process of the more pressing details as well as recent changes to the rules and items that are new "discoveries"
As anyone that is involved with testing and the process knows a true false or multiple choice test is the least productive method of evaluating a person's knowledge, but it is what MCA is saddled with. But enough of that discussion could write multiple paragraphs about the science of test development and delivery
That's ridiculous. It's an open book test, even by the website's own admission. Open book, to me, means use any and all resources available to you to find the answer. If we can't use other judges' experience, then why does THIS site even exist?
This site was not developed to help answer test questions for MCA test takers. IF that was our reason for being and we had access to copies of all the MCA questions, we would have creatively woven them (the information) into posts, articles and responses which we have not. That is not our intent nor our "jobs"
Yes someone, as you mentioned, could "game us" and post a MCA question hidden within a request here on this site. They would very likely get a response and with the help of the members find what we believe is the best information available at that time. Not something that would likely happen back before the wide use of the internet but yes something that could be done. We can't guard against that nor IMHO have the time to try and discern every posters intent. At the same time individual members can choose to respond, simply ignore or just watch if they detect a alternate purpose to the posting.
One thing to reflect on IMHO is that since this site and MCA are not "connected", the answer you might get here may not be the one keyed as the correct one on the MCA site or the one that the AHJ felt is the right answer. Might have been different if past events would have taken place differently - just the way things are.
Have you asked your question (sorry have not checked in this week) over on the official MCA site? Just got to ask since that is why that site was developed and the separate judging section provided. Will watch to see what responses you receive there from members, other judges and officials. Seems the appropriate place to start. Meant as a constructive, positive suggestion
