As I understand it - having been recently advised by a panel member:

The panel is made up of 150 'movers and shakers' from the folk world - agents (that's wrong imo), club organisers, festival organisers, broadcasters, journalists, record company people (also wrong imo if true) folk arts professionals etc (no artists).

The official view

The list is kept secret to avoid members being put under pressure by artists, agents or record companies (see above).

They are all sent a list of categories, in which to make four nominations each.

To help them (and, I believe, to help people think beyond the obvious choices) they are reminded of about 150 tracks THAT HAVE ALL BEEN PLAYED BY MIKE HARDING - so if you haven't been on his show you're not on the list. It IS stressed that you can suggest anyone you like, but we've no way of knowing how much this list influences people.

The votes go back to Smooth Operations, who calculate (we don't know who verifies the count, if anyone) who will be the nominations in each category, (the top four). This full list is not published.

The entire panel is then asked to vote again on the nominations, to decide who will be the winner of each award.

There would appear to be some other forces at work though.

Over the years a good few atrists have been nominated as 'best live act' for example, when they've hardly done any gigs, and there seems to be some 'muggins turn' effect at work.

That said - I'm not against the system. If you're going to have awards (and on balance I think it's a good idea - just) this is better than many, and the winners are all richly deserving.

But that doesn't mean there's not room for improvement.

Now, can someone on the panel, or from Smooth Operations correct any errors in the above, please?