Further to what Howard writes (and which I agree with), I'd suggest that the names of judges aren't 'secret' so much as they don't want to hand them over to someone who has proved that a) she enjoys pestering people who have a different viewpoint to her own, b) has an amazing knack for getting the wrong end of the stick (and making howling errors) and c) will use any moment as a 'victory' to publicise her blog.

If she really wants to be an influential figure - and lets face it, this is what this is all about one way or another - then she could apply to be a judge. But somehow I suspect she may have burnt any bridges there. This is not the right way to affect change, unless the change she wants is to destroy the awards once and for all. And, whatever faults they have, that's surely not helpful.

Seemingly, you can take the writer out of the horrible-bullying-end-of-fleet-street, but you can't take the horrible-bullying-end-of-fleet-street out of the writer...