Report comment

I have to say I think this 'event' is a waste of time in its current format. Having a real debate about improving design quality would be a worthwhile endeavor for a magazine like this. Instead, you take cheap, highly subjective potshots at mediocre buildings. I am not sure your commentary is achieving anything. I would suggest you think twice about doing this next year. If you do decide it is a good idea, try to put a bit more weight into what you, BD, consider to be good design and why your nominees fall short. Having a house view on design would be a perfectly respectable thing, but I would like to see that spelled out, and failures noted relative to some ideal. You might consider how the Economist operates. You don't have to agree with the Economist's perspective, but at least they have a clearly articulated, considered point of view. You could consider a similar approach for your own design awards and failures.