I think it would be very easy to get overly-formal about the selection process. Even though it's wise to have a plan of action should we need to select from too many applicants, the creation of many rules results in much rules-lawyering.
I'd rather keep it very simple:
- Bad-ass always wins - the neatest stuff, of the most value to the attendees should always win.
- In the event we can't decide between equally bad-ass projects, we should consider membership status of the exhibtor and overall value (again, to the attendees) provided, but this should be entirely subjective to the jury members, not based on some RPG-esque rule system.
As long as we are up-front that the jury selection process is entirely subjective, this should be OK.
I also think we should aim for consensus on admission/selection, but allow the chair to call a vote when needed so we can move on if we can't reach consensus.