2. Rating Convention Speakers
The trifecta assigned to perform this "review" has always been an absurd protocol...
Two of the three reviews will often give high marks to the other one, and vice versa.
When 1 of the 3 is being reviewed, he must step out of the room while the other two grade him. When he reenters the room he can freely look at the remarks & grade given to his speaking ability.
That creates an environment where the three reviewers become a good ol' boy team which often exchange inflated high marks among themselves and for their prefered pals... deliberately and repeatedly downgrading legitimately skilled speakers.
The grades are then forwarded to the circuit overseer who, in most cases, accepts the gradings without a question, then uses those gradings to distribute speaking assignments at the assembly/convention level.
This is one reason why you will see many of the same incumbent speakers at every convention/assembly... because of this flawed grading process.
(and the grading scale is literally: A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, etc.)
Holy spirit at work
Atlantis or another may have archived a scanned copy of the ridiculous grading form (blank)