If this is for affordable avaition, perhaps we should put a cap on the materials cost. If an expensive process is needed to fabricate, then that should be a disqualifier, too. If shooting for LSA, entrants will need to compete with expensive composite wonders such as the A5. That is going to be very difficult for small teams. Other countries have their own botrtom rung of aviation. 103 is adaptable to the majority of them. A designer is of course free to build in extra capability to meet higher foreign performance, then limit it for 103. Ideas for key criteria: build cost, running cost, ease of use. I'm thinking of something that Average Joe could pull out of his garage on a Sunday, trailer to a nearby field, and fly for a few hours. Hmmm, how about one criteria being that it fits folded in a standard garage? Though I may change my mind on that if my project does not The judges free vote could be used to weed out impractical point design 'winners'.