However it is done, the average score for each category should be shown along with the factored score. This would make it more understandable to the viewers. For instance, skater A got mostly 9’s and skater B got mostly 8’s.
I think that pcs judging should be split between technical panel and judges, technical panel would give marks for SS and transitions and rest would be marked by judges. I think that would be best, as technical panel is already focused mainly on blade work, not on performance so they should be able to objectively mark who has the best ss and transitions and judges would mark performance, interpretation and composition.
jenaj's point about making it understandable to the audience makes me think of a few things.
The judging system is a communications tool... the main lines of communication are Judge<->Skater, Skater<->Audience, Judge<->Audience. The IJS system is optimized for the back and forth between Skater<->Judge. Which makes sense since it's a judging tool. The problem with that is that all the skaters will be taught by their coaches to "skate to the test". The system to a great extent constructs the performances. Which for this system has resulted in less audience engaging programs. And the results the judges come up with are not too easy for the casual audience to understand which leaves them a little less engaged.
I think IJS is good for juniors and below, but I would prefer a system that allowed more freedom for seniors. A while back I wouldn't mind 6.0 being used for the Grand Prix season. IJS(especially spins) encourage a very myopic and mechanical kind of skating that gets in the way of skaters being able to visualize the music. Skaters should be able to cut up the step sequence, do more or less spins, replace a spin with a spiral, replace a 2A on the FS with something else, etc. And I think they need a bit more time too which goes against the trend of cutting down time. I care more about program freedom than I do about audience understandability but that matters too.