I have never competed in Scale Masters at any level. I have attended one Scale Masters (Cave Creek 2006) and a couple of regional meets (Hemet) and enjoyed them very much. I also learned a great deal from them and am considering competing at sometime in the future (which maybe makes me worth listening too since the future of the event is keyed to getting new participants).

The one huge advantage that Scale Masters has is the existence of the regional qualifiers. I am sure some of these are better than others but it is a route to getting into the swim of things without driving a thousand miles or more. One cannot get into Top Gun that way. The regionals are a big strength of the concept and should be enhanced as much as possible. Maybe awards at the regional level should be publicized more.

The fact that the national event moves around, and isn't even determined a couple of years in advance, is a big detriment to making the effort to enter. On the other hand, a non-changing venue cuts off people in other parts of the country (other than the regionals, of course). I would love to see a schedule which had a set venue on even years and moved around on the odd years.

On judging, the rules are clear and perfectly fair. If judges aren't following them, then that needs to be addressed. A way of protesting, with a hope of reversing an unfair decision, would go a long way toward eliminating frustrations. The ratio of importance between static and flight scores is a good question but, if your model is shy on static, you shouldn't have a shot at the top rank anyway. Of course, the judges must score static on a fair basis, according to one's docs.
The organization should consider new ideas for sure because even fair rules can make the event boring. A "realism" judge who scores the entire flight is a good idea IMO. The pilots should fill in between the 10 maneuvers with interesting flying/unofficial maneuvers for the "realism" judge - making the whole flight more dynamic.
Just my 2 cents...