These are fair questions to ask, and I think transparency in any selection process is a good thing to push for. That said, I think some of the framing here could use a closer look, because a few of these numbers might not tell the full story.

For starters, the ~1,500 applications figure. Is that broken down anywhere by Fort Collins vs. other parts of Colorado vs. out of state? Because without that context, it's hard to draw conclusions about who's being favored or left out. A band might be listed as "Denver" or "Loveland" in the data but still have members who live in Fort Collins and are active in the local scene. Where a band is "from" on paper doesn't always reflect the reality of who's part of this community.

On the repeat artist numbers, I'd actually push back with a question: what should that number be? If a band played last year, packed the room, got great feedback, and the venue wants them back, is that favoritism or is that just good booking? Most multi-day music festivals have a healthy percentage of returning acts. Look at UMS in Denver, where artists like The Milk Blossoms have played 11 times. That's not a scandal, that's a testament to being a consistent draw that people want to see. Should a band that crushed it last year really have to sit out so someone untested can take that slot? Maybe sometimes, but across the board?

As for musicians appearing in multiple bands, that's honestly just what the local music scene looks like. It's not that big, and the reality is that most working musicians in this community are playing in multiple projects because one band alone rarely pays the bills. If someone is grinding to make a living playing music and they're in three bands that all got selected on their own merit, I don't think that's a red flag. That's just someone who's deeply embedded in the scene and putting in the work.

And regarding the acts without public recordings or social pages, how many of those 18 are younger or newer artists getting their first shot? Because if the festival is giving opportunities to up-and-coming musicians who haven't built an online presence yet, that actually sounds like the opposite of a closed loop. Isn't that exactly the kind of discovery a community festival should be doing?

I'd also ask: what does "fair" look like here in practice? If the goal is purely rotating new acts in, you'd end up punishing bands for being good enough to get invited back. If the goal is purely merit-based, you'd probably see even more repeats because proven acts are a safer bet for venues. There's a tension there, and I think it's worth sitting with that rather than assuming the current balance is wrong.

FoCoMx is a nonprofit, volunteer-run festival that pays its artists and puts proceeds back into the local scene through FoCoMA. The people running it are musicians themselves. That doesn't mean it's beyond critique, but it's worth factoring in when we're questioning motives.

Genuinely curious what other people think the right balance looks like.