If you analyze the list taken as a whole and then by individual contributor it becomes pretty apparent that there is no consistency to the list, because the methodology used to select individual items was inconsistent. So instead of calling them the Golden Ear awards, think of it instead as being "the edited list of stuff that made us say woo-hoo". Viewing the list for what it actually is as opposed to what some might expect it to be is very helpful.
Now if one insists on subscribing to evil conspiracy theories, you could always suspect that a magazine like TAS knows that award issues generate more newsstand sales than other issues. You could also suspect that making this award issue somewhat provocative might stimulate even more sales, and generate more discussion -- such as the one we are having -- on TAS' and other audio websites.
Like I said, I view this for what it is. I just can't get motivated to put on my wacky straw hat and Hawaiian shirt and dance around chanting "head on a stick".
