Or not.

Skip M:
Decent enough composition - interest subject, at least.  Nothing amazes
me about it, just a decent photograph.

Peter Chant:
It's... a building.  Nothing ground breaking here, but it fits the
mandate.

Bob Hickey:
It's... a beach.  I think it would have been better with more dramatic
lighting and some additional contrast.  And hot women in bikinis.

Bret Douglas:
Hey, a shot of something other than a cat, bird or cheerleader!  And
it's pretty damned good, too.  I would have dodged the rocks a bit, but
that's a minor complaint.  How much did you crop this, BTW?

Quercus:
Nice framing, good exposure.  Would have liked to seen the sun at a
different angle to the windmill, but that's me.

The Dave:
I was toying with an idea similar to this but decided not to when I
couldn't find any candies worth shooting.  I would have used a narrower
depth of field to make things a little more interesting visually.

Doug Payne:
Oh you, with the bucking of the mandate!  Well, the foreground is
black... the clouds white.  I suppose if I was drunk enough, this would
pass.

Tom Hudson:
Nice picture of an old Tudor building.  I know what you're getting at
with the style and such, but I don't know if I'd put a greater emphasis
on the black and white portion of the building.

Ken Nadvornick:
Ken, I never thought I'd be saying this to you, but: That flash is
really harsh, man.

Simon Lee:
Good picture that fits the mandate in your usual off-the-wall style.  I
would have been tempted to leave the picture in color just to give the
mandate a kick in the pants - after all, the Spies will still be black
and white.

In a related note, one of my alternate (bad) ideas was to photograph a
Lego model of Darth Vader against a white background with some dramatic
lighting ala your Boba Fett picture.  It just didn't turn out well, so
my attempt to impersonate your style failed this time.

Steve McCartney:
Nice picture, feels cozy and intimate.  But what horrible news!
"Corruption Scam Engulfs Thai PM"!

Bruce Murphy:
Feels like this was a "crop an old picture to fit the mandate" job.  And
it was.  Shame on you.

Walt Hanks:
Can't say enough good things about this picture.  Excellent!  Love the
texture of the petals.

Bowser:
Bulldozers do indeed have a lot of texture.  Good framing, the text
fades and doesn't intrude on the composition.

Joseph Kewfi:
Snapshot of an Elvis impersonator.  Simple, works.  ARCHIVED SHOT?  You
mean you don't have Elvis impersonators on call for your every
photographic whim?

Jim Kramer:
Again with the dogs!  I'm partial to labs, so I do enjoy this photo.

R. Schenck:
Is it the bottom of an aquarium?  A model ship dumped at a gravel yard?  
I can't tell.  Cropping could be a little better.

Christian Gatien:
The baby's face should be out of focus, but I don't think the
interesting moment (the touch) is highlighted enough to maximize impact.  
Specifically the adult's hand is a little too dark and masked in shadow.

Eric Quesnel-Williams:
I like it.  Interesting choice of effects, they seem to have worked to
make an interesting image.  Too bad there aren't letters falling off a
movie title from 15 years ago - that would have been icing on the cake.

Al Denelsbeck:
Looks like the point of focus was slightly behind the main subject.  
Otherwise very nice.

Brian Baird:
An egg lamp?  AN EGG LAMP?  It looks like you put this picture together
in two seconds.  Oh, you did?  YOU'RE A HORRIBLE PHOTOGRAPHER!

Matt Clara:
Again with the street people!  Actually, I don't know if you take a lot
of pictures of street people.  Looks a little dark, but it could be my
monitor.

Vic Mason:
It's a lamp.  It took me a while to figure that out.  I feel the
lighting could be more dramatic, but it would be really hard to do that
without sacrificing the detail on the lamp.

As always, my opinions should be taken with a grain of salt, a shot of
tequila and a sense of humor.