1. If you took this photo, as presented here, with one fluro and a compact camera...please share your secret with the world!
http://www.coolminiornot.com/236665?browseid=961426
I've done so on many occasions, it's not a secret (scroll down). There is even an article in the articles section describing pretty much the same technique as Mike points out. That picture right there is taken with an old Sony P100 from 2004 and one fluorescent light.
2. Photoshop will be used to adjust lighting, saturation, colour, gamet, midtones, etc, this is inevitable, it is not possible to detect this if done subtley, even an unnoticed smudge can be whisked away in a heart beat before uploading
If you do not think this happens with a large number of submissions, you are living in a fantasy land. It is also used to add in a nicely graduated background, like, well, YOUR submissions.
Yes of course as most decent digital images (unless you have very good jpg settings) uploaded it takes some work to get the image to look like the miniature, fix colours and contrast etc. That is not what anyone mean by "photoshopping" who's in the ballgame. Again point me towards the examples of truly "cheating", you're just guessing, and what looks like it not from a very educated viewpoint either. Out of all my submissions there are I think two miniatures that have photoshopped backgrounds, the rest of them are gradients printed with my printer. If you cannot tell that, perhaps that undermines your argument of the existence of a legion of cheaters?
I'm going to give you an example. Some people claimed that a well known painter photoshopped their work. The reason was that when viewed at the golden deamon the minis seemed flat and lack contrast. I have one of the painters miniatures in my collection and the painter does not photoshop their work, it's just very subtle. The lighting on the GD's just blew all the highlights and shadows away. Looked close under good lighting the painters work is very sublime.
People claim a lot of things, that they saw this and that and that it was obviously photoshopped, conspiracy this, conspiracy that bla bla... but it's mainly just talk.
3. But you can't deny having the mini there in front of you is much better for judging, for a start, you see all the mini, not just the best bits highlighted by carefully selected photo choices.
Yes you have the potential of seeing more flaws in the case that the pictures are unrevealing and the lighting that you view the miniature under is revealing, but what's the point? We don't scrap telephones because it's better to talk face to face with people.
As for scrapping it...then consider another system:
One that reduces the range perhaps, to only 1 - 5, rounded up.
One that forces a comment of more then a few words.
One that counts thumbs up, and thumbs downs, and maybe "meh" sideways thumbs.
In what way would that help? I would go the other way in that case, with .5's so it would be easier to make a call between say a 7 and 8. But there are issues with that as well.
Many, many, many sites get by quite nicely without a judging system, people post to share their work, to gather helpful tips for improvement, and to join in and share in a supportive community.
But here, all you get most of the time is a flat, lifeless score. The very best will shrug off an aberrant low score, but it is the impressionable newbie who I feel for.
A score allows people to be post a truly low score, that if they were forced to spell out in words, they might find hard to justify.
"I don't like the colours" is not reason to score a well painted mini low, nor is "I don't like that mini, I prefer the Forgeworld variant" and yet tell me this does not happen.
Yes there are other sites! There are no reason for you or anyone else to post their work here if you do not feel like it! 
But I think the mini community would be poorer without coolminiornot controversies and all
Answer me this: Is the scoring a true and correct measure of a minis worth?
If the answer is Yes, great, sorry to trouble you all.
If the answer is No, then, why bother?
You seem to be missing the point here which is a bit frustrating. Just because something is not the objective truth does not mean it's without value. Think this one through now. Yes there are flaws with the voting system but there are always flaws with every kind of judging system, objectivity is just one aspect of it. Is it a few selected that judge? Are there mass-judging where everyone can cast a vote? Is the judging linked to a competition which a comapny holds? How long have the judges to judge the miniature? What lighting do they judge under? etc. etc. This system have a lot advantages too because it's not in real life, that it is on the Internet. I don't take it too seriously but I don't think it is without value either. It gives you an idea, just like any other system or competition. It complements rather then replaces feedback you get from people in real life. I mean it's not uncommon for people coming here, won one or two store competitions, thinking they're pretty much up there with the best when it's plain obvious that they are not...
Let me put it this way, what gain is there to score minis, if the scoring is
by all accounts at
best flawed, and what gain is there to encourage early starters with helpful comments instead.
What worth is it to stroke the ego of those who can both paint AND photograph a model well, if you discourage starters burned by a low score, a low score, by the way, often left without comment.
This point I do understand, what I would suggest rather then removing scores is then to have an option to not be a part of the scoring when you post. That I think would cater to everyone.
