Gymnastics and diving have had multiple judges for another reason, which is that the nominally objective portions of the judging involved spotting things at the edge of human perception. (That is, I'm discounting the obviously subjective things like "style".) The judging is definitely not just "hey, that looked good, I think I liked that 8.5 worth"; you can tell just by listening to the commentary. Things like "they're attempting an 8.6 point dive" and "that'll be two tenths off". They're often not guessing at the numbers in question, though it may be a tossup whether the human judges see the same thing the commentators did.

There has been some discussion of moving to computer vision analysis for these portions.

While one could easily judge poetry by equally objective metrics, I don't think it's hard to imagine what the result would be once the min-maxers get into the game.

    Love! love love love love love poet,
    love! hate no! love love love throw it.

    .,!.,!.,,..,,,.!!!!.,.,,.,,!!..,.!

    rhyme time lime slime mime mime love,
    a a a a a a glove

    o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o love.