That's always a difficult point. I hear what you're saying Russ but you'd like to think the images were selected 'blind' so chosen on impact and merit and photographer's names not taken into account. If you look at past Landscape Photographer Of The Year and Wildlife Photographer Of The Year awards (and I'm talking the Natural History Museum and Charlie Waite backed comp's here), there are often the same names popping up as section winners and highly commendeds in the same year. I guess that photographer hits that particular 'style' that the judge is looking for at that time - which would change from judge to judge and year to year.
Limiting shortlists to one per photographer is a bit like restricting their current 'trendiness' rating and encouraging images with less impact to be included from a fairness perspective. I'd love to be shortlisted but would hate to think I was only included to make up numbers...
It's a contentious issue and there are both sides of the story to be considered... And not sure what the outcome should/could be be... We were restricted to 10 entries per section - perhaps this should be 1? Or if we can't get noticed with 10 entries, we're not good enough? Don't know, this could go on longer than a Mac vs PC debate