They were supposed to be taken into consideration when scoring, and were mandatory deductions in the short program. Obviously, for 6.0, you would never know for sure if and how much each judges deducted. My impression of 6.0 judging was that judges didn't necessarily deduct or heavily deduct for errors or shortcomings that weren't visible. That is, a fall - deduct. A triple without preceding steps - ergh. Back then, it was more important to UR and stand up than to rotate and fall.How much were URs considered in the 6.0 era, though?
90s was an era of technical breakthrough for the ladies. There were 3axels and harder 3/3s by Midori, Tonya and Kristi. By 1995 however, they had all left the competitive ranks and there wasn't a clear leader. Strategically it was probably wise for them to encourage risk taking by the new flock, even if it meant overlooking poorer technique and rougher presentation. It was ironic that at all 3 Worlds from 1993 to 1995, Surya was given high scores for what she tried to do (even if not always successful), but ultimately she still narrowly lost to a 'better skater' with lesser jumps. Like Slutskaya in 2000 and 2001.
The way Michelle lost to Surya in 1995 was almost like how Surya lost to Oksana in 1993. 7 clean triples losing to flawed skates with lesser, imperfect jumps. The difference to me was that Oksana was clearly a better SKATER than Surya in 1993, but Michelle, whilst skating smaller, was not necessarily a worse skater than Surya in 1995. For me, the judges picked the wrong technical skater to promote in 1995. Michelle was clearly on her way to normalizing the 7 triple, 2 3lutz strategy that went missing since Kristi. Funnily, having Surya beat Michelle but lose to Lulu in 1995 is also akin to Slutskaya circa 2000/1 because the judges didn't let her beat Michelle, but let her beat Butryskaya.
Not that it didn't work out for Michelle in the end, but perhaps if Michelle had medalled in 1995, she would go the technical route. Frank had said she already had the 3axel by then.