This paper examines the role of checklists as a device for evaluating CALL courseware. After defining checklists, it examines the reasons why courseware is difficult to evaluate compared to other educational materials. It then covers in detail the main objections to the use of checklists for courseware evaluation; articles in the CAL literature from the 1980s through the 1990s have complained that checklists are inaccurate, cannot deal with educational issues, lack objectivity and reliability, are biased, etc. The present paper then examines these claims one by one, finding either that the criticism is unjustified or that it applies equally to any form of courseware evaluation. The paper concludes with speculations, drawn from postmodern literary theory, as to why the checklist has been the target of so many unsubstantial attacks.