Quote:
Originally Posted by LektorAJ
The people on patron's list (includes fuluck414) and d10 will have votes counted if any more of them want to get involved at this stage.
This is an admission that the mid-competition rules change was wrong and should not have been made, correct? My list was meant to show that the rules change was nonsensical and disqualified many of OOT's reggiest regs, including some who were already currently participating in the competition. This obvious demonstration that the rules change was wrong, is what prompted you to then include my list of people as now eligible voters.
But that does not fix the problem. As mentioned many times, my list was not exhaustive, and there are hundreds of OOT posters who were wrongly and unfairly disqualified, even though they are eligible voters. Several of them are speaking up in this thread, even after you added my list of people. There are still hundreds of correctly eligible OOT posters who you are disqualifying.
The only fair solution is to allow all voters and then disqualify those who do not meet the 100/10 rule. Others will help you vet the voters. Opponents of specific candidates will be sure to point out their voters who do not meet the requirements.
But the current path is still immoral and wrong, and unfairly disqualifies hundreds of OOT posters, even after adding my list. Please stop the immoral voter suppression and allow OOT to vote, not half of OOT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LektorAJ
If there are people fitting that profile missing from patron's list then they can ask ITT to be added.
This is not a fair way for this to work. OOT regs shouldn't need to come begging itt to be allowed to vote, when both you and the history of Ms OOT already granted them the right to vote at the beginning of the competition. Many regs vote in just a few rounds, or just later rounds, or some vote in the voting threads and do not read every post in this lengthy discussion thread. This is another bad solution to the problem that you created.
The only fair solution is to allow all voters and then disqualify those who do not meet the 100/10 rule.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mullen
The issue with that solution is the changing of the rules mid-contest to fit a specific narrative. I agree this is all super arduous, but the best solution would have been to let this contest play out and simply amend the rules for next year. Recounting each individual vote for every candidate seems like a really time consuming process.
I mean the fact that the list had to get posted is kind of proof that the rule change is bad, no? If there’s that many exceptions surely it indicates that the rule change was flawed.
This.
The only fair solution is to allow all voters and then disqualify those who do not meet the 100/10 rule.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 27offsuit
Lek this is pretty damning evidence.
This. 27offsuit is agreeing that the mid-competition rules change was wrong.
The only fair solution is to allow all voters and then disqualify those who do not meet the 100/10 rule.