There is a very easy solution. Use the rules and voting eligibility requirements that Lektor started the contest with, and which were not changed or debated until after the contest had already started ftmp. This means initially allowing all voters, but then disqualifying those who do not meet the initial eligibility requirements (even if it is Lektor's strict interpretation of 100 posts & 10 OOT posts). Other posters are welcome to help Lektor search for voters who should be disqualified according to those rules, if they wish to. Anything other than that is asinine, ahistorical, and anti-OOT.

The rules are not being abused. If OOT posters meet the initial voting eligibility requirements, they should obviously be allowed to vote, even if they are also [other forum] posters or have more posts in other forums. Anything other than that is immoral disenfranchisement which is asinine, ahistorical, and anti-OOT.

It is not anti-OOT, OOT has a history of allowing pretty much anything at the discretion of mods. If anything, there are no rules because they can be enforced at the discretion of the mod, the rules for this contest seem to be changed at the discretion of the organiser, very much in the tradition of OOT.

OOT justice is not bound by rules, it is bound by common sense.

It is very very obviously anti-OOT to disqualify all of those great OOT posters on my list, as well as hundreds of others. That is common sense. The new mid-competition rules change goes against common sense and is literally against many of OOT's greatest posters, mods, and Ms OOT participants, even the creator himself! The only thing that makes sense is to use the rules in place at the beginning of the competition.

Seems like common sense would be to keep the current rules and add the users on your list. The rule works, it just has some negative side effects.

lol @ this riggage

lol

Morans better not **** with my entry into super bowl squares.

I wasn't expecting to need a specific solution for OOT regulars who hadn't been participating who would suddenly want to, but I've already added gregorio back in and I noticed Yeti has started voting now. I also asked for other names.

The kind of people you mentioned can be added to the list if they suddenly become interested in this competition.

Are you willing to go and check all the voters under the 100/10 rule? There's still a backlog of voters to be checked from the sweet 16. The old rule had become unsustainable.

Also the point of the lax rule was to make it open to people newish to OOT who don't post that often. Not to open it to people who lost interest in OOT years ago and are openly contemptuous of it and us.

Other than that - as I said, I'm running this for the 200+ people who are regularly voting in the rounds not for the 20ish people who post regularly ITT, so I'm not really open to persuasion at this point.

If you are mad that someone in pol called someone else a MAGA chud while not actually being a MAGA chud yourself you should put on some big boy pants. Eh, even if you are a MAGA chud you should put on some big boy pants.

lol @"brigadering".

This just makes no sense - if some hot new figure in Buddhism was nominated for the contest, don't you think the active members of the "Religion, God, and Theology" sub-forum would take a more keen interest than normal?

Pretty sure that's why the 100 OOT post and reg-date rules are in effect so the voters would have at least a decent exposure to OOT and that "culture".

I know it's shocking that folks here might frequent multiple sub-forums and have varied interests, but whatever. Seriously, just tell us who you want to win and put up the final victory post so we can never click on it for the next year.

Lektor,

I like your rule change because the contest itself is inherently silly and meaningless, so who cares? Adding a twist like this creating so much mid-contest drama is funny and entertaining.

I don’t think AOC would have legit made it as far as she did based on an honest assessment of hotness+relevance in the prior rounds.

However, she is perhaps the legit favorite based on an honest assessment of hotness+relevance in the elite eight.

The real miss OOT this year should be Emily Blunt. Was she even nominated?

Surprise POGgers haven't brigaded pol with deplorable MAGA pics and requesting to see people's hogs given their affinity for Trump.

Lektor,

IMO a fair/reasonable qualification criteria would be something like 20+ OOT posts in 2018.

El Diablo,

I'm sorry, but Lektor has deemed you ineligible to vote, and has said that your input has no bearing, and he's not really open to persuasion at this point!

That would be the opposite of common sense, as my list is not exhaustive, and there are hundreds of eligible voters not on my list, a few of which have already come forward, and many more would undoubtedly wish to vote as well.

LOL at saying that the new mid-competition rules change "works, it just has some negative side effects" - oh, the small side effect of disenfranchising half of OOT, including many of its greatest posters, mods, and Ms OOT participants, even some who have been active in the current contest? Yeah, just a "minor" side effect which renders the current competition completely meaningless.


Yes, you obviously did not expect many things, with the completely asinine mid-competition rules change that was made. Your "solution" is the opposite of a solution, it makes things even worse than they were before, with worse effects than the one you were trying to change.

Hooray, you added gregorio, even though you disenfranchised hundreds of OOT posters? Some of the people on my list were already participating in this year's competition, and you disenfranchised them anyway!

What you did is completely wrong, and you need to rectify it. There is one obvious solution. Use the rules you said you would abide by at the start of the competition.

This is not a legitimate excuse to disqualify half of OOT voters. Other people are welcome to check out other voters if they wish, and add them to the disqualification list. That is the way it has always worked, and it is not unsustainable. Many people can help you out if they wish to do so. But you cannot fairly turn things upside down and go about an opposite process of the way things should be, especially when your method is proven to be unfair and disqualify many of OOT's greatest posters, some of which are still currently active in this competition.

Then this is not Ms. OOT, it's simply Ms. LektorAJ. What about the hundreds of voters and posters that you disqualified? Are you really openly admitting that you're fine with being completely unfair and disqualifying half of OOT, because you just wanna do what you wanna do? I have been giving you more good faith credit than this previously, but you really seem like you're now doubling down on a terrible mistake and being intentionally immoral and anti-OOT.

I will be continuing to vote going forward and would appreciate my vote being counted.

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.

Yes, and I'm confident I would proceed in exactly the same way in that situation as I am now.

There are people ITT who have a problem with AOC because of her politics. I'm not one of them.

As in to add people who are not already listed if they want to be? That sounds reasonable - but with 2018 defined as prior to nominations opening.

Patron,


I was too busy to bother to open a browser to vote in any of the contests so far this year, though I would have done so if any were a close contest where I had a clear favorite. I don’t have think it’s a problem to be excluded for that reason, even tho I’ve often only voted in a small subset of matchups that I find interesting.

And some of us who voted in races that interested us are brigadering.

There are only a couple of names I don’t recognize on that list. Lektor, I’ll suggest to you that list of posters be added to the rolls.

Lektor,

If certain contestants were eliminated in prior rounds due to votes from now ineligible voters, you should have a repechage to give them a fair shot at the title.

Also Emily Blunt should be in the repechage if she was somehow inadvertently left out from the competition.

No idea about any politics, but no bikini pics/nudes should pretty much disqualify you. Lol at the trolls voting for the complete unknown.

Thanks for doing this Lektor.

+1 Emily Blunt

Hi team,

surprise rule change.

I am running the contest now.

lol, this weird tribal mentality. You have one and only one "team". Let's see your papers, please.