Gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe - just maybe - the reason Wookie says you disenfranchised him is that you told him that in every single one of the E8 voting threads! Every single one has a giant wall of text that says, only these people selected to my ever-changing criteria are allowed to vote, and Wookie, you are not one of them!

MrWookie has 14 Ms OOT posts this year, 100 OOT posts since 2018, many many hundreds more across the 14 years he's been on the site, is way more senior a member than you, and you disenfranchised him because of the asinine rules changes you are continually making. This is not about "brigading" - go ahead and disqualify the Politics/non-OOT posters, that's not the issue - this is about the imbecilic way you chose to try to do that, which disqualified literally half of OOT including tons of longtime regs.

So now you tell him, oh just vote and I'll add you to the list, like that fixes the overall problem, but it should be obvious to anyone with intelligence that it does not! There are many longtime members who have popped into Ms OOT threads to point out the unfairness of their disqualification, and likely many more. Adding a few people at a time does not fix the overall issue when you disqualified literally hundreds of people (who do not fit into the politics interlopers category). You are still disenfranchising longtime OOT regs, and it is a problem that you choose not to fix, even though the extremely simple fix has been pointed out to you many times.

AOC 150-40 = 110
RR 121-19 = 102

The list of people not counted is essentially the same as the list of people posted in the Discussion thread a few hours ago, where I asked for more senior members to suggest exceptions.

Timmay has 21 OOT posts since 2018, including 17 from 1/27/18-10/8/18, and hundreds of OOT posts over the 13+ years he's been on this site.

Lektor disqualified him, and told him in every single E8 thread that he's not allowed to vote, via his name not being one of the ones that will count.

Lektor sees no problem with this system.

Wow, that was difficult! Wookie asked and you answered!

Lektor, is Timmay on the voting list now?

You see no problem with people who are told that they are (incorrectly) disqualified, but aren't the type of people to make a fuss about it? You think that type of voter suppression is okay? Because that is definitely happening here.

You are transparently doing whatever you can to block specifically politics posters by inelegantly putting your thumb on the scale for what it means to be an OOT poster.

Politics regs are second class citizens here and always have been, as codified in killa law:


They are lucky to even be allowed here. No need to give them a vote.

lol I love all the anti-AOC snowflakes who are triggered by this. And double lol at anything Killa ever decreed.

A simple weighted voting scheme seems fairest. Just weight every vote using the following multiplier:

[(# OOT posts in 2018)/(total 2018 posts)+(# lifetime OOT posts)/(total lifetime posts)]/[(# 2018 politics posts)/(total 2018 posts)+(# lifetime politics posts)/(total lifetime posts)]

Easy and that way everyone's votes count.

SenorKeeed with the 3/5’s compromise ITT.

Looking forward to my infinite vote weight.

Keed, how do you plan to figure out how many posts someone has in a specific forum, when the software only shows 250 posts at a time, and searches can't be done by exact date?

I'm more of an ideas guy

Great formula when someone who has 100% of their posts in OOT and 0% of their posts in Politics would get a multiplier of 0/undefined/error/null-set and not get their vote counted.

You sure solved that problem!

Even if you fix the math, though, it's great to see you endorsing 3/5 person votes, as it confirms further who you are.

That's actually a good idea, just do a simple comparison of number of politics posts to OOT posts and if politics>OOT then their vote gets counted as 3/5th

Speaking strictly on the rules:

I see that killa post is dated 2013, but guessing the “No Politics” rule was originally made even earlier than that.

Unfortunately, things change over time. Almost everything is partisan now as opposed to the past when it would be mostly fiscal issues or moral issues like abortion. Politics bleeds much more into everyday lives now, even sports! It’s quite difficult to have discussions on nearly any topic these days without touching on something that could be considered partisan (though sensible people can avoid this of course).

Do Bundy's 100 posts in ATF complaining about being banned from Politics count as Politics posts?

New solution for these people: Their votes are to be turned over to and instead cast by:

patron - that's your first good post in awhile. Try to do more like that.

Counting all posts as equal is a chump idea, posts should be weighted by quality not quantity. For example, I post in OOT sparingly, but my posts are all the tits. Conversely, you guys are chumps and your posts are terrible. Nobody wants to read your chump posts. In conclusion, you chumps post terribly and nobody loves you.

Didace - you don't have any good posts in awhile. Try to do more like mine above.

Hmmm after some consideration I've come up with a better formula:

A = 2018 OOT posts
B = lifetime OOT posts
C = 2018 politics posts
D = lifetime politics posts
E = 2018 total posts+1
F = lifetime total posts
G = total lifetime posts in ATF in threads with "politics" in the title+1
H = total lifetime threads started by user in ATF with "politics" in the title

1/G*1/(1000*H+1)*(A/E+B/F)/(1/100+C/E+D/F)

That sounds complicated but it's easy if we find someone good at maths.