Poll: Illustration Gallery -FINAL VOTE-

[Darknemo2000]

GTO, are you saying taht you have already voted 13 times in this poll and then we voted our 13 votes after that?

If no then THERE IS NO DOUBLE VOTING.

The other poll as far as I understand is inactive and the votes from there are not moved to here. You left all members to vote freely. If you are saying that this is to prevent a double voting then show how our votes are taken into consideration.

They are taken away from this poll, but the other poll is inactive thus meaning those 13 votes are gone, unless you are going to add them to the current results of voting, but then whole this taking and then adding again would be useless, besides it seems you are not going to do that because the other voting results were unclear, thus the other polls votes were counted as inactive as well. Now you are taking away the votes from this poll saying that they are duplicates of inactive poll? Thats nonsense.

It just leaves all those 13 votes gone completely and not taken into consideration at all.

To avoid the confusion explain where are those 13 votes and how they are reflected in the current poll. because it is the current poll we are talking about.

To make it simple we have 49 votes 13 of which we knew took part in INACTIVE poll. So you are saying that you are avoiding double votes and take away those 13 votes. leaving the poll with 36, its fine, great but WHERE ARE those 13 votes? In an INACTIVE poll? This basically means that those 13 votes are ignored because they are votes of INACTIVE poll. The only way those votes would be double votes if you would combine both voting poll results into one, but you are not doing that or maybe you yourself voted 13 times in the current poll before, but it didn't seemed like you did as when the poll started it basically started from zero and votes were added gradually.

Can you see the arithmetical mistake? You took away the 13 but you are not adding that 13 again in any form possible, thus turning that 13 into a 0.

[Nerevarine]

I agree in dark's confusion...

i see no reason whatsoever, in how the pervious poll has anything to do, at all, with this current poll

could you explain why the votes were subtracted? as the current votes showing right now were not, in any way, affected by the votes of the last poll.

the only possible way i could explain why you are doing this, is because you are simply adding the two polls' results together, and merely subtracting votes if a single member has voted in both polls. However, as far as i could tell right now, you forgot to add the two polls together(at least i did not see you do that), and instead merely subtracted from the single member's double votes. Only in this case can i gleam any sense in this whole situation.

Edit: you got the number "6", because 6 members voted in both polls in the first choice, (but from what i see) you never added the original 13 votes.
the same for the other choices

am i right in this reasoning?

[Darknemo2000]

this all your math GTO

(01.) = 21-6 => 15

(02.) = 3-2 => 1

(03.) = 7-3 => 4

(04.) = 18-1 => 17

Basically just shows the other votes apart that 13. thats great it shows that 4th option indeed has most votes, BUT you have to ADD those 13 VOTES again as they are also members of community and have the right to vote as you haven't added additional votes to the current ACTIVE poll, do you understand? You cannot leave those 13 votes in inactive poll and not add them here because this would delete all of the completely. And in the end we still get the same result:

1 - 21
2 - 3
3 - 7
4 - 18

Meaning that the first choice wins.

[onizuka-gto]

Please refer to this post, located here:

http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewto ... 120#p39451

Dated: August 8th, 2008.

For those of you who wish only to read the context of the post, i have quoted it below.

Which ATM looks like (current results can't be interpreted in single way, but they let us assume votes' distribution in an upcoming poll, if any):
"I agree, details don't matter" = "I agree" - 9 = 17 - 9 = 8
"Place images on one page altogether, like in ZnT and Toradora" +6
"Use single page, but covers and B&W inlines shouldn't be too close" +2
"I disagree, details don't matter" = "I disagree" - 2 = 12 - 2 = 10
"Make two pages: one for covers and another for B&W inlines" +3
"Use gallery for covers and chapters for inlines, like in SHnY" +0
(numbers +n are relative since we don't know how votes are distributed in "generic" options)

this is a tricky situation, as calls for a "shorter" voting duration and/or "lower" quota is not something i wish to implement when ever a re-vote is required.




I do not like the idea that a small minority of "active" users should be used to decide the outcome of a site wide vote Nor will do i like to see this influence the shortening of a voting duration, simply because the other majority choose not to comment but only to vote.

After careful consideration, a new poll will be create, because in the end there is no real way of separating the remaining "silent" votes into the more detail options.

You can argue that you can add those votes to a "generic" option, but in the end that will still leave thing un-resolve.

Thus it will be unfair to decide for or disregard them. They must be given the chance to re-vote on the new options.

however the above votes will be taken into account in the new poll.

what you see here will be automatically subtracted from the options displayed at the end of voting duration

so if you did not choose to vote in this new poll, please tell me via P.M.

The reason is that, there is no real way to stop a member from voting in the new poll, thus effectively having two votes.

This is unacceptable.



In future, the voting majority will be simple and depend upon the number of total votes altogether.


But at the moment the following rules below will apply to this vote only.

• The above votes will be counted in the new poll and at the end will be subtracted from the total for each given option unless notified
• There will be a minimum total vote of 20 counting the existing 13. Therefore you only need 7 additional votes.
• The vote will last for one month
• Failure to meet minimum number of votes will result in an extension of the voting duration by one week.
• If the minimum number of votes are not obtained, then i will make a final decision
• If two or more options are tied, I will make a final decision
• Votes are changeable within the voting duration

since you want a decision i will give you one, this vote will be decided one way of another just like you wanted.

Even if it means i have to go "Stalin" on this.

Remember, the Motherland loves you.

Since this was unchallenged, I assumed all was well.

please understand that I will remain committed to my pledge to not break any of the voting rules at the duration of the poll, until the results are in and declared.

The time is up and I deemed my responsibility to uphold the terms of the voting rule to be as fair as can be, in judgement of my peers before the words of the rules were set, during the voting process and after the process to be fair and a success.

Maybe you will convince me that the voting rules are incorrect, illogical, impractical or all of them.

I will thank you in advance for your debate on this matter and will help me rethink the terms of the General Voting Policy that i will submit later,

But alas, anything you may argue or protest now, is, frankly.

Too Late.

later on I will attempt to explain more in detail to answers your questions, including my rational of forming this decision.

But right now, I have to sleep, so I will resume later tonight (Wednesday are client inspection, so i will not be able to access the internet until tonight)

So until then, please feel free to debate amongst yourself.

[Darknemo2000]

It is not too late. Look at the votes above they are all correct and your ridiculous math made no impact on the actual voting because everyone misunderstood you to begin with.

And why are you avoiding to answer this simple question - where are those votes and why they are not taking into consideration? Ok you said that you think they are double votes, but double votes of WHAT? The other poll is inactive so unless you have added those all votes to this poll before we all voted there cannot be double votes...

It all reflects the current real situation basically the first option has 21, fourth - 18 since second best is the fourth and the first has three votes advantage of it it has won.

In your opening post you never said that you are going to ignore the 13 votes of community members as if they were a trash. You haven't. And you can't assume that everyone will follow up this poll discussion attentively later on. You have to state everything in the opener. You didn't. More so even those that read that part about you substracting the votes misunderstood you. I thought that you will take those votes into consideration, and not completely ignore my and others votes as if it were some waste. You never said it directly. Thats why no one opposed it or questioned it before finally everyone understood that you decide to trash their votes away without giving a proper explanation, but for the one that they were posted in an inactive poll. But inactive poll is inactive all votes in there do not count. You do not transfer them to here thus you cannot take those 13 votes away.

There is no point of discussion because everything is clear - you made an arithmetical error but are not willing to admit it nor give the reason why...

[Krikit]

http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewto ... 120#p39451

After careful consideration, a new poll will be create, because in the end there is no real way of separating the remaining "silent" votes into the more detail options.

So the new poll was made to separate the votes into deeper categories. ALL the votes. Except those that voiced their opinion. The 13 of us. Our votes were already accounted for, because you knew which category we voted for. So at the creation of the new poll, did you add those votes into the poll? If so, then it was okay to subtract the votes, as we would have "double-voted."

however the above votes will be taken into account in the new poll.

Okay, so you said here that you would put our votes into the poll correct? Did you? If so, again, then subtracting those numbers again is okay, to remove any double votes. But if you did not add those 13 votes at the creation of the poll, into their categories.........

what you see here will be automatically subtracted from the options displayed at the end of voting duration

You said this because You would have already put our 13 votes into the poll, right? So we were SUPPOSED to vote again, and then you would subtract those votes, BECAUSE you added the 13 votes at the creation of the Poll. Did you?

The reason is that, there is no real way to stop a member from voting in the new poll, thus effectively having two votes.

ONLY IF YOU ADDED OUR 13 VOTES AT THE CREATION OF THE POLL. DID YOU? If so, I have nothing to complain about. This is fair.

The above votes will be counted in the new poll and at the end will be subtracted from the total for each given option unless notified

So our earlier votes would be accounted for at the creation of the poll, thus meaning votes would be deducted if we voted after you added these votes. You said to notify you by email if we weren't voting. So that you could change the 13 subtracted votes to 12, or 11, etc, if we didn't vote. Because you said you would ADD the 13 votes already from us. Did you do this?

There will be a minimum total vote of 20 counting the existing 13. Therefore you only need 7 additional votes.

Requirement: MET. So you already counted the 13 votes. Did you put them into the poll or not?

So this is everything that you said would happen. You cannot end this Poll IF:

You did not add the 13 votes in the beginning. You still need to add those 13 votes now, and as you already subtracted our "double" votes, that will be the new winning Choice. You see right??

DID YOU ADD THOSE 13 VOTES AT THE CREATION OF THE POLL? IF SO, I CANNOT COMPLAIN. IF YOU DID NOT ADD THOSE VOTES, YOU CAN SEE THE DILEMMA.

Please, did you, or did you not, count those 13 votes from the original Poll? (I take it no one sent you an email saying they wouldn't be voting??)

EDIT: So Oni, we have NO PROBLEM with the rules. There is nothing wrong with this Poll. You just need to fulfill what you said you would do, by adding in those 13 Votes. We have and had no reason to argue you on the rules, because as I posted above, this is how they were understood. You just need to follow the rules as well, as you SAID you would ADD the 13 Votes. Did you? Again, if you already did add those into the poll, then subtracted our "new votes" I'm fine with it.

EDIT2: Haha...so this is what I do in my free time when I'm not at school studying Japanese....hahaha....I lurk on the forums here trying to change Wiki-Communist Policy . But to reiterate once more:

If:

1) You added the 13 votes from the last poll to this poll
2) You received 0 emails saying one of us would not be voting in this poll
3) You deducted 13 votes from each of us who had voted again in this poll

Then the record as we see it is as you describe. That is Option 4 wins. And we'll have to put up with this for another 6 weeks ^_^.
If you did not do step 1 though, then you still need to do so. That is add those 13 votes. That will determine the TRUE Winner of the Poll.

EDIT 3) Wow I must be bored...Anyway, for the record Oni, I think for future polls that run into this problem: That is, one poll not being sufficient, so a new one is created. There are two main Policies, if you will, that can be followed:

1) The Previous Poll is completely Disregarded, and the New Poll is just that. A new poll that takes no votes from a previous poll. Everyone gets a vote, and no votes are deducted. This does have 1 downside. If someone in the past poll voted, but didn't vote in the new poll, how does that vote get counted? This option disregards that, and says "You snooze You lose" on the new poll.

2) The policy used for this Poll. That is, for those who made their claim known in the previous poll, their votes would be automatically carried over to the new poll, so they need not vote. This maintains their say in the new poll, even if they aren't there to vote. (or died ), and then they just need to tell the "Vote Master" whether they will vote or not, and where they vote, so the "Vote Master" can deduct that vote in the end. The Downside: If someone says they won't vote, and you don't subtract a vote for that, then they go ahead and vote anyway, to where you can't check, then they get two votes. This is the downside.

What do you think? ^_^

[Darknemo2000]

ok lets try to make it clear (if its possible at all)

But GTO just haven't answered us anything really... The main question is what happened to those votes of 13 people if they are taken away from the main poll. If they are not added then 13 members were taken away the right to vote because their votes do not count.

GTO gave us only two reasons so far.

1. It is too late thus it is pointless to discuss, because he assumed that we understood the issue and since he assumed that we understood and we haven't started to discuss the issue we agreed with it.

Problem: A) The actual issue was not posted on the opening post where all other rules were posted. This thing was not mentioned there

[*] The above votes will be counted in the new poll and at the end will be subtracted from the total for each given option unless notified

This is the sentence in his opening post but the problem that he wrote above while the actual modifying votes were listed below, thus this statement itself becomes illegal because the actual real problem was not posed by the opener. The rule which is not written correctly cannot be counted as legal.

B) No one even understood what he wanted to do with it. You can clearly see that from the upcoming questions if they should vote or not.


2) Onizuka said they should but didn't explained it correctly leaving a double meaning that those 13 votes will still be counted, and only will be taken away due to the double voting.

<...>

I do not like the idea that a small minority of "active" users should be used to decide the outcome of a site wide vote Nor will do i like to see this influence the shortening of a voting duration, simply because the other majority choose not to comment but only to vote.

After careful consideration, a new poll will be create, because in the end there is no real way of separating the remaining "silent" votes into the more detail options.

You can argue that you can add those votes to a "generic" option, but in the end that will still leave thing un-resolve.

Thus it will be unfair to decide for or disregard them. They must be given the chance to re-vote on the new options.

however the above votes will be taken into account in the new poll.

what you see here will be automatically subtracted from the options displayed at the end of voting duration

so if you did not choose to vote in this new poll, please tell me via P.M.

The reason is that, there is no real way to stop a member from voting in the new poll, thus effectively having two votes.

This is unacceptable.

In future, the voting majority will be simple and depend upon the number of total votes altogether.

But at the moment the following rules below will apply to this vote only.

• The above votes will be counted in the new poll and at the end will be subtracted from the total for each given option unless notified
• There will be a minimum total vote of 20 counting the existing 13. Therefore you only need 7 additional votes.
  
  <...>
  
  since you want a decision i will give you one, this vote will be decided one way of another just like you wanted.
  
  Even if it means i have to go "Stalin" on this.
  
  Remember, the Motherland loves you.

So what do we see in this GTO post? (I have underlined the key moments).

A) Basically he is either saying that active members are not members of the community and thus their votes should be taken leaving only inactive members (those that do not post) to vote. Naturally this is a total nonsense. All members have the right to vote. You cannot say that translator or editor is not a member of community and have no right to vote and only inactive members are part of the community, just like you cannot say that only active members should decide the outcome.

All members are equal in terms of voting and all of their votes should be counted as equal and none should be ignored.

B) Or he is saying that the members that voted again because will be a double voting. But this is another ridiculous way of thought. The first poll is inactive and GTO hasn't added those votes to the new poll, meaning that if you take these votes from the active poll and do not add them to it later you leave them in inactive poll, meaning that those 13 votes are gone thus taking away the right to vote from 13 active members.

However, in his post above we can see phrases like "the above votes will be taken into account in the new poll" it is not hard to believe that above also include the 13 votes even if they will be substracted later, but only because "there is no real way to stop a member from voting in the new poll, thus effectively having two votes." meaning that they WILL BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. The problem is that those 13 members votes ARE NOT ADDED into this poll but they are still distracted from it, leaving that you just get rid of 13 members votes considering them to be lesser members of community without the right to vote.

Thats why everyone understood that he will add them because he started to talk about the double meaning, but as we see from his latest arithmetics he DID NOT added those votes to the poll and just took them off.

How can he expect anyone to pose an issue if everyone misunderstood his own confusing writing? It wasn't taht they not understood but they misunderstood meaning that they took a logical conclusion (based on those phrases) thet they will be taken into account.

The best confirmation is this one

"[*] There will be a minimum total vote of 20 counting the existing 13. Therefore you only need 7 additional votes."

It seems to tell us that THOSE 13 votes WILL be added to the poll and will be counted in, and thus you will need only 7 additional votes.

But he did not added those 13 votes and just took them away without re-adding them.

The only reason behind that is that GTO already voted 13 times in this active polls by himself for those 13 members but still allowed them to vote, meaning that there indeed is double voting. But there were no signs of that. No 13 votes were added in one go which would hhave happened (presumingly right from the start of the poll).

Because he did not added those 13 votes they cannot be counted as dubpicates as they did not took a double voting in this particular active poll - they only voted in inactive poll, which is disregarded.

Thus I think that if GTO doesn't give any reasonable explanation to that it is safe to assume that he got lost in his own counting and made an arithmetical mistake by taking away 13 but not re-adding them later.

Thats why the above votes should be considered the way they are without ignoring any member that voted. GTO just made a mistake. Or maybe he wanted to make a mistake. I do not know, but in either case in current situation he is basically insulting the 13 voters by telling that their votes do not matter and should not be taken into account.

[onizuka-gto]

hello to all concerned, im back.

now to rejoin the conversation, let me explain the rational that lead to the subtraction of the 13 votes.

previously, in the other thread I was in favour of a completely new poll, all results should be disregarded and essentially a brand new re-vote.

however, a number of opponents challenged me on this point.

I counter that I cannot realistically be able to separate existing members whoms vote was counted to re-vote for a second chance.

Since my opponents were adamant, i made a compromise, and allowed the 13 existing votes from members who had taken the trouble to comment on their decision to be "counted for"

Please take note of the wording, in a voting context votes are "counted" in that they affect the results of the poll, it does not always meant to be "literal".

But to ensure that the existing 13 members whom votes have been allowed to affect the new poll, I carefully explained I would "subtracted" them from the result, to prevent the 13 members from having the ability to vote TWICE.

To me, this was a fair deal,

The opposition was allowed the 13 collected votes to affect the ending results of the new poll.

To me this solves the problem of levelling the playing field in that ALL MEMBERS will have only ONE VOTE. No more and no less.


of course,
In retrospective, this is contradicting.



But the real question is, How come NO ONE CHALLENGED ME?


I laid out my cards, I did not attempt to hide or deceive anyone, if you had asked me to examine and reword the rules of the poll you had only to challenge me and we would renew negotiation.

However for FIVE WEEKS NOT ONE PERSON DID.



Darknemo You have only yourself to blame, as they say in the real world,

remember to read the fine print before you sign the paper.

You signed it away when you chose to challenge the decisions of this vote AFTER it had closed.

Just be aware that no matter what you say now, it is too late to affect this one.

The results of this vote will stand, and i will enforce it.

The best you can do, is to wait for the next two weeks to once again submit a new proposal regarding this issue.

Then to wait for a standard month for the vote to conclude.

You might counter that no one will vote.

Let me remind you that you mentioned the exact same thing when i told you about the new poll.

From looking at the results fo this one, you will have no problems.

And I will honour the results as i did in this one.

Consistency is my middle name.

[Nerevarine]

yeah thats all well and fine

but the problem everyone is having is:

did you add the two polls together? (or did you put the votes from the previous poll into this one before subtracting?)

[onizuka-gto]

Interesting answers, just received some information about the poll data, from TGM.

But to answer your questions:


No.

I did not add the results from the previous poll to this one, then subtract the designated votes indicated.

I simply subtracted the 13 votes as stated from the list in the first post, to the independent result of this poll.





hmmmmm...... yes, i can very well see the problem with this now,

sorry i didn't see it now.


it's very confusing as to why I even did that.

oh well, if only i knew what the Onizuka-GTO of five weeks ago was thinking....



Makes me want to disregard those 13 votes altogether and let the votes stand for themselves.... :

if only i was so flexible......

*wiggle hand under the desk for some cash*

....could of made things so much faster......


but you have only to curse my incorruptibility....

I hate myself sometimes.

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Alright, now that the mathematical error has been understood, I'll post the poll results based on the rules set.

The above votes will be counted in the new poll and at the end will be subtracted from the total for each given option unless notified

Option 1: "I agree, Place images on one page altogether, like in ZnT and Toradora" 21 Votes
Option 2: "I agree, Use single page, but colour/covers and B&W inlines should be clearly segregated" 3 Votes
Option 3: "I disagree, Make two pages: one for covers and another for B&W inlines" 7 Votes
Option 4: "I disagree, Use gallery for covers and chapters for inlines only, like in SHnY" 18 Votes

Modifying (Adding in first poll results)
Op 1: 21 + 6 = 27
Op 2: 3 + 2 = 5
Op 3: 7 + 3 = 10
Op 4: 18 + 1 = 19

Modifying (Subtracting the first poll results from the modified results of current poll to prevent double voting)
Op 1: 27 - 6 = 21
Op 2: 5 - 2 = 3
Op 3: 10 - 3 = 7
Op 4: 19 - 1 = 18

Anything I missed?

[Krikit]

EDIT: No TGM, that's how we understood it. ^_^. The only way those numbers would have 'changed', is if one of the 13 didn't vote in this poll. The end result would be the same, but the equation would be different. (but no one sent Oni an email, so we all voted, which makes your math correct ^_^)
PERFECT TGM ^_^.
IF That is the new result, then disregard what I wrote below ^_^

Sigh. Why no one challenged you on it? Well, as I wrote above, that was how we understood it. To us, there was no reason to challenge it. You said that our votes would still "Be accounted for," and that only our "double vote" would have been subtracted. Since no one sent you an email, it was assumed all 13 of us voted again, so after you "accounted for" our vote in the old poll, you would then subtract the 13 new votes. However, this was completely confusing aspect that most of us didn't understand or want in the first place.

http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewto ... =90#p39289

We start counting votes on this page, not as keeping tallys on who has voted, but to give an example of how the poll would run and how to choose the wording for the options.

http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewto ... =90#p39299

Const2k Was only SUMMING UP the Discussion thread. Read all the pages. No one EVER made the case that they wanted to not be allowed to have a say in the new poll.

http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewto ... =90#p39302

Here Dark talks about "bringing the votes over," but it is not a plan, it's an example to show how having a "details don't matter option can be a good thing.

http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewto ... =75#p39238

Face it it - to get a result in this case you would have to take out the option 'details don't matter' at all, as simply such 'details don't matter' option adds completely nothing to the solution. As far as I can fiollow Const2k thought process, this option is basically just to keep the continuity of the voting from this poll so that the votes would not be lost completely.

What we meant by lost votes was that people that wanted a specific category couldn't find it, and so wouldn't vote. "Lost Votes." Nothing about carrying votes over or regarding/disregarding them.

If you wanted to disregard our votes, then this new poll should have had only TWO options. The two I agree options. As the winner of the last poll was the "Yes" option. So the new poll should have taken this into account, and had only those two choices. Under your assumption that we would be voting twice.

Anyway, keep reading, and you see some people tallying numbers to get a feel for what the categories would look like and who goes where. NO ONE EVER SAID THESE VOTES SHOULD BE SUBTRACTED! Except all of a sudden you post the end of the poll and the new rules, and that clause about modifying votes, etc was in there. I didn't read it as well as I should have, but even if I had, I would have gotten where I am now. And that is that you would still be counting in those 13 votes. As you said they would be accounted for. And there is no other way to account for them than to add them. Then only our double vote should be subtracted.

Where you got the idea to subtract votes in the first place is beyond me...but maybe I missed something in the last forum. Please point it out.

But if you are not willing to budge, I think we should jump into a new poll right now. Just like how this was part II or the old poll. Make it a trilogy, because you meant opposite what you wrote in the rules, we understood it in the context of the written rules, and you pulled the idea to subtract votes from somewhere?...So create the "new poll" now, (or soon ^_^) and make it have all the same options as this one. Give it a month, and we'll all revote. ALL VOTES COUNT. Don't give a 2 week cooldown when the poll's rules were confused/wrong. We'll compromise with you.

Disregard the two week cooldown and make a poll now, for one month, same rules as this one, just that every vote counts, no vote is disregarded, and then we will stop trying to get this poll's results changed. If the 2 week rule isn't dropped and the new poll is created as a "continuation" of this debate (not a 'new' debate, but like Part III in the trilogy installment), then we have no choice but to argue and petition for a recall. (without the disregarded votes). Because it was the ACTUAL RULES of this poll which were imagined, and were understood literally as WRITTEN. Because of this fault, the new poll 2 should be made now. Without a waiting period. That's the compromise we can make. Even though the choices were messed up here and have an EASY remedy, we are willing to vote again. But remove the two week wait. I'm going to get too old and die by then. ^_^




EDIT: No TGM, that's how we understood it. ^_^. The only way those numbers would have 'changed', is if one of the 13 didn't vote in this poll. The end result would be the same, but the equation would be different. (but no one sent Oni an email, so we all voted, which makes your math correct ^_^)

[onizuka-gto]

I can only attribute my decision to "subtract" the votes, was the menacing fear of paranoia and Pessimism that everyone will try to pervert the voting results by voting twice.
Anyway be aware the majority of my post here are after 1am GMT and i'm usually sleep deprived, so its rarely that i can remember something that far back with accuracy.

But the idea of combining ALL the votes from the previous post with the new one was never acceptable, now and i suspect back then.

So to be honest not sure why i allowed only the mentioned 13.

I suppose all the argument by Darknemo, cracked me, and i simply said yes so that he would stop.

(not to self: don't compromise to the dissidents. they cause dissent)


so I hope everyone here learns the moral of this situation.
"assume, and you make an ass out of u and me"

Never make an assumption that you and your fellow comrades are all on the same frequency. When the outcome is important to you, make it your business to ask questions. Or you will suffer the consequences for your lack of action. i.e. get fired from your job because you assumed that data was already backed up or that product had already been sent to the client before the deadline had reached them on time....




Anyway, while i would love to forgo the two week cooling down period.

please understand these are necessary to prevent people from simply starting another poll immediately just because they do not like the results of the first one.

Also understand that these measure will be part of my standard response in future voting conflict and it will be bad form for me to allow these infractions.

it makes me look inconsistent. not good.



So, you will have to wait for two weeks like everyone else, besides, not like you don't have time to waste. if you didn't, why are you on the interweb? get back to work!

[Krikit]

sigh...........6 weeeks it is....wow....O_o. I've got time to waste cuz I'm procrastinating from finding work....sigh....sigh......sigh....sigh....(someone fix my broekn recor...sigh.....sigh.....sigh)

Well, off to findateacher.net so I can try to teach English to Japanese students so I can live out my daily life in *moderate* comfort ^_^. haha. English teaching...AWAY!!!

but 6 weeks.....waaaaaaah....

Is there no clause or thing we can use to shorten it? Perhaps decreasing poll duration?.....anything *legal* we can do at all?? sigh....

EDIT: I say we start a poll for Toradora! etc, with this same concept, and remove all the images from the gallery there. Because they aren't following guidelines, didn't vote on it, and yet there it is....we should just do it anyway ^_^. Or at least make them struggle as well to get those images back up, then maybe they'll recognize our struggle, and vote in this one as well...hahahaha.

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Oi, Krikit, I know your joking but please just keep it in thread.

So Oni, you plan on sticking with your original decision?