Nota bene, I counted your votes for others. I did not count your vote for yourself.
Doesn't matter, for the highest vote on the list can still end up voting against yourself, even if it is a secondary vote.
Yes, I get the idea you don't want people to vote for themselves, but I never suggested there wasn't another option that solves the problem I mentioned *aside* from voting for ourselves. In the interest of not taking up more space in this voting thread which isn't meant to be taken over by a lengthy debate, I will send you the alternative solution by PM.
Please come back in 20 years and tell me of what I do or do not have grasp.
That is the point. We are trying to support others. The act of writing in and of itself. It is not about YOU. It is about AARland.
If you read the first post, you will see that I clearly say "not to influence" the vote. Most people respect that.
Yes, somebody who ignores glaring problems does not progress, however many decades they are given to do so; mere experience does not equal competence. None of this is about ME, it is an entirely impersonal problem that I am deliberately drawing attention to apparently at personal cost, regarding writers voting (they mostly don't, wonder why?).
Regardless of our subjective opinions, it's still a competition, and not voting in a competition can also influence the outcome; people are no less gaming the system if they simply decide not to vote in case they vote against themselves. Somebody with a sharp eye can even deliberately withdraw their vote for somebody else as soon as it looks like that other person stands to beat them.
@Goblin-Cookie you are entirely right about the mathematics and the "gaming" of the award voting. But you are 100% wrong on the purpose of the award and about the community we have here. Not to mention how we've built a community through efforts like this that
@coz1 is spending his time and effort to provide this award process for every writer.
Regardless of whether it was a "written rule" when first posted it's now an established written rule because the award owner has said it. It's not a matter of discussion anymore.
No it isn't, secret written rules are not a thing. We can't expect in 10 years time people to remember what was written on a thread 20 years ago.
The award does not have a
"purpose", aside from that given to it by others. You agree that there is a problem in the voting system resulting from the disallowing of self-voting, but you don't care.
A problem is to be solved, not dismissed with some appeal to the virtue of self-destructive altruism and pretending that a competition isn't a competition.