Even though it would change nothing other than denying Arkasas a win, I would say that Alynkio's vote should have counted. He got it in on time, and the vote was clear and obvious, the only substance of the post in which it was made. Generally speaking the insistence on bolding votes has been to make them stand out so not to be overlooked or missed, so in a case where a post has nothing besides a vote, bolding is unnecessary. I have certainly seen a number of players over the years make unbolded votes that counted, even done so myself a few times when needing to quickly write out a snipe vote.
Now, granted, as I checked, the rules for this game do say, "§8. – Voting must be done in the following way. Write "VOTE" and the person you are voting for in size 4 bold text." So there would be basis for you to make this decision. However, by the same standard any vote that isn't also in size 4 wouldn't count either, and I know at the least none of my votes were in size 4, I always make my votes size 6. I'm sure quite a few other players also didn't make all their votes in size 4 either.
Ultimately the GM has the final say. However, historically speaking, votes have never been discounted for not being in bold. A number of votes over the years have even been counted when they were partially hidden in text within a post, after a GM would miss it the first time in some cases. Not counting a clear, on time vote purely because it isn't bolded is needless pedantry that, if it becomes standard, make unproductive rules lawyering of what constitutes an "acceptable vote" a common occurance, to the detriment of the game.
.png){kind=avatar}
