Board Thread:Wiki management/@comment-3398859-20170629222924/@comment-7091122-20170703205414

ThisUserLikesOreo wrote: Camwood777 wrote: ThisUserLikesOreo wrote: Camwood777 wrote: ThisUserLikesOreo wrote: TheO's vote won't count. He changed his mind and changed to choice 1, which means that he no longer wanted choice 2 to win. You're basically forcing the vote in. And not disqualified, huh?
 * Choice #1 - 11 votes (12 if including Fairy's)
 * Choice #2 - 9 votes or 10 votes (explained below)

Thinker's and Shroom's votes will counts as 0.5 or don't count at all, as they can be considered as choice 5, which would be your own idea or something like that. If they counted as full votes for two choices, it would be unfair in a similar matter if "absolute x" votes counted as 2 votes.

Nonetheless, choice 1 still wins. And do not reopen this thread again. This is the final result due to basic logic. Buddy, it was never disqualified properly as the template was never used. We don't count supports or opposes without their templates. So by default, we don't count that. But there's more, the rules state that a disqualfiy can be revoked if it is unfair. And since the reason for disqualification is invalid, it is unfair.

Nowhere in the rules does it state that a vote such as Thinker's or Shroom's is counted as a 0.5 vote. Thusly, they do indeed count as 1 vote.

It honestly feels like you're trying to rig the results so Choice 1 wins, because you want it to. You keep referring to systems that do not exist in our rules. You're flat-out using reasons that are not valid to justify it being Choice 1, even though the voting itself states it is Choice 2. You voted it, even, so it's not impossible that you're doing that. What do you mean template was never used? All of the required templates were used, I have no idea what are you talking about.

Nowhere in the rules is stated that they count as 1 vote either. And I used basic logic there.

Woah, I was just about to say that about you, as you tend to always do that. When AWB tallied the votes, that was when the "disqualifcation via past disqualifcation" was set it. He never used the template. It does not count.

Nothing says anything about splitting it, and nothing says anything about merging it. So guess what? By default, they're counted as 1 vote each. Unless you want to make a vote about that.

If this was an argument about me as a person, that might make sense! Unfortunately, this is about a voting thread, and I am not a voting thread, so this is just ad-hominem. And listen, buddy; it didn't work for me, and I recognize I did it. So what makes you think it'll work for you? What..? Explain from step 1, as it's making no sense.

It was never stated that default vote quantity is 1.

What didn't work for you? Since you asked for a chronology, here it is.
 * 1) TheO casts their original vote
 * 2) It is disqualified
 * 3) TheO changes their vote
 * 4) AWB tallies the votes, and does not count is, claiming it is disqualified. However, he does not use the template, and his reason given is not a valid reason.

Neither was it stated that the default for split votes such as that is 0.5. Not to mention, most votes (with the exception of neutrals and support-neutral/neutral-oppose) count as 1 vote. Since 1 is the standard metric, and 1 has been used for split votes such as SSU's in the past...

In the old thread BF10 linked, I did a similar thing by attempting to disqualify votes I thought were going off wrong ideals. It didn't work, and resulted in a rule being added stating you cannot do that. I recognize this was wrong, but I still did it, and I apologize, but that's irrelevant. I assume you'd already know you can't disqualify votes you feel are "wrong" or disqualify votes to make a result you want, however, because you posted in that thread.