[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Josy

Did you read Gregs post?

Yes I did ,I also read the post about regular members votes only

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Josy

That doesn't matter though, Greg is the one that runs this and see's the votes, he's been doing it for years and isn't stupid, he knows which accounts are genuine regular members and which are questionable.

Here you say GENUINE REGULAR MEMBERS

[Z]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

So you have discounted votes in case someones told someone who to vote for ? this is no different to the touting for votes that been happening since day one ,and you dont know whats been said in pms so that is selective

No, I discounted it because they'd nominated about 6 or 7 people and nearly half of them were people who had withdrawn and it was just very obvious that they'd never even read the OP - not specifically because I thought they'd been told how to vote though that was a factor. It didn't change the outcome of who qualified anyway, the people they had nominated who were eligible were either already qualified or weren't going to qualify with that one extra nomination.

[Z]

Honestly it's not even a big deal

[Josy]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Here you say GENUINE REGULAR MEMBERS

That was in reply to this..

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Why ? even he doesnt know about whats in the pms that will have been floating about all week ,asking for votes

It doesn't matter if members are asking others to vote for them, it's pathetic yes imo but if they want to get votes like that then that's up to them how would you even know if they were doing that anyway?

And if say for example an account like Ilovebb345623 was made and sent votes then Greg would know that was an account that was made for voting, not a genuine member account and discount it.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Josy

That was in reply to this..



It doesn't matter if members are asking others to vote for them, it's pathetic yes imo but if they want to get votes like that then that's up to them how would you even know if they were doing that anyway?

And if say for example an account like Ilovebb345623 was made and sent votes then Greg would know that was an account that was made for voting, not a genuine member account and discount it.

But you didnt say that did you Josy ? you also said REGULAR members ,I too find it pathetic, but also sad that people tout for votes,but some people are like that

[Josy]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

But you didnt say that did you Josy ? you also said REGULAR members ,I too find it pathetic, but also sad that people tout for votes,but some people are like that

That's just nit picking though chuff, regular members/genuine members whatever I meant the same thing...

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Josy

That was in reply to this..



It doesn't matter if members are asking others to vote for them, it's pathetic yes imo but if they want to get votes like that then that's up to them how would you even know if they were doing that anyway?

And if say for example an account like Ilovebb345623 was made and sent votes then Greg would know that was an account that was made for voting, not a genuine member account and discount it.

gregs reasons are different, he's saying that if the votes had been for those 10 included in the shortlist and with reasons they would have deffo been included. Regardless of whether they were 'regular' members or not?

[Z]

Originally Posted by Josy

That was in reply to this..



It doesn't matter if members are asking others to vote for them, it's pathetic yes imo but if they want to get votes like that then that's up to them how would you even know if they were doing that anyway?

And if say for example an account like Ilovebb345623 was made and sent votes then Greg would know that was an account that was made for voting, not a genuine member account and discount it.

And yeah, this is exactly it. I'm not familiar with every single person who's ever posted on here - nobody is - but you become aware of people who start to post a lot very quickly even if you know nothing about them. As long as it's clear that somebody's genuinely put thought into it and they've got a 3 figure post count, that's more or less proof enough that they're genuine. Sometimes it's very obvious that people have been asked to vote (like the time DrunkerThanMoses gave a reason for one member as "they told me to vote for them" ) but as long as they're conforming to the rules that I set out every time I do this then it doesn't matter. I only discount votes that are either very obviously from fake accounts or those that haven't followed the rules properly. In this case it was because that particular set of nominations mentioned 2 or 3 (I think it was 3) people who had withdrawn and had barely nominated anyone else so it just seemed very pointless, unlike say if they'd nominated 15 people and had nominated 2 who had withdrawn, because clearly they'd thought about it.

At any rate it's nobody who's been posting in here whose nominations were discounted so it's not important is it?! I'm not even sure I've seen that user post in here once.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Josy

That's just nit picking though chuff, regular members/genuine members whatever I meant the same thing...

Im not nit picking at all Josy, Im pointing out facts

[Z]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

gregs reasons are different, he's saying that if the votes had been for those 10 included in the shortlist and with reasons they would have deffo been included. Regardless of whether they were 'regular' members or not?

Yeah if they'd voted in Round 2, which they haven't, this is what I mean, it's not a big deal . They just nominated half a dozen people in Round 1, half of whom had already opted out long before this competition (I think it was Vanessa and Cherie and possibly Jesus!? Can't remember, I deleted all the Round 1 PMs and I've not included it in my spreadsheet) so there was no point including it

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

gregs reasons are different, he's saying that if the votes had been for those 10 included in the shortlist and with reasons they would have deffo been included. Regardless of whether they were 'regular' members or not?

I know that Kizzy, I was answering Chuffs post about members asking each other to vote, Greg hadn't even replied at this point...

[Z]

Anyway, anyone who has yet to vote in Round 2, chop chop, one more day of voting left!

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Z

Yeah if they'd voted in Round 2, which they haven't, this is what I mean, it's not a big deal . They just nominated half a dozen people in Round 1, half of whom had already opted out long before this competition (I think it was Vanessa and Cherie and possibly Jesus!? Can't remember, I deleted all the Round 1 PMs and I've not included it in my spreadsheet) so there was no point including it

So the senario we are discussing was just for round 1... you didn't need reasons in round 1 did you?

I have a headache....

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

gregs reasons are different, he's saying that if the votes had been for those 10 included in the shortlist and with reasons they would have deffo been included. Regardless of whether they were 'regular' members or not?

Thats how i read it too Kizzy

[Z]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

So the senario we are discussing was just for round 1... you didn't need reasons in round 1 did you?

I have a headache....

Yeah just Round 1 and no that was just up to 15 names - but when somebody doesn't even nominate half of that, and half of the names they do mention are ineligible and have been for multiple competitions now, it's clear they've never followed the game or read the OP of the thread. That's literally the only reason it got discarded, nothing to do with how many posts they have (which wouldn't be a factor anyway unless, as I said, it was someone with about 10 posts who clearly wouldn't know enough of the forum to have an idea of who they like the most or have anything to say about 10 people in Round 2) or whatever else... and nobody in here who's been discussing this has had their Round 1 nominations discarded so I don't think it's an issue at all, in fact I doubt the person whose nominations were discarded will ever even realise because I don't think they've posted in this thread once.

I've never revealed who has taken part or what anyone's nominations or votes are in any previous competition and I won't be doing it this time either because that's the reason it's done through PM, so people are free to say what they like about who they like - after it's over people are free to say whether they took part and who they voted for but I would never reveal that on their behalf because it's not fair to otherwise; so I'd like to draw a line under this discussion because I don't think it's fair to discuss anyone's nominations or votes in any context unless it's absolutely necessary. I'll of course answer any general questions about this but I think I've probably already said too much on the matter anyway.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Why ? even he doesnt know about whats in the pms that will have been floating about all week ,asking for votes

People ask for votes in ML? How sad

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Z

Yeah if they'd voted in Round 2, which they haven't, this is what I mean, it's not a big deal . They just nominated half a dozen people in Round 1, half of whom had already opted out long before this competition (I think it was Vanessa and Cherie and possibly Jesus!? Can't remember, I deleted all the Round 1 PMs and I've not included it in my spreadsheet) so there was no point including it

Who is this person with 10 posts who nominated me

[Z]

Tbh ever since Ross disappeared off the forum I think vote rigging has dropped in TiBB games by about 99% I don't get the impression there's much in the way of vote rigging nowadays; generally in the summer season you get off-season voters voting for the people they speak to and during the winter season you get on-season voters voting for the people they interact with most in the BB forums and the people they speak to during off-season so even if people have been asking for votes, it's from people who would vote for them anyway it's not like, I dunno, two sworn enemies voting for each other and very obviously being disingenuous.

[Me. I Am Salman]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

why write a huge paragraph when only a sentence of it is gonna be shown anyway

I'm pretty sure it's all included unless someone else has made the same point
Greg said himself the more reasons thè better, so end of discussion.

[Me. I Am Salman]

I can understand vote rigging for games, but for something like ML?

[Cherie]

Chuff should post more in off season, it certainly livens up the forum

You got the sausage rolls ready for On Season Chuff?

[Z]

The only way someone could significantly impact on the results of this is either by withdrawing or by organising enough people to vote for them without any of them blabbing that they've done that it's just not feasible

[InOne]

Chuff is a bit like a bull in a china shop with any thread she enters. God bless her

[Tom4784]

I'll vote later tonight if I'm still alive. Remind me if I don't.