Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
There was nothing remotely unfair about the prior system. You may prefer this one, but it's no fairer. Can we grow up and avoid playground terminology? Especially when "fair" can be deconstructed to mean, "my choices never seem to win, so I want to try something else."
|
I think you missed the plot (as they say in the UK).
What happened now was that every book had votes. The votes were a lot closer. We didn't have any of the "choosing a book because the others didn't have enough votes". We've had people admit they voted because of the way the votes were going and not for what they really wanted. So yes, fair is the exact and correct word. This vote was fair. It was not railroaded by who voted for what or how many votes. This vote was
FAIR.
I'm sorry you seem to think that everything I am in favor of has to have an ulterior motive. But that's just not so. It was just very obvious (if you'd take off your blinders) that the voting wasn't actually impartial. Once we had enough votes, we may as well have only had 1 or 2 books nominated. It didn't work. It wasn't what people wanted. They voted for what had a chance to win. That's not how it should have been.