Missed this official post, lol. Just now seeing it, I believe I was packing for Vegas on the 7th...;o) 54321...would make my brain explode. With 321, the number of individual votes I hand count...(by the way)...averages about 255 individual votes. With 54321, that would go to 425. It takes a 2-3 hours to do all that right now as it is. I basically count them, check them again in reverse and then take the top 10 and end up counting them all again in various ways another 3 times each. Just to make sure I'm not messing up with the count. All the while visually dodging members who voted, deleted their post and voted again (as a Mod I see deleted posts still), and those who voted incorrectly and I have to discount. The problem with having a number of votes available to a voter, and then letting said voter give all the votes to just one pic, and no one else, is there could/would be landslide victories. With having to share the 321 votes, this spreads out the votes. (more members feel like a winner even if they don't win) True, the same top winner would probably win whether or not voters would have to spread their votes out or not. But, sharing the votes comes off looking as more of a group effort (for lack of better words), and not sharing the votes would look more like a popularity contest. (imho) Besides, back when we only voted 1 person a winner, after a while everyone wanted to have 3 winners. A voter being able to give all their votes to just one person would sorta be like going in reverse. AgentSmith

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"