Legion World Forums LEGION OUTPOST Mission Monitor Board Every 10 Years Forum LW Elections: ELECTION POLL NOW UP!

<marquee behavior=alternate> This is the official Legion World elections NOMINATIONS thread! </marquee>

First of all, a few comments. Please note that these reflect only my own opinion, and not that of Legion World, Inc.! (Your mileage may vary. )

I will not be running in this election. I’ve had a terrific time as Leader, but I don’t think it’s fair for elected officials to have multiple terms –- at least not yet, not when there are still so many deserving people out there who haven’t had the chance to have this experience even once. I feel like this privilege should be reserved for them, and not for those of us who have already had our moment in the spotlight.

Also, Legion World is all about diversity –- diversity of viewpoints, backgrounds, senses of humor, you name it. There are tons of people who would bring their own variety of insight and fun to these elected positions, and I would love to see them do it.

A brief note about my own nomination philosophy –- I feel that it’s an honor and a privilege to be elected to the positions of Leader and Deputy, and I’m thankful to everyone who helped get me here. And because I feel it’s an honor and a privilege to be in this position, I believe in nominating and voting for people who would do something with the position that they wouldn’t do as a regular poster.

I’m also looking to nominate and vote for people who have a fairly significant presence on the boards. By this, I don’t mean that they necessarily need to post to every forum every day –- but I'd hope that my nominees are relatively visible over the next three months, to help make all of Legion World fun for everyone here.

Anyhow, like I said, these are just my opinions. They're not meant to refer to anyone or anything specifically -- I just figured I'd take the opportunity to use this soapbox while I'm up here. The important thing is to have fun and enjoy these elections, because they don't come every day.

OK, now on to the good stuff.

1) The nominations process will take place in two rounds.

The first round will last from now until approximately 5:00 PM board time on Monday, February 23. During this round, you may nominate one person by sending me a PM (private message) with the name of the person you wish to nominate. To send me a PM, click on the icon above.

Please do not post nominations on this or any other thread! All nominations should be made in the form of a private message to me. Thanks!

At least once daily during the first round, I will post a list of all the people up to that point who have received at least one nomination. The list will be in random order, and will not indicate the total number of nominations that the people in the list have each received –- just the fact that each person has one or more nominations.

The second round will start on Monday evening and last until approximately 5:00 PM board time on Friday, February 27. When the second round begins, I will post a list of everyone that has been nominated up to that point, including the total number of nominations each person has received. People who made a nomination in the first round may choose to nominate someone else in the second round. Anyone who did not make a nomination in the first round may make up to two nominations in the second round (for two different people). Also, each person may only make up to two nominations total -- you can't use alt IDs to get around this rule.

At this point, anyone on the list of nominees may choose to post a brief statement on this thread explaining why people should vote for them. It’s optional, and if you choose to make a statement, it can be silly, serious –- whatever you want.

2) Once the second round of nominations is over, the top five+ candidates will move on to the election poll. The number of candidates moving on will be determined as follows: at least five will move on, unless there are fewer than five people on the list at that point (geez, I sure hope not!), in which case all of the nominees will move on. If there are multiple people tied for first, second, third, fourth, or fifth place, such that there are more than five top candidates, then all of those people tied will move on. (I hope this makes sense.) The candidates will have several days in which to campaign to their heart’s content before the actual poll is posted. The official election poll will be posted at approximately 5:00 PM board time on Tuesday, March 2, and be up for approximately one week.

3) Each person is only eligible to be nominated under one ID. This can be either the person’s primary ID or an “alt ID.” If a person has more than one ID nominated, he/she will be contacted promptly and asked to choose one or the other ID.

4) You may nominate yourself or one of your alt IDs.

5) I will include in the nominations list the five noms that were already made on the other thread, but all future noms should be made via PM. Just to confirm (in case I missed anyone on that thread, please let me know) -- Quis nominated Pofo; Pofo nominated himself; Sonnie nominated Numf and Icey; and Stoopid Cat nominated itself.

6) Nominations cannot be changed once they are made, except under the most extenuating circumstances. Changes are solely at my discretion.

7) The people in the list below have declined to participate in this election. There were a few others who declined in the last election, but did not appear to have been online in the last couple of days –- so, to be on the safe side, I have not included them on the list below. If your name does not appear on the list, but you have decided that you are not interested in participating in the election and/or would like to decline a nomination, please let me know as soon as possible through PM.

8) If someone you nominate declines, I will contact you as soon as possible to let you know, and ask you to make another nomination, if you wish. The declinee list will also be updated regularly to reflect any changes.

Good luck to all, and happy nominating!

(Any questions, please post 'em here. )

Declining:
Abin Quank
Eryk Davis Ester
Fat Cramer
<strike>Greybird</strike>
He Who Wanders
Kid Prime
Lightning Lad
MLLASH
Nightcrawler
rickshaw1
Semi Transparent Fellow
STU
Thriftshop Debutante

I decline nomination.

The following Legion Worlders have received one or more nominations:

icefire
Varalent
Numf-El
Stoopid Cat
Quislet
Cobalt Kid
Portfolio Boy

[Updated 6:38 AM board time on Friday.]

" At this point, anyone on the list of nominees may choose to post a brief statement
on this thread explaining why people should vote for them. It’s optional, and if you
choose to make a statement, it can be silly, serious –- whatever you want."

Does this mean you want to keep election/campaign posts off the board until the actual election period starts?

{[...] The people in the list below have declined to participate in this election. }

No, I declined a nomination in the LAST election. There's still a difference.

We don't have nearly enough election rules yet {rueful smile} and you really must issue an addendum, so I'm declining to "decline" by default. Please take me off that list.

It would be like a day without sunshine...

My original inclination was to suggest not campaigning at all until the final list of candidates was set. I think that it can be a little awkward campaigning while nominations are still ongoing, knowing that there's a good possibility that one might not make it to the election poll if a lot of noms are submitted in the last couple of days in the nomination period.

Upon reflection, I decided that that would take too much fun and spontaneity out of the nomination/election process.

Nominees should feel free to campaign however much they wish, whenever they wish -- although I would still suggest that the most heavy-duty campaigning be saved until at least the second round (with the numbers) begins on Monday.

The nominee statement was just to ensure that people knew they could post something to this "official" thread if they wanted to at that point -- because others might have time only to check in here, and not at numerous other campaign threads on the MMB.

No, you clearly declined a nomination in THIS election by your words and your actions.

I can understand if someone whose name appeared on that earlier list simply hadn't had the chance to read my posts about asking to be taken off. That's why, as I stated above, I erred on the side of caution and left off the names of people who I wasn't sure had been around in the last couple of days. But that clearly was not the case with you.

Your words and attitude indicate beyond a shadow of a doubt that you didn't miss my statements on the other nominations thread. You knew full well that, had you wanted to "change your mind" about taking your name off the previously-declined list, all you had to do was to send me an e-mail or PM. (In fact, just about everyone else whose name appears on that list did so.) Moreover, you had plenty of time -- almost 48 hours, during which you were on LW and posting -- in which to do so.

Yet you deliberately chose not to.

I don't know whether you're acting this way out of vanity, sheer arrogance, or simply the idea that, as a general matter, rules just don't apply to you.

Whatever the reason, it's blatantly manipulative, and already well beyond tiresome.

If Grey doesn't want his nomination, can I have it?

It's his declining of the nomination he doesn't want. I suppose YOU can have *that*, though...

I am actually going to give it a go this time! I know I have been away for about a month but I had a family emergency, Please do not give me sympathy votes!
I want you to vote for me because it would be so much fun!!!!!!!!!

{[...] No, you clearly declined a nomination in THIS election by your words and your actions. }

Ah, but did I follow the morocco-bound, multi-volume Legion World Election
Code :rolleyes: by sending you an e-mail or PM, one way or the other? Nope.

It's the presumption I didn't care for, not whether you were accurate or not.

{[...] Whatever the reason, it's blatantly manipulative, and already well beyond tiresome. }

Well, then, as to the last point, the posts at the start of this thread are obviously following my own sterling example {self-reflecting ironic smile}

We don't need such a Rube Goldberg apparatus . It's getting a bit out of hand.

Edit: To add a link for this last allusion. I'm showing my age, I guess ...

Jeepers! Is Grey running or isn't he?

If not, this is shaping up to be the most exciting faux-campaign since Fat Cramer!

Jeepers! Is Grey running or isn't he?

If not, this is shaping up to be the most exciting faux-campaign since Fat Cramer!

It's so exciting I had to double post about it!

This is only the third election here at LW, and we're refining the process as we go along. I think the 8-step procedure listed is clear and detailed. The initial post represents Stu's personal comments about elections, which I found interesting and welcome.

I think - and hope - that most of us see this as another Legion World game, and although one can make it as serious or silly as one desires, no toes are intentionally trod upon.

Shucks, Cramey, I still think it's a waste you won't run! We need more chicks in power!!!

I do not choose to not choose to run for president in 1928 ... er, for leader in 2004.

In other words, if some people want to nominate me, the crazy fools, I'll let 'em.

Stu's motives are open and honest enough. It's the rule-making that's getting too serious for me.

I know that I see it as another Legion World game ! I believe that the Legion World leader should never have any powers whatsoever, and should mainly be an honorary position that's fun to have for everyone.

Theoretically, the whole point of a leader is that if a leader tells us to do something, we can say 'no', and assert our independence, empowering ourselves!

I'll nominate Greybird ONLY if he promises to not drop out of the running at the last nanosecond!

Why am I nominating Grey? I'm curious to see how the status of Leader might affect him. Will he go power-mad and rule with an iron fist? Will he crack under the pressure and be reduced to posting nothing but nonsensical gibberish? Will Reep return during Grey's administration? Or will Grey have a perfect time in office?

I just gotta know!!

For my campaign, here's what I suggest: all the lurkers, the essential proletariat of Legion World, should over throw the top 40 posters in a ruthless and bloody revolution!

After, the leader (if it's me), will co-opt the revolution, assume power and exile the lurker's leaders to another more terrible message board (you know the one )! Thus, a new era of communal nirvana will ensure, and history itself will end!

Actually the whole point of ELECTING a leader should be a nod of the head in memory to those LSH Leader elections in the Letter columns of days gone by.

Jeepers!!! (to steal a phrase from EDE)

Now I'm curious to know what'll happen if Grey runs! What if Reep returns and attempts to challenge our leader to a dual! Our we, as Legion Worlders, committed to standing by Grey and vanquishing Reep? Will they have a bloody battle, and to the victor goes the spoils?

That's exactly how it began, Vee, as a nod to our favorite team.

And why, pray tell, were you stealing my brilliant idea before I came up with it? Hmmmmm?

Yeah, which was so great about it! Here's a list of past LMB leaders :

LardLad with Cobalt Kid and Shadowplay in Candlelight Lass as co-deputies

Lash Lad with LardLad as deputy

Loser Lad with Newcru (our very own Princess Crujectra ) as deputy

Newcru with Dev-Em as deputy

Seahorse with Beagle Boy as deputy

Stu with Faraway Lad as deputy

Faraway Lad with Poverty Lad as deputy

Cobalt Kid with Omega Man as deputy

Ultra Matt with Greybird as deputy (see, Grey has held a position before!)

Lucien Lad and Stu as co-leaders with Pov and Freekinos as co-deputies (the eastern/western Roman Empire era!)

and now

Princess Crujectra with Eryk Davis Ester as deputy

Stu with He Who Wanders as deputy

It always should be about fun and silliness!

[Edited to make a few minor tweaks! ]

Vote for Danny! Weeeeeeeeeee.......

What? I haven;t been nominated? Oh...

Ooops... Guess THAT was premature...

Giggle...

So are we throwing away the Yahoo elections?

Don't worry, Danny
You're still polling 3 points behind Edwards for the Massachusetts primary...

I think these ARE the Yahoo elections, Beaglet.

Hmmmm. SOmehow this feels like deja vu...

I can't believe that I did not find you guys until these boards and the Crujectra administration! I really am a poster-come-lately.

What are the timeframes on those earlier administrations Cobie?

The following Legion Worlders have received one or more nominations:

Numf-El
Quislet
Portfolio Boy
Cobalt Kid
Varalent
icefire
Stoopid Cat
L'il Rhino

Declining:
Abin Quank
Eryk Davis Ester
Fat Cramer
<strike>Greybird</strike>
He Who Wanders
Kid Prime
Lightning Lad
MLLASH
Nightcrawler
rickshaw1
Semi Transparent Fellow
STU
Thriftshop Debutante

Duke, here is the best I can do off the top of my head at five in the morning (before I slept!):

Lardy elected circa May/April 2000
Lash elected circa Sept. 2000
Loser- Dec. 2000
Newcru- March 2001
Seahorse- June 2001
Stu- Sept. 2001
Faraway Lad-Dec. 2001
Cobalt- March 2002
Ultra Matt- June 2002 (he had an extended term I believe)
Lucien and Stu- Feb. 2003, a bit later or earlier (this was when I was on a break from the internet)
and the Crujeckie and EDE whenever the first elections for this board started! [Edited to add: Sept. 2003]

We've had a long history of leadership elections, and they were all a pretty fun time! Check out the LMBP link in my sig and click on polls for a chance to see how the elections reallly went down! There's about eight of them taken from over the years still in there!

And there are no posters come lately ! It was once said that Stu and Pov were 'posters come lately', and two years later, they're pretty much veteran posters among everyone else! Imagine in two to three years (I know, but after four to five myself, it seems reasonable ), how much fun it is explaining to people what has gone on before!

The nominations are rolling in!

To nominate a fellow poster, please send me a PM by clicking on the icon above, with the name of your nominee.

Thanks!

The following Legion Worlders have received one or more nominations:

Juan
Portfolio Boy
Varalent
l'il rhino
Cobalt Kid
Harbinger
Danny Blaine
Invisible Brainiac
Arachne
Poverty Lad
Quislet
icefire
Outdoor Miner
Numf-El
Stoopid Cat

[EDIT: Updated as of 11:53 AM board time on Sunday.]

Check again!

I'm in more or less the same rowboat as Grey. I (LYL=TD) declined a nomination in the last election. While I am not interested in running in this election either (and there's my declination), I would prefer that my decisions not be presumed.

I would prefer not to presume anything. And, in an ideal world (or World), no one would ever have to presume anything about anybody.

However, we do not live in an ideal world. We live in one in which nominations take place over a relatively short time span, and in which some people only log onto Legion World once or twice a week -- and, even then, might not necessarily check the Mission Monitor Board, let alone this thread or the other thread in which I carefully explained why presumptions regarding declinations needed to be made (and gave people several days in which to notify me if my initial presumption turned out to be incorrect).

Now, say Poster X wants to nominate Poster Z, despite the fact that Z has not posted to LW for over five weeks. Poster Y, seeing X's nomination for Z, also decides to nominate Z -- again, despite the fact that Z has not only declined a nomination in the past two elections, but also has not apparently been active on LW for over a month.

Nearly a week after the nomination process has begun, Z shows up and declines the nominations. However, X nor Y do not have schedules that would allow them to frequent LW daily. Consequently, X and Y do not see the fact that Z has declined the nominations until after the nomination period is over. Had X or Y seen the declination, they would have nominated Q instead. However, because they do not come back in time to see the declination, their nominations for Z are effectively wasted, and Q -- who only needed one more nomination to make it to the election poll -- loses out, through no fault of his or her own.

There's inherent unfairness no matter how you structure something like this. Certainly, if Z's declination is presumed before the fact, and then Z shows up several days later and decides that he or she in fact wants to run this time around -- then Z's chances of receiving enough nominations to reach the election poll are diminished. And that, of course, isn't fair to Z either.

But faced with a situation in which any action would encompass some degree of unfairness, decisions had to be made. I weighed the two possible outcomes -- the potential unfairness to Q, against the potential unfairness to Z -- and I made a decision that I believed would minimize any possible unfairness.

Unfortunately, as is sadly apparent from feathers that have become ruffled over the last couple of days, you can't please all of the people all of the time. In fact, you can't please some of the people any of the time.

Jiminy Jillikers! You shoulda just let 'em nominate THEMSELVES, Stuey! I tried to tell ya...!

I declined a nom last time and wasn't on LW in the days before the quoted post, yet I was on the list that followed.

The above statement was posted on this thread almost four days before I posted the initial declination list for this round of nominations.

During those four days, I received e-mails and PMs from many of the people whose names appeared on the list from last time. And, just to make doubly sure that I wouldn't be making any unwarranted presumptions on anyone's behalf, I e-mailed and/or PMed most of the remaining people on the list whom I hadn't heard from, to confirm that they wouldn't mind being included on the declination list this time around.

I didn't send an e-mail or PM to anyone on the last list who had previously made it clear that they have no interest in communicating privately with me via e-mail or PM. I neither cared to antagonize anybody by doing something that ran counter to their express wishes, nor waste my own time and effort by sending out an e-mail or PM that would most likely have been deleted, unread.

There didn't seem to be any reason earlier to provide the above explanation -- since it is rather lengthy and touches on issues that the LW public in general does not need to know -- so I instead provided a succinct explanation that omitted certain details that would be irrelevant to over 99% of the people reading the thread, and (I thought) obvious to the other 1% or so.

Fools.

Fools.

At the beginning of this thread, you said you were acting on the safe side and not counting declinations from people who hadn't been around. Then last page you said you had to make decisions regarding who had/hadn't effectively declined. And now you say had no intention of asking me like you did others in my situation.

I have now indeed declined, so the point is moot. But whom I choose to email or message with is my business, and I fail to see how it should factor in LW business.

As I said above -- which you may have missed, since it was likely added while your last post was being composed -- I provided an explanation that was adequate for purposes of the general LW public. There was no reason to elaborate.

When your business impacts how LW business is conducted, it becomes LW business.

I'd ask what the hell that means, but I think I'll do the interpreting this time. Email and message with Stu! Or he might not give you the same consideration he gives others while administering an LW election!

That sort of thing could get someone in trouble in the real world. But here...it's just sad.

I don't think I have anything else to say on this. These elections are meant to be fun, and I'll turn it back over to those who are having a good time with it.

I e-mailed or PMed people on the list purely out of courtesy -- not because I was bound to under some unwritten set of LW election rules, but because I wanted to. Had I not e-mailed or PMed anyone at all, I doubt anyone would have complained -- and, had they done so, I could have simply pointed to my original post and say, "Too bad, you were supposed to contact me, and you didn't."

But I didn't want to do things in such a harsh and unforgiving way. Even though I could have simply sat back and done nothing for four days, and then posted the declination list, I went out of my way to make sure that I double-checked people for whom I felt there was even a shadow of a doubt that they might be interested in running this time around.

Yes, there were a few people whom I didn't send an e-mail or PM to for various reasons. Greybird was one of them -- because, despite the fact that he never contacted me via e-mail or PM, his statements on the other nominations thread made it abundantly clear that he had no interest in running. You (TD/LYL) were another, because I would have thought that any reasonable person would interpret: (1) having one's post count reset to zero + (2) not posting on LW at all for over five weeks, despite being online and posting elsewhere in that same time period + (3) declining, rather forcefully, in both of the previous elections = not interested in running in this election. If there's anyone out there who can come to the opposite conclusion from that same set of facts, please speak up.

(Also, I knew that the other people on the list who were absent from LW in the last week were very likely absent only temporarily -- due to a computer problem or something similar. Certainly, no one else had been gone for over a month.)

In any case, as I said above, e-mailing and PMing people was done out of courtesy. It was not done because election protocol demanded it, or because failing to do so would have resulted in a fundamental unfairness in the election process. It was done as a favor -- no more, no less.

Why on earth would I extend a courtesy or favor to someone who, by their own words, wouldn't return that same courtesy or favor? That's not only illogical, but also mildly masochistic.

What's truly "sad" here is that you've made a specific, crystal-clear request not to be contacted via e-mail or PM. Yet, when that request is honored to the letter, you throw a fit and claim to have been unfairly singled out -- to have not been given the same "consideration" that others were given. How would it have been possible to react in any way that would have satisfied you?

Worst of all, you accused me of doing something that "could get someone in trouble in the real world." But in the real world, no one would complain about the fact that a person has extended a courtesy to certain people, but not to others with whom he has no relationship whatsoever.

The bottom line is this: you've made your point clear, time and time again, that you're under no obligation to do anything for anyone you don't want to. That's fine. But why shouldn't the same principle apply to everyone else? Anything less would be the very definition of hypocrisy.

With just a little more than 24 hours remaining in this preliminary round, the following Legion Worlders have received one or more nominations:

Juan
Portfolio Boy
Varalent
l'il rhino
Cobalt Kid
Harbinger
Danny Blaine
Invisible Brainiac
Arachne
Poverty Lad
Quislet
icefire
Outdoor Miner
Numf-El
Stoopid Cat

TOMORROW NIGHT: The numbers!

To nominate a fellow poster, please send me a PM by clicking on the icon above, with the name of your nominee.

Thanks!

YAY - Danny for Legion Leader! I can see it now! I'll build a tower high in the sky and look down on everyone!

Oh wait... (Mantis just whispered in my ear that that's a bad idea).

OK how about this? A gleaming fortress with a giant picture of me in front? Mantis? No?

Hmmm... I'll have to think on this one...

I'm Switzerland.

Have a run in with Turns You Into A Country Kid again, Kippers?

Hmm... Mantis for LW Leader... now there's an interesting idea...!

THis one would prefer to let Danny win. That way, this one can manip... advise him from behind the scenes...

That's my line!

That's my line! [/b]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I thought your line was:

STU, you're

<font size="12]BANNED!

giggle

With about 12 hours remaining in this preliminary round, the following Legion Worlders have received one or more nominations:

Arachne
Outdoor Miner
l'il rhino
Juan
Harbinger
Danny Blaine
Invisible Brainiac
Stoopid Cat
Cobalt Kid
Poverty Lad
Varalent
Quislet
icefire
Numf-El
Portfolio Boy

TONIGHT: The numbers!

To nominate a fellow poster, please send me a PM by clicking on the icon above, with the name of your nominee.

Declining:
Abin Quank
Eryk Davis Ester
Fat Cramer
<strike>Greybird</strike>
He Who Wanders
Kid Prime
Lightning Lad
MLLASH
Nightcrawler
rickshaw1
Semi Transparent Fellow
STU
Thriftshop Debutante/Leap Year Lass

I thought your line was:

STU, you're

<font size="12]BANNED! [/b]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That too!

Hmmmm... tricky formatting doesn't quote well, does it?

Tell me about it.

Darn, I was so close to getting nominated too. Who is "Quislet"? Maybe next election Quislet, Esq. will get nominated

No I'm Spartacus.

What? Speak up? What’s that? Oh! he said Switzerland!did he

Bum!

that’s ruined that joke then

I'm going to amend a previous statement: I do have something else to say.

In an election? Yes. While the leader position here is largely ceremonial and the election is meant for fun, I think the playing field is expected to be equal. In other words, the election administrator doesn't extend a courtesy to certain people and not others - regardless of relationship or lack thereof.

Actually, you didn't have to contact me. Early in the thread you said: "There were a few others who declined in the last election, but did not appear to have been online in the last couple of days &#8211;- so, to be on the safe side, I have not included them on the list below." I fit both circumstances but I WAS on the list.

Initially I figured that could easily be a list transcription or cut-and-paste gaffe (I know I've done that sort of thing by mistake). But the lengthy responses about your rationale didn't square with "to be on the safe side".

It's very curious that you choose to comment on our previous email communication. I try to keep off-board stuff off the board, but now here it is. We both know what happened, but for anyone else following this: Stu asked me for personal information. I didn't share this information with him. He was upset that I didn't.

Using that as a rationale here...that is sad.

Back to the nonsense.

I'm the Caymans. Send me all your ill-gotten gains for safe-keeping.

Ahem...

So tonight is the final tally?

...of the first round of nominations. Yup!

If you mean ill-gotten "weight" gains, I'd be glad to send them to you. You are so very kind.

You make a presumption as to how and why I may have reacted. Since we never spoke about it, how can you possibly "know" that I was upset for the reason you offer?

What upset me was not, as you erroneously presumed, your decision to share or not to share personal information with me. And I don't know whether you actually believe that yourself, or whether you're just saying that because it makes it easier to justify your appalling behavior on this thread.

Rather, what upsets me is your utter rudeness in responding to the simplest of interactions -- your apparent belief that the rules simply don't apply to you, including the rules of common civility.

But I hardly need to elaborate on your hair-trigger penchant for rudeness. It's self-evident to everyone who's read our posts over the last couple of pages. All of my responses to you have been calm and measured. In contrast, your last few responses to me have been riddled with insinuations and personal attacks on my character.

Normally, I don't respond to tantrums. And if this interaction were occurring through private channels, I would have long since ignored your unwarranted personal attacks. But it's neither fair to me, nor to any of the other people who come to this thread for information about the nominations, to let this sort of childish fit continue -- because whether or not you personally believe what you've said about me is irrelevent. These sorts of comments simply have no place on a congenial board like LW -- and certainly not when the person to whom you're speaking has not leveled such personal attacks at you.

I brought up the e-mail/PM situation solely to explain why I didn't think it would have been fruitful to try to contact you regarding the declination list. No other reason. I described the situation in as objective a manner as possible -- and certainly not in a way that would have suggested anything negative about you. In response, you repeatedly characterize my behavior as "sad" and offer inflammatory opinions of my character that are entirely irrelevant to the issue of nominations.

It boils down to this: for a number of reasons, I didn't contact you and one or two others about the declination list. One of the main reasons I didn't contact you was because you'd specifically asked not to be contacted via e-mail or PM. If our positions were reversed, I have no doubt that you would have chosen not to contact me.

Being in a situation where I had no direct input from you, I had to make an educated guess as to whether or not you'd want to be included on the declination list. I based that presumption on a number of factors that I've already listed -- reset post count, no activity on LW for over a month despite regular activity elsewhere, and forceful declination in the last two elections. But had I come to the opposite conclusion -- leaving you off the list -- that would have involved a presumption as well. I'm not going to waste further time trying to justify something that would have been a lose-lose situation no matter what I did.

And I'm not going to waste further time allowing you to turn something that's fun for everybody into your own personal vendetta. If you want to continue your rude and hurtful tirade, there are plenty of other ways to do it -- just not here. Not any longer.

<ahem>

Is this thing on? <taps on mike>

When are the nomination round results going to be announced? I'm waiting with baited breath.

You been eating worms, Danny?

<shhhh> don't tell anyone. It's how I keep my stamina...

99.9% Protien, Good Choice! But! I think Ant Brood Tacos are tastier

**Purr**

If you two are finished, I'd like to hear the nomination results. STU is probably trying to figure out how I got so far ahead.

**Purr**

[STU wipes tear of mirth from his eye]

*sigh*

Stoopid Cat, you just made my day!

**Purr**

Don't take much, do it? [Hrumf, DOGS!]

**Purr**

Since it's now "approximately" 5:00 PM board time... (ties are listed in alphabetical order)

Poster - Number of nominations

Varalent - 6
icefire - 2
Outdoor Miner - 2
Portfolio Boy - 2
Arachne - 1
Cobalt Kid - 1
Danny Blaine - 1
Harbinger - 1
Invisible Brainiac - 1
Juan - 1
l'il rhino - 1
Poverty Lad - 1
Quislet, Esq. - 1
Stoopid Cat - 1

From now until the end of nominations (approximately 5:00 PM board time on Friday) -- you may make an additional nomination (for a different person) if you've already made a nomination up to this point. If you haven't made a nomination yet, you may make up to two.

Best of luck to everyone!