Voting For Oneself in Forum Awards

As in all the forum award threads, it states: "You may not vote for yourself. Voting for yourself will result in disqualification for the Award you're voting yourself for."

I perceived that an incident occurred recently where someone did vote for themselves, but they were denied the punishment.

Apparently this person wished to be disqualified, because the award was belittling.

I have a question:

"Will this person's vote be counted as a valid vote?"

Who was the person?

Also, it won't be counted. Most likely not, anyway.

Originally Posted by ‏‏‏‏

Who was the person?

Also, it won't be counted. Most likely not, anyway.

Okay, you have no name....

Anyway, I'll provide a link:

http://www.zeldauniverse.net/forums/...t-debater.html

No, it won't be counted.

And they won't be disqualified either. I suppose technically they SHOULD be, but we're not lawyers enough to plan every situation in advance. If people could disqualify themselves from negative awards, then that defeats the whole purpose of a negative award. It defeats the whole purpose of an award, too, that people would WANT to disqualify themselves, but you know what? I wouldn't count on negative awards being present in any more awards in the future.

Well, if this person was nominated for "most likely to be disqualified from his/her nominated award," this would all make complete sense.

Originally Posted by Mr. Fish

No, it won't be counted.

Thank you for answering my question.

Originally Posted by Mr. Fish

And they won't be disqualified either. I suppose technically they SHOULD be, but we're not lawyers enough to plan every situation in advance. If people could disqualify themselves from negative awards, then that defeats the whole purpose of a negative award. It defeats the whole purpose of an award, too, that people would WANT to disqualify themselves, but you know what? I wouldn't count on negative awards being present in any more awards in the future.

Personally, I wouldn't title such awards "negative awards". I'd title them "infamous awards".

One can still be proud to have an infamous award (for example, "Most Perverted" (I'm sure Queen Kara of Pen Island would love another one of those)).

However, titling them "negative", combined with the reason of why they exist, which you just gave, just means those awards are meant to be belittling. Unfortunately, I have no access to the forum rules, because the links don't work, due to the forum renovation, so I will have to end that point there.

Originally Posted by Mr. Fish

No, it won't be counted.

And they won't be disqualified either. I suppose technically they SHOULD be, but we're not lawyers enough to plan every situation in advance. If people could disqualify themselves from negative awards, then that defeats the whole purpose of a negative award. It defeats the whole purpose of an award, too, that people would WANT to disqualify themselves, but you know what? I wouldn't count on negative awards being present in any more awards in the future.

Quoted for truth.

[In-before-da-lock/nuke]

The reason the no-voting-for-yourself rule exists is to stop people from voting for themselves. Obviously, when people are voting for themselves for the sole purpose of disqualifying themselves, it beats the purpose of the rule. So enforcing it in this case would be counter-productive. Hence, I'm not enforcing it in this case.

Originally Posted by Mr. Fish

I wouldn't count on negative awards being present in any more awards in the future.

I never intended any Awards to be negative. In any event, I'm not really in favour of axing an Award like Biggest Ego, which has been around for longer than I have, just because one person can't handle it.

Next time around, voting for yourself will instantly disqualify you from participating in the Awards altogether.

Originally Posted by SacredSturgeon

I never intended any Awards to be negative. In any event, I'm not really in favour of axing an Award like Biggest Ego, which has been around for longer than I have, just because one person can't handle it.

The award doesn't have to be canceled. Maybe, in the future, individuals would be allowed to request to be removed from being a candidate of any awards they were nominated for. This way, no awards will be negative, as if anyone "can't handle it", they would request to be removed from the possible candidates.

Oh yeah, someone did vote for themselves to try getting disqualified. Well, I'm not surprised. Some people just take these awards way too seriously. I used to take them a bit seriously, but now I don't care if I'm nominated for anything negative. In fact, I laughed when I noticed someone nominated me for scariest member.

Originally Posted by Ranil

Oh yeah, someone did vote for themselves to try getting disqualified. Well, I'm not surprised. Some people just take these awards way too seriously. I used to take them a bit seriously, but now I don't care if I'm nominated for anything negative. In fact, I laughed when I noticed someone nominated me for scariest member.

Can't knock the truth!

Originally Posted by Sturge

I never intended any Awards to be negative.

But you want to keep it that way, since you won't disqualify me.

Originally Posted by Sturge

just because one person can't handle it.

So much for my supposed "Andromeda Galaxy-sized ego."

Originally Posted by GarmGarf

The award doesn't have to be canceled. Maybe, in the future, individuals would be allowed to request to be removed from being a candidate of any awards they were nominated for. This way, no awards will be negative, as if anyone "can't handle it", they would request to be removed from the possible candidates.

I tried that last time, not accepting the nominations, but that didn't work.

I believe the exact quote was "ego the size of the goddamn Andromeda galaxy".

I say ban the ****er.

Originally Posted by Mafoofoo

I say ban the ****er.

That is a terrible thing to say about SacredSturgeon.