The analogy is still not correct.

The examples you used, I've stated, were illogical.

You have yet to show how they are correct and/or logical.

You simply keep saying the same exact thing over and over and over.

I've already explained how the 2 votes for already registered members,
and 1 vote for people who would register simply to vote for a particular
product, makes sense.
If I really cared to show just how wrong you are I am sure I could find
someone more knowledgeable in polls and statistics to explain this
method, and comment from a more informed perspective whether or not such
a Voting process in this case, is significantly flawed and biased.

They didn't HIDE the change in the voting process, or try to cover it
up. Longtime members of CFDJ still have the same vote.

If they weren't 'biased' in previous years when you won..why the ass
would they be biased now?

*steups*

-Gel
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Randolph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Hello Gel,

The analogy is this, we've been playing checkers for the last 7 years
using 
the standard play book and I always win and all our friends know it.
Then 
one day you change the rules so your checkers are worth two of mine,
when 
you win and go bragging to all our friends do you really think it means
as 
much as my wins...na.  But our friends knowing you've lost for the last
7 
years, now think you've come across a stroke of genius in your play and
you 
get kudos...unfairly.

Cheers,
Mike Randolph

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5

Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to