The first post mentions august 6th as the last date?
Yeah.
The first post mentions august 6th as the last date?
Just filled my vote.
Am I the only one who has an vote for every category of every game?
Everyone should advertise this in their signatures.
I would if I could.
The mods banned you from having a sig?
Size matters, mate.
My AAR, Cum Porci Volant, didn't start until July 15. Does that mean that it's not eligible? If so, people should know so they can vote for someone elseJust noticed Enewald voted for mine - that I pulled from the competition. And a few others have voted for Brandenburg III's Dark Muse, which did not begin until July 1 so it is not yet eligible. I recognize there are not a lot of EUIII narratives that are eligible, but there is one if you look for it - at least one. Remember, the rules state anything worked on between Jan and June is eligible. And this of course should perhaps spur some others to get to writing. It's an open category.
Remember, the rules state anything worked on between Jan and June is eligible.
I TOLD YOUIs that still a rule? It wasn't explicitly stated in the new rules it just said "any AAR updated at any time during 2009 is still eligible, including ones that won only once so far."
In that case, comagoosie, my aar IS ineligible. Not that it was threatening an actual win or anything.
Any time during 2009 up until the awards started (which was 2nd quarter or July.) Next quarter the AARs worked on between Jan and Sept would be remain eligible if they have yet to win twice (according to the current rules and depending on any other rule changes.)Is that still a rule? It wasn't explicitly stated in the new rules it just said "any AAR updated at any time during 2009 is still eligible, including ones that won only once so far."
In that case, comagoosie, my aar IS ineligible. Not that it was threatening an actual win or anything.
coz1 said:Any time during 2009 up until the awards started (which was 2nd quarter or July.) Next quarter the AARs worked on between Jan and Sept would be remain eligible if they have yet to win twice (according to the current rules and depending on any other rule changes.)
phargle said:But remember this: any AAR updated at any time during 2009 is still eligible, including ones that won only once so far.
The month in which the ACA was held has never been eligible itself. Guess no one felt that needed spelling out since its always been the rule. Otherwise you could have someone start an AAR on the 15th of July and then get voted on for favorite on the 16th of July. Is that really what we want? Or to go back and look at what has been done over a period of at least a quarter?I was under the same impression as the others and in that case, the above rule needs to be written more clearly (perhaps replaced with your own words.) Now I have to go through and check the dates of the AARs I voted on.
The month in which the ACA was held has never been eligible itself. Guess no one felt that needed spelling out since its always been the rule. Otherwise you could have someone start an AAR on the 15th of July and then get voted on for favorite on the 16th of July. Is that really what we want? Or to go back and look at what has been done over a period of at least a quarter?
I'm sure you understand, but you really need to rewrite the rule. The current leaders in several of the CK categories weren't started until July.did not begin until July 1 ... is not yet eligible.