• Follow our Instagram!
  • Curious about what we're currently doing about bots? Check out the latest updates from staff in this thread.

Final UU Voters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Confirming that I'm Erazor.

Paragraphs coming soon.

edit: Lightscreen is QibingZero!?
 
Confirming that I'm Erazor.

Paragraphs coming soon.

edit: Question, when we "describe the criteria to cast our vote", do we have to give our stand on the suspects, or just state under which characteristic each suspect falls under?

What factors did you use to come to your conclusions. That's what it's asking.
 
edit2: thanks Caelum, but do we have to state our position?

No, it's not absolutely required. HOWEVER, you'll find that it's very difficult (if not impossible) to describe the suspects in relation to the criteria without giving your vote away. When saying "it meets this characteristic for reasons A, B, and C" you kind of give away that you're voting BL.
 
Confirming that I'm HAUNTER. However, since I didn't play much before the suspects were removed, for the integrity of the process, I'm not going to vote in this round.
 
Confirming I am Steinhauser.

I'm surprised I made the rating as I've hardly played at all in the past 2 weeks. For the same reason I won't be voting.
 
Just a note, if you are voting in this you should be voting for all the suspects, not only a few.
 
Just a note, if you are voting in this you should be voting for all the suspects, not only a few.

just to clarify, if we dont provide good reasoning for a certain Pokemon, will it be "not proven BL, therefore UU"?

For example, say I could not decide on crobat, so I chose to obstain simply because I could not prove it BL, but am unsettled if it should become UU?

Another example, if I were to say "obstain", would you not count the vote for Crobat, or assume it be UU, or would you take it into account with ALL of my votes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top