Hi Linda, Good points, as usual. The thing that irks me (and always irks me) is when something is being presented as something that it is not. If I thought that complaining about this "feature" would do any good then I would do so. However, it appears that some sort of secret agenda is going on so I won't bother. Besides, those that run it will see this anyway. From my point of view, I have watched the irregularity of the POTW for several months now. I agree with the "clique" that you speak of. It is obvious but it has got to the point now where it is just too obvious. It's hard to brush aside or ignore any more. There is always a massive campaign from a certain section of the Adland community to get their members up each and every week. We are not idiots. We can see it happening. So, I have to ask the question. Is the eventual "winner" winning on merit? Or is the winner winning through manipulation of the closing dates. I have no problem with campaigning for candidates. That is all part of democratic elections. Campaign hard and you have a greater chance of winning. But fiddling with dates to make some periods longer and some shorter smacks of something else. From my point of view I can only surmise that the closing dates are being used to support an ordained or intended result. The playing field should be level for EVERYONE, not just a select group. In politics and horse racing we have come to expect this sort of thing so none of us should be surprised at the nobbling that goes on elsewhere. I'm reminded of the "democratic" elections that were held in Iraq prior to the dethroning of Saddam Hussein. Then again, he was always the ONLY candidate on the ballot paper. So, his re-election was no surprise to anyone. I wonder what explanation Mr Sanchez might give. No doubt he will be alerted to these posts so I will have no need to approach him directly over this matter. How about it John? Will you publish opening and closing dates on all future POTW ballots? Openness and accountability should be paramount in "elections." Your answer would be appreciated. Or, if you don't want to answer here just publish the dates from now on so that everybody knows the rules and we can all vote evenly. By the way, don't blame Linda for this. Blame me if you don't like this thread. I'm the one who raised it. Gary Simpson.

Linda and Cheri, You both can count on my vote. Best of luck to you Cheri!!!!

Little Potato Pie, Your intentions are sweet. However, I regret to inform you that your vote will not count. Nor will anybody else's as from yesterday. You see, for some reason (as yet we don't know for sure - but we have our suspicions) the voting was closed in record quick time. I wonder how many others were not afforded the opportunity to vote for their chosen candidate? Tough luck my dear. Gary Simpson.

Linda, everyone, First, thank you Linda for your efforts. I appreciate your kind words and the thought behind this thread. For everyone who posted and everyone who voted, thank you also. Gary, I might have known you'd be the one tilting at windmills, lol. My hero! Please don't concern yourselves about this. I've been up before, and in fact am up again, which is what Heather may be referring to. I have never expected to win, as my friends list isn't as big as others who are nominated. The next poll looks almost identical to the last one--I still don't expect to win. It matters not. What matters to me are the good opinions of the folks who are here in this forum and the others where I'm a regular, including mine. I have quite a few friends who are probably members of the group Linda mentions, as they have been featured before. They are good people, too, and I'm happy for them. Let's talk about something more important, now. See you in the next thread. Cheri

Hello Cheri, You are so gracious with what you said. Sometimes I wish I could be so passive. Now, about... =========== "My hero!" =========== (blush) I wouldn't say that. I just get annoyed with things like this. I have always spoken out about unfairness in all its ugly forms. Like I mentioned before (somewhere) I detest seeing people being taken advantage of, or victimised - not that this is an especially prime example of that. However, when somebody offers an orange and it turns out to be a lemon then I like to know why. I just want to know what is going on and what the rules are! You see I figure that if this sort of thing continues then the so-called "award" isn't worth winning and it CERTAINLY isn't worth participating in. To continue to vote for anybody after this only condones a system that is fundamentally flawed. It's a waste of time. I see that no explanation has been made as yet so maybe I'll have to up the ante. Does anybody else want to know or isn't it worth a rat's rectum to anybody? I'll let it go if that is the concensus of opinion at this forum. So, I guess what I am asking is: Do you care?" Best Wishes Gary Simpson