Dec '19 / Jan '20 2nd Round vote is CLOSED.

[Michael O'Brien]

The votes have been cast and it looks like everyone got a chance to vote twice afterall.
Happily there is no need to involve Chris at this stage and five ideas will go forward to the final round. This round will be an open poll so you will always see the result before you cast your votes.

Remember you have TWO votes. Once again I strongly recommend taking a minute before voting to make 100% sure you do not vote twice on the SAME month as this wastes a vote. Look carefully at the brackets at the end of the ideas and put one vote into [DEC] and one for [JAN].

There were two ideas tied for December so both those two go forward.
There were three ideas that will go forward in January, as the 3rd was only one vote behind the 2nd.

This vote ends at the start of Feb 3rd GMT.

[olivier]

It seems someone voted twice in January and not at all in December...
It's technically possible, but is it morally permissible?

[Halbarad II.]

Merry

He's the only one of the fellowship of the Ring missing in the fellowship club range so far

[Axel]

@oliver
Its possible, but not sensible, as his second vote also goes against his first vote in December - thus, the moral damage is minor to neglegible.

[Thingol]

Jan 21, 2020 8:31:44 GMT Halbarad II. said:

Merry

He's the only one of the fellowship of the Ring missing in the fellowship club range so far

We have Merry in MZ669...

[Halbarad II.]

Allright yes - there is a Merry figure
it's MX669, isnt it?
that was not a winning club suggestion.
rather a special Special

...doesn't matter anyway.

[Michael O'Brien]

Jan 20, 2020 17:54:32 GMT olivier said:

It seems someone voted twice in January and not at all in December...
It's technically possible, but is it morally permissible?

I gave plenty of warning about the issue so anyone who still fails to grasp the concept has only themselves to blame. However voting for two ideas in the same month achieves nothing as it raises the vote equally of two contenders. Of course doing this on purpose is dishonest as well, but I assume someone was simply sloppy in how they clicked. I suppose it's also possible that someone just did not want to vote for any idea in one of the months.