I nominate < wordfunph > for best avatar.

I nominate < Parbrahman > for best post. Wesley So page 5213 There is no player today...

I nominate < Wesley So > for best player of the year.

I nominate < Wesley So > for best profile.

I nominate < twinlark > for best historian.

I nominate < twinlark > for best informed.

3) I nominate <Shams> for Most Helpful.

7) I nominate <Benzol> for Best Profile = User: Benzol

Very strange that I can't find it. I've tried with a variety of strings, and even specified "+user:..." without effect.

This is not for you to determine at first glance and mere assumptions...you are doing a summary execution without the benefit of judicial and fair investigation, followed by trial and the the presentation of evidence before coming up with a decision.

For what? For completely agreeing with <Annie K> to drop out my list of nominees?

<We are all at perfect liberty to produce our own synopses of nominations >

Ok then, below please find my own recap:

<Most Helpful> Jessicafisherqueen

<Best Historian> isit

<Most Informed> orcafan

<Most Nominated for all available categories> tolengoy

<Best Player of the year> Wesley So.

Your nominations are on record, and your complaint is on record.

The Caissars are a bit of fun. A way of saying "thank you" to people who have contributed to the site. An innocent way of recognising someone else's efforts. You don't get anything for winning other than the respect of your peers ... which is more important than a gold statuette, IMHO.

It can be tempting to take them much too seriously. But that can lead us into activities which start to devalue the spirit of the awards. Then we can get into squabbling, sock-puppetry, campaigns, hanging chads, bribery, corruption, pain, suffering, the downfall of the Republic and the dark Lords of the Sith take over the Senate.

I know that.

<It can be tempting to take them much too seriously.>

I'm not tempted one bit.

I entered this contest with the expectation to be treated fairly and granted the same rights and privileges given to all other kibitzers in the lawful exercise of the right of suffrage.

I've reviewed <Annie K>'s recap the first time and was disappointed to find the names of my nominees nowhere in sight.

I voiced my plea for a review and rectification.

<Blunderdome> favored inclusion of all nominees subject to a final review for qualification by CG. He advised <Annie K>. But when the updated list of nominees was posted, I found out it was not taken, what am I to do but vehemently protest the denial of my right.

But heck, <Abdel Irada> was right. The list was not official, anybody can do a summary..that's what I did and now, everything seems all right.

Thanks to <Jessicafischerqueen>, me think CG has become privy of my concerns and hope the official tabulation would include my nominees. If not, it would not be such a big deal provided:

1. the disqualification would be pointed out and proven as valid pursuant to the election rules

2. after hearing my arguments and

3. accepting my presentation of evidence

...even if they would rule against my favor, I would rest assured that my right of due process has been provided me- that's what's more important that winning any caissars award.

I nominate Wesley So as best player for the year as in the previous year and in the next years to come. Sans the elo rating which is prone to ridiculous contortion in favor of those who manage to stay busy and be invited always by sponsors, Wesley would have proved no one's equal among his contemporaries...he ranks besides Fischer, Capablanca and Morphy as an all time great. Please vote for him.

You immediately broke the rules by nominating yourself under two (!) sockpuppet accounts. Then you broke the rules again by arguing about two (!) nominees. Then you complain about being treated unfairly.

You did the same thing last year during the Best Game voting, crashing my chessforum with your alternate identities just to cause trouble. For the last site awards cycle, everybody remembers the "Hitler" and "Mussolini" bit, also how our Wikipedia project from four years before was suddenly dredged up to become a crisis.

Mere allegation which still needs to be resolved as true with proof beyond reasonable doubt. Until then, due process says I'm innocent.

< Then you complain about being treated unfairly.>

I only demanded to be treated equally well within my constitutional right:

<Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.>