Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

I don't see any need to change it.
However, if the setter wishes to run it differently, it should be left for him/her to decide.

I know I don't often enter these days, but...it ain't broke. However, I doubt anyone casting a single vote would have it disqualified! ;-)

Congrats Mattrom and cheers Matthew.
I would personally let sleeping dogs lie (after their walk of course). Matthew may not be aware that various setters have chosen by dint of the number of “likes” in place of a casting vote. Most usually indicate a number of “likes” which spreads more love than a rigid no.2.

Thanks Paul, I think that’s what concerns me a little - because there are others who prefer not to give out mentions - so it seems to me unbalanced that some judges carry more weight than others by dint of this unofficial practice.

I’m not sure I was asking for any change - seems to me to be rather fun that hosts may vary the rules. But if I ever win PR again I hope you won’t mind if I ask for a second vote from judges. Cheers M

The idea of a second vote has some appeal to me, as it could mean that the setter doesn't have to make a decision, (or it could still be tied). I thought perhaps an optional second vote, but then it could be said that those using it have an advantage. Therefore I've canned that idea.

It's worth mentioning that counting the “likes” has only been used on a few occasions to “get out of jail free” as Paul says. It is not obligatory. Sometimes a coin has been flipped.

In any case, it's not as if the house is riding on it. Best to keep it flexible and not try to cover every possibility. I agree, different approaches from setters add to the interest.