[Mithalwen]

Well I threw a stone, the target had gone but it caused some interesting ripples... interesting but not particularly helpful.

Firefoot, now I have had time to take into account the time she was posting, I think was really out on her own with not much to react with. She probably was truly just trying to stir up discussion - but in 3 of the 4 games I have played before suspecting the first poster would have been justified so, for me it is worth a look.

At the time I posted last, Jenny was the second most frequent poster. I just put it down to a new comer trying too hard and gave her the benefit of the doubt then. It may well be that still hold true. Does 2 votes count as a bandwagon?
I don't know but I will not add to them now.

So I am not much further save that if I must go for a relatively random vote, I shall probably go for someone who hasn't contributed much... and by that I mean quality not quantity. Some people have only really posted references to their profession - I know there isn't a lot to go on on day one but ..... "frothy" posts give the impression that someone is active without actually helping.

However I would like explained why limiting the vote is better than people following their insticts however duff? If people choose from the 13 (effectively 12 others - suicidal votes are generally unhelpful) then at least all the wolves are in the pot - yes with all the gifted and ordos. If you limit it then you might be choosing from all innocents /gifteds.... or have I misunderstood the situation?

Time ot reread and see if there have been more posts while I pondered.