Ahhhh.<br/><br/>I don't like the way you're doing this.  Look here, Private Hargrave.<br/><br/>Miami (4) - Muse (2nd), ReijiTabibito (2nd), Schrödinger (2nd), Mad Panda (2nd)<strong>That's FOUR people.</strong><br/>Seattle (4) - Archivist (2nd), Dizzied (2nd), Mad Panda (1st)<br/>Denver (2) - Archivist (1st), Jeramiahh (2nd)<br/>Prague (2) - Muse (1st)<br/>New Orleans<br/>Bucharest (2) - ReijiTabibito (1st)<br/>Las Vegas (6) -  Schrödinger (1st), Dizzied (1st), Jeramiahh (1st)<strong>That's THREE people.</strong><br/><br/><strong>You have a four to three majority losing by two votes</strong>.  Color me displeased with this concept.  >:(  Even if I reverse the order of my vote, which I'd be willing to do if folks like Miami, you've still got the minority winning because the people who want to play Vegas<em>really</em>want to play Vegas.  And Vegas excites and interests me less than New Orleans.<br/><br/>I understand that we don't want an endless argument over this topic, and I don't want to ruin anyone's fun.  I'm just not sure weighted votes are a good idea.<br/><br/>Splitting the game into two smaller groups would be a lot more work, but might be a way around this mess.<br/>