[quote=@Lugubrious]
Well, screw me then, am I right?  If both trusty Kray and the contest winner disagree with my standards (bad standards make a bad judge and make my decisions bad ones) then it's not just one person's malcontent.  I mean, forget the idea that I might have preferred those with greater antagonistic force in a story than those with next to none, and that both Grane and Diamond both had shreds of good left in them.  Also forget that this RP has been Darker and Edgier since the very beginning.  The contest results are now voided; if I get another three hour span free in the next couple of weeks I'll go back and try and sort everything out less 'questionably'.  Alternative, someone less questionable could step up to judge the whole contest.  Please--be my guest.
[/quote]

Little of that is what I meant; I've said from the very beginning that I would have chosen very similar winners. Napoli and Gratia were both far and away the best entries into the contest, by my standards [i]and[/i] yours. Even my third and fourth place winners would have been similar, were I the judge for the contest. 

I never said you were a bad judge, either. In fact I never even said anything about your judgement in this contest. I said something because there was clearly a difference in standards between what you [i]intended[/i] and what some people [i]interpreted[/i] from the contest descriptor. I only started talking about the standards after the fact because, to be perfectly frank, I was irritated. While you had a very clear idea of what constituted a villain or bad guy in your head, it didn't match up with what the literary definitions were. And since the literary ones were the standards I (and I suspect a few others) had been working off of, it seemed as though my entry was within the parameters of the contest.

It isn't a matter of you being a bad judge, it's a matter of a miscommunication in what the standards for the contest were. If you still want to void the results and reconsider, go right ahead. But that outcome was not my intent, nor do I think it's what Onarax was looking for when he agreed with me. We both had been discussing the literary definitions of villain prior to his agreement, so I think he was endorsing my objections to the standards. 

Like I said, it isn't anyone's fault. It's a case of something being lost between intent and interpretation. Hence my original feedback on perhaps being able to define things a little more clearly for the future. And in fairness to PoS, Onarax and I both were missing the last paragraph for a little while. I  think the coding that would give his name a mention didn't work, so it tends to blend in with the feedback on other entries.