It's our (the entrants) fault that the challenges don't work well.

Slynky wrote:

If you knew exactly what I meant, then you had no need to twist it as if I had said something else.

Because I said I preferred having a voter there who was there because s/he wanted to vote and and not because s/he was forced to be there (as a condition of entering a challenge) does not make the same thing true in reverse (or by some fancy word phrasing to make it somehow sound as if mandatory voting creates mandatory challenge entry by proxy).

To give an analagy by your words, it would be like me saying I don't want all hamburgers served with onions on them because I don't want to be forced to eat an onion on my hamburger and then you reply with, "No one's forcing you to eat a hamburger." The discussion is about whether or not to make onions mandatory on all hamburgers, not whether or not eating hamburgers should be mandatory... :rollingmyeyes: