MadDogE134 wrote:he states they received 2200 entries and they were going through them THEN he states "once they are decided" referring to the winners.
Yes, "he" states that all the submitted entries needed going through. Correct.
Call it "filtering" if you will.
The free licenses that we promised as an incentive for people to actively participate will go to an already randomly, yes - randomly, accumulated list of 10 random, yes - random, people who submitted settings that, after human evaluation, turned out to actually be useful for further examination and came with a valid eMail address.
This is a research project after all, our intention is to gather insight in order to help us figure out how to proceed with something that will hopefully turn into a product or feature sometime in the future.
What we are not interested in is sending a rewarding free license to trolls who submitted the same setting several times over and over again, all checkboxes ticked and coming with useless profanities in the comments box. Make that maybe even -because of the randomization- several licenses per potential troll, thereby lowering the chances of receiving a reward for all other participants who maybe indeed submitted useful settings and comments.
Whether or not a submission is valid is not something a machine or algorithm could have evaluated on its own and entirely without human engagement, be it for the creative use of the few allowed symbols to "paint pictures" or for the lack of the submitters' typing skills while demonstrating their impressive fecal vocabulary.
We did not promise any "winners announced by" dates, and we are giving pricey stuff away for free. We are a very small team with a huge list of things to do, every one of us is busy handling several tasks at once. If it takes a while to get the free licenses to those who should get them, then it's because we can't deal with it faster. Anyhow, I fail to see how that should cause such a "scandal".