There was no tie in the vote. IMO, changing the rules during the vote or especially after the vote is not really fair. Counting the votes differently than they were said to be counted is definitely not OK. Of course if there is a clear loop hole in voting system the system should be modified but not during the vote. And I don't view bumping your votes down voluntarily a serious issue. You can always also abstain completely effectively giving equal points for each candidate. IMO reducing the weight of your own is comparable to abstaining rather than vote manipulation. Now, I am not challenging any decision. As I've stated, I will not claim that this vote is official and if the team wants to ignore the result, so be it. Honestly, I regard SIP and Bananas both good positions and roughly equal (but with different strenghts). What I am a bit irritataed about though is trying to fit the vote to support an option it does not. The result of this vote is still clear. Bananas won within the framework of the vote. Bear in mind that differences in points with borda count tend to be rather small given relatively equal candidates. Winning by a fraction of a point with Borda count is roughly equivalent to winning by one vote with plurality. If we try to analyze what the votes seem to tell about team consensus Bananas is more preferred option (meaning, bananas win in pairwise comparison). On the other hand SIP seems to be more accepted. Though, there was obviously some strategic voting, SIP has rather many second place votes compared to relatively few Bananas has. In the end there is one more important conclusion we can draw from this vote: Unrestricted Borda count might not be suitable voting system for our team. Given the amount of discussion a single decision sparks we'd probably be better of with a more robust voting system.