>>>the COTY would carry more prestige if the entire membership could readily vote for it..

Why? What makes it more prestigious?

>>many members are reluctant to nominate a chip because they don't know the year a chip was released

This relates back to the first question. How does having people who don't know what chips were released in the past year vote make the vote more prestigious?

>>In fact, the last two points probably explain why the powers-that-be don't want to change the rules. It is there little clique for whatever that is worth.

Who are the powers that be? Why do they care if other members vote or not? What do they get out of this? How do they prevent others from nominating chips and voting?

>> being a rabid current-chip collector, etc., may qualify one to nominate COTY's, but has nothing/should have nothing to do with qualifying one to vote on a COTY.

Why not? What would qualify one to vote on a OTY? How come you don't propose that we allow non-members to vote?

Couple of general questions:

1) How many more people do you think would vote if your system were implemented? How do you come up with this number?

2) What would be the added expense of implementing your system?

3) Does either system address the issue of ballot stuffing? Is their a way to address that problem?

4) What qualifies a chip to be COTY?

5) Should members who only collect tokens be allowed to vote for COTY? Members who only collect chips vote for TOTY?