at this point there is a nagging suspicion that someone hoped less people would notice the second poll and results could "normalise"
I exchanged a few emails with Dan, and based on those I can say that this is definitely not what happened. Rather to the contrary, he was concerned that having a poll among "leading candidates" would make it too easy to game.
He got more votes in the first round alone than the "winner" in the second round, and twice that amount the second time. The will of the community was pretty clear the first time around, and it only got stronger when new hoops were added; this not just from votes but from comment threads. Invoking "voting fraud" is clutching at straws. Kevin didn't like him - fine, let's just say so and move on, it's their money and all, but don't try to hide behind some sort of hacking (eh) or fraud that never was.
