This is actually a very good point and argument, most importantly for the sake of those that have been part of the community.
I am a new member and joined as a result of coming to vote for a friend, then I decided to pitch my startup too 
So let the admin handle the situation the fair way to both new and existing members.
@techscorpion I think itâs 3 as well as the opportunity to pitch an idea without getting responses from[ commenters that in the end contribute nothing constructive to the conversation] (2d/3d âJigsawâ Puzzles - Shapeymix) (thanks @lordbanks and @Ubarab for being the exceptions). People will check out the sites that are interesting to them even if they donât publicly acknowledge/vote for them, and the competition post shows that people are brimming with ideas but there is still a dearth of viable outlets for these ideas to be shared.
There may be a future post about how to improve the competition, but Iâll just mention something. The OP of the competition post shared a clear format, and it would have been easy for some people to add a video description or a screenshot to the pitch, and so it should have been made clear whether or not such things were allowed, because it gives some people a clear or subconscious advantage. Most people followed the format though. The competition itself is a prototype/version 1 so if the organisers decide to run another one (hard to say since the Battlefield is still pending about 2/3? years later) then some improvements can be implemented. Another way the voting could be improved is that each person gets 1-3 max votes. Weighted votes: members 50%; judges/organisers: 50%;
Disclosure: I sent a pitch. I made these comments so that people can have a level playing field. I would still speak as freely had I not sent one.
I think exposure is the crux of the story not the $500 people are scrambling for
Still happy to always get my narrative out 
Isnt it embarrassing that a tech community is sweating on how to manage spam votes in 2016 considering all the opportunities?
Yes, itâs a giveaway. But you should invest in process controls to keep it credible.
And If you have a startup, between your immediate family and friends, you can pull 20people to signup and vote so you can win $500, because thatâs easier than pulling $50 from each of them.
In my university days, I could have gotten all my class to vote and that would be a legitimate 200+ votes and there were smart people who were popular across blocks.
Remember that any startup chasing $500 is more probably a student run or owned startup.
I was feeling you until your last point⌠Most of the people here entered the competition for the fun of it I guess, and honestly, itâs been fun.
Generalizing like that is not fit for such intellectual communityâŚ
Its beyond the $500, and Iâm sure no one will mind an extra $500âŚ
You could like my post, I donât mind ooh 
As an experiment, I will love/appreciate @xolubi to actually pitch Paystack for this. And also @iaboyeji to pitch his Andela. Of course, not for the cash. Itâs just to see how the community will respond. There is this thing about âParity bitâ I learned back in school, Andela and Paystack seems to me a good parity test for quality filter. Pitch should be presented like the startup is 6 months old.
Also @lordbanks or @seyitaylor should drop BigCabal as well, and @OoTheNigerian with his Callbase. @SkweiRd can write for BigCabal, and @kehers for callbase to limit the popularity effect a bit. Of course, if any of the listed startup in this post get the $500, they wonât actually get it. ButâŚwhat gives. Please guys! Please. I really will love to see the response.
@mark or @markessien is invited to pitch Hotels too. @somtoifezue with SharpHire! Please guys, pitch your startup as at when it is 6 months old. Thank you very much.
Now that youâve asked us to post, we cannot rely on the results if we do because Heisenbergâs uncertainty principle or a Schrodingerâs cat situation would apply. 
ď¸
Hi, @akindolu. Youâre making it seem like the competition was meant for mashmallow startups, and as such needs redemption from the elite few⌠If this is about you, still feeling regret⌠Let it go.
He said the magic word 3 times. Lemme see who will not pitch 
.
Oyinbo po!
Iâm sorry you feel offended by my unwitting disregard for your level of comprehension. What part do you need me to repeat slowly?
Correct guy. You counted! Letâs have a mix to the whole thing. This should not be about $500 but to see how responses to these type of things are weighed. It might even help in setting up the upcoming contests. I particularly have a bad bias against voting systems and popular democracy generally.
Scholarships are designed for the disadvantaged.
Its not cool to see a billionaireâs kid grab a scholarship setup by his father to help the disadvantaged students(The case of Big Cabal Pitching).
Some startups need to win this $500 for validation but asking startups who spend tens or hundreds of thousands in monthly operating cost to enter a contest for $500 is not cool especially If they have tens of thousands of followers on twitter, instagram or facebook.
Well, I just read up Heisenbergâs uncertainty principle and a Schrodingerâs cat. Learning never ends. Thanks
Some Sharphire startups would have pitched, but it will be kinda biased (because they are familiar names) even when I know there are a lot more interesting startups out there. So NOPE!
Anyway, one of the startups Iâm involved with pitched (my younger brotherâs startup) guess??
That part that scholarships are designed for the disadvantaged is an error. Rich kids apply for Stanford Fellowship every year. Well-funded startups apply to YC every cycle and Techcrunch Disrupt. I am not even trying to argue that, but I said the listed startups in my post wonât exactly get the cash if the votes are biased to them, at the end of the day. Perhaps they pass it over. And that includes Big Cabal itself by @bankole and even Callbase by @oothenigerian and @xolubi paystack and others. What I am most interested in, is the lesson we can extract from this exercise, not anyone feeling too big for $500.
I know you canât run an experiment twice, but think about Andela or Paystack or Hotels pitching and actually having a very low vote. Wonât you find that interesting? What should that mean? Thatâs what I am interested in seeing. It means any other startup with low vote wonât see this as a bad signal, and vice versa. @gabe, I hope you read this too. Not about me at all.
Contests have a way of sending the wrong signals, my opinion. You could think you are shit because your votes are high, and you are not, because your votes are low. But when you see Paystack/Hotels with low votes, perhaps you can understand it is not a signal of anything really.
I donât think itâs about familiarity. @Ndianabasi pitched his startup. Am sure his startup is fairly popular amongst radar folks here. Itâs either you decide to pitch or notâŚ
SignupCall. Sorry I cheated. 
Its a pitch, everyone is invited, but the rules for granting winners should have been reflected from the onset which would state the eligibility ( revenue over 100,000 for example and other stringent methods to weed out or filter ) and current Stats, some of the Startups didnt provide current stats or historicals to judge by. If this was about the Exposure, Radar has been doing that a long time, Many Startup founders pitch their ideas here for review and many cant stand the heat , we can ask @bankole to create a weekly pitch event open only to Radarians that have been on the platform as Active people for 1 month at least, just a thought.