Yes, but a tie with a final three and 7/9 jurors was slim to none. A final two with eight jury members is just ASKING for a tie with no logical way to break it
other then making the jury revote, and revote and revote until someone changes, which is stupid.
At least the tie with the final three has a way to break it, either eliminate third place finisher and have the jury revote between the top two vote getters, or have the third place finisher place the final deciding voting.
Just logically, a final two with eight jury members makes no sense. We'll see the truth in a couple of hours, so no reason to keep making our brains hurt.
At least the tie with the final three has a way to break it, either eliminate third place finisher and have the jury revote between the top two vote getters, or have the third place finisher place the final deciding voting.
Just logically, a final two with eight jury members makes no sense. We'll see the truth in a couple of hours, so no reason to keep making our brains hurt.
