As suggested, a new sweepstakes thread is here. The intent of this is so that the other threads don't get clogged up with sweepstakes when people are wanting news for a particular person. But, i still don't think sweepstakes should be start for anyone. That's why I'm offering a democratic way to start sweepstakes. Anyone is allowed to bring up a sweepstake idea, and they must get support of four other members in order to start. As such a case, anyone can object to a sweepstake, and likewise, they must get four other people to agree. Whoever gets four in support first will dictate if a sweepstakes will start or not, and if the offer gets rejected, they'll have to wait at least one month before they can bring it up the same sweepstakes again. As the owner of this thread, I feel like when it's necessary, to instant veto a ridiculous sweepstake offer (hoping not to use that power much if at all), or to allow bringing up a sweepstake again if that person takes a sudden turn for the worse and they are on a months wait. The veto can be overridden if ten people agree that the sweepstakes is necessary.
Now, any objections to the rules? They are allowed.
If not, I'll like to offer the first sweepstake: Liz Dawn.