I think this standard predictions bulls**t is just as bad as the potential scenario you just gave Neil. But anyway, I also hope that the predictions given are actually from Amy otherwise it's unfair.

You are all curious and jealous w**kers. Neil, I'm an extremely honest person with such things. Amy will give me her exact predictions, but we've agreed that some days she won't be able to make it and I'll put in standard ones according to a system.

She'll have deserved every point she gets, there's no problem, though you guys are making one.

  We are allowed to be friends outside MW you know

And besides, I reckon me and Dana have a close similiar relationship to what Mark/Cate and Julia/Andrew have, right chicken?  

To me this seems like you're insulting my judgement on people personalities.  Dana is my friend and I trust her.  It never came into my mind that Dana would double cross me.  I don't see why I should have to give an explaination as to why I picked Dana to post of my behalf.  

I don't understand why people are making a big deal of this.  I say, Dana will post my predictions whilst I'm away.  End off.  Theres no rules stating I should have to give more detail than that.  And I was only being courteous by telling you all in the first place.

Also I seem to mind you were one person who wanted to makes rules, yet you totally change your tune when it involves you. People were just asking simple questions and all it took was a relatively simple answer.

I.e. you were VERY quick to change from a "no change to rules" to a "change to rules" and since the result was "leave it as it is" you suddenly drop the support for changing rules, and like I said, it was a simple question. Also, more questions followed from Alex, Mark and myself, because you didn't give a clear answer, just saying "your predictions would be posted by dana" not saying how, if they were yours, or anything. AND you seemed unwilling to disclose methods of contact or method of predictions, it's hardly surprising people were/are suspcious of cheating going on. Do you see?

You said no change before it came up THEN mark convinced you to vote for new rules!

And by cheating we meant the following -

1) You don't get in touch with Dana
2) Dana says "must post amy's predictions
3) Dana posts (for example) Fed in 5 Nadal in 3 Djoko in 3 etc etc. NOT standard predictions and NOT your predictions. THAT IS WHY WE ASKED. Do you get it now? You are being slightly slow tonight. Try and read the FULL posts.

What are you on?  Mark didn't convince me.  At the time I was thinking about possible rules in my own mind and thought "sod that can't be arsed with it" then changed my mind.  So give that one a rest for a start.

Dana and I discussed possible ways of getting my predictions up and we finally came to an accord.  We don't have to tell you anymore than that. Where does it say in the rules about "cheating" and getting other people to post for you?  Nowhere!!  So stop making up rules because you aren't RTR staff.