>>The way I figure it, winning a contest and the value placed on that win depends on the situation. Winning any contest depends on personality and luck. Is the winner of a contest, even if it included a universal invite, necessarily the best? Not always.
>
>That is another interesting point. However, it is far from the big factor many people are frustrated from. :)

I was just at a big companies web site. What is being advertised in a "lottery" not a "contest". Lotteries involve luck, contest are based on skill. Excluding participants from a lottery, does not invalidate the winners. Excluding participants in a contenst does.


>>I wouldn't bother to lose sleep if a company wants to push it's own 'contest' as being the end-all and be-all. Let us each judge each other as we judge ourselves and let a person's accomplishments in life and in the workplace dictate ability, not his or her gamesmanship.
>
>Yes, that is also a good opinion. However, big things are involved for people participating in that contest and also about the finalist, winners, etc. That contest is the biggest in its domain so far. It needed to be well prepared. The facts involved are really big. The future of the components involved may also be affected.

The only thing that is at stake is cash. Not reputations.

All that said, if we are talking about the same "lottery" and the same big company, it is unfair the exclude people from it.