You are missing some important details here DoA and rule change was completely expectable for the reasons below:
Quality vs quantity
For example(fictive example), I wanna sort out damage type of a Monria mob. Its not a simple thing and it takes a lot of time and testing. However after 10 hours of work, I post my result on a wiki page, and I get 1 contribution points!
Then you read my page and edit a spelling mistakes, it takes you 2min, you get 1 contribution point.
Then later you decide some info would look better with bulleted list, you edit the page, add bullet (take 1min), you get 1 contribution point.
Then a day later you find it would look better with some color, you edit text with some color, get 1 contribution point.
Then you edit again changing the text font to a better one, you get 1 contribution point
And then repeat with all the other wiki pages.
So the result was 1 person investing 10 hours of work would get 1 points and another who invest 30min is able to get 30 points
How is this logic? You didn't expect them to modify the contest rules?
I think rule change was logic & expectable.
I can agree with you that rules could have been made better from the very beginning (like, dunno, give a different weight to major/minor edits or set a minimum edit level to qualify for a point or whatever); problem is that they should have thought at this before the start of the contest, not after.
In the moment when a contest starts under certain rules, I see it like a binding contract, that everyone, including the organizer, would abide to said rules, and will not change them in the middle of contest.
Personally, I wouldn't have joined if I would have known that in the end the decision is based on the subjective impression of the organizer... I joined for the very reason because the rules were clear, objective, not open to discussions and interpretations; I would have accepted other rules (as long as they would have been objective, measurable, and not subjective, interpretable). Never in my life I joined a contest where there was a "jury", but only contests where the winning conditions were clear, objective and measurable.
I would have sure contributed, but to a smaller degree, just like I contributed on Monria forums where there was no contest prior of that event.
Also, it was a funny thing that the rule change happened the very next day after I basically told DME (one of Monria officials) to give me some break and stop messaging me, because I don't feel like talking with her any more (the link to said PM, including its time, is in the original post). Considering that I was the only person affected by said rule change, doesn't that look like an action taken in retaliation?
IMHO, the politically correct action, would have been to let the contest run according to original rules, award the prize according to original rules, then, if the organizer would have considered that someone else deserved more to win, award said other person a second prize (especially since it wasn't a problem for not having or affording a second prize). Then learn from the mistake and on future contests have better rules.
----
And to ZPF: the +/-rep thing says "I agree" or "I disagree" in text; since this is private and visible only to the receiver person, I might choose to silently disagree with someone via your "-rep"-ing, instead of continuing an argument that is obvious that is not going anywhere. You may see things differently, but I consider the act of -rep-ing a lighter version of starting or continuing an argument in public (let that person know privately you disagree with them, but without creating further drama on public forums - unless, of course, said person takes that disagreement too personal and choose to make a tantrum by him/herself). I really fail to see how a "I disagree" message targeted to a specific post, visible only to the receiver party, can count as an "attack". Maybe is not me the person that can't accept that someone else is "disagreeing" with them. You got both +rep and -rep from me (and many others got the same "treatment"); is not like when I +rep-ed you I loved you or when I -rep-ed you I hated you... I was not rating, judging the person, but only the post content, nothing more, nothing less.
)
