What is a duplicate vote in Greece? Definition, rules and examples
A duplicate vote in Greece is a second choice cast by the same person in the same contest, and the contest's own limit decides whether that second choice is counted. The Greek examples cited here set a daily limit in a basketball fan vote and a per-category limit in a book award, so an entrant can test a second choice against the window and the category it falls in. The reporting does not show how any organiser spots a duplicate or what it does with one, and this page leaves those points open.
Rechecked on 21 October 2026.
Duplicate vote meaning in Greece: a second choice from one person
A duplicate vote is a second choice cast by the same person in the same contest, and the contest's own limit decides whether that second choice counts. The word on its own says nothing about the platform or the method. The examples cited here set a limit per day and a limit per category, and they include one data-use statement that sets no limit at all, so the entrant has to read which limit applies before calling anything a duplicate.
Two choices from one person are not a duplicate in every contest. In a fan vote with a daily limit, a second choice on the next day is a fresh choice, while a second choice on the same day is the one the rule addresses. In a book award with a per-category limit, two choices in two different categories are both allowed, and the duplicate is the second choice in the same category.
The reporting does not say how a contest tells one person from another, and an entrant should not assume a method that the terms do not describe. What the entrant can read is the limit, the window it covers and the category or phase it applies to, and those three details are where any dispute about a second choice starts.
- Two choices from one person are not a duplicate in every contest.
- The limit's unit, whether day, category or phase, decides the count.
- A fan vote with a daily limit treats the next day as a fresh choice.
- A data-use statement in sponsor terms is not a duplicate rule.
- The reporting does not describe how a contest identifies the person behind a choice.
Duplicate vote rules in Greece: one choice per day or per category
The limit is the rule, and the Greek examples show two of them. The basketball federation's fan vote allowed one vote per day until midnight on Sunday 27 June, which was the close of the window and gives an entrant a daily count to check. The book award allowed each reader one vote per category in both reader-voting phases, which gives a count per category and per phase.
A per-day limit and a per-category limit answer different questions. A per-day limit asks how many choices one person made on one date, while a per-category limit asks how many choices one person made for one named category. An entrant who reads only one of the two will misjudge the other, and the limit that matters is the one the terms print.
Neither limit says anything about how the organiser checks a person. The rule speaks to the voter, and the organiser's own record does the counting, so the two should not be run together. Where the terms are silent on checking, the count rests on the organiser's record, which an entrant cannot see from outside.
- The basketball federation's fan vote set one choice per day.
- The book award set one choice per category in each reader phase.
- A per-day limit and a per-category limit answer different questions.
- Silence on how a person is checked leaves the count with the organiser's record.
- Read the unit of any limit before deciding which choice is the duplicate.
What an organiser can see: its own count, its record and its rules
The organiser sees the count it kept. Where a platform keeps a log of choices, the organiser can read that log. What the organiser does with a second choice depends on its terms: the terms either say that a second choice is not counted, or they say nothing, and silence leaves the outcome open.
The Woobox sponsor terms are a useful contrast. They describe entrant IP data as a source for broad demographic figures, not as a rule on duplicate choices, and this page does not read them as one. A reader who sees an IP sentence in a sponsor's terms should ask what that sentence governs before treating it as a limit.
A duplicate rule an entrant can test has to be written down with its unit and its window. A rule that exists only inside the organiser's system gives the entrant nothing to test, and that is worth raising with the organiser in writing.
- An organiser sees the count it kept, and the terms say what that count means.
- Where a platform keeps a log, the organiser can read that log.
- A data-use clause in sponsor terms is not a duplicate rule.
- A duplicate rule the entrant cannot read is a rule the entrant cannot test.
- Ask the organiser to put the duplicate rule in writing with its window.
Fake contest concerns: a count you can test and one you cannot
A reader cannot test a count from the outside, but can test the rules it claims to follow. A rule that names a unit, a window and a category is something an entrant can read against the dates and the category list. A count with no published limit gives an entrant nothing to test, and a worry about a fake result has nothing to attach to.
The honest limit is this: the page does not say whether a given contest enforces its limit well. The examples cited here show what organisers wrote down, and they do not show how any of those organisers checked a second choice in practice. A reader who wants that answer has to ask, because no method is printed in the reporting.
Raise a concern with the organiser in writing, with the date, the category and the phase. Ask what the rule covers, and what the organiser does with a second choice once it is found. A written answer is something an entrant can point to later, while a verbal assurance is not.
- A reader can test a rule that names a unit, a window and a category.
- The examples show what organisers wrote, not how they checked.
- Ask for the duplicate rule in writing, with the category and phase named.
- A verbal assurance leaves the entrant with nothing to point to.
- The page does not rank any contest as more or less honest.
Legality and disqualification: the terms and the organiser decide
The reporting cited here names no Greek regulator for duplicate votes and states no legal position on them, so this page gives none. The legal question about one contest belongs to the body that runs it and to any authority its terms name, and the page does not guess at either.
Disqualification follows the terms. The examples name a limit, but none states the sanction for a second choice, so this page lists no sanction. An entrant should read the disqualification clause in full and ask in writing whether a second choice removes the whole entry or only the extra choice.
Platform rules form a separate layer again. The general terms of an account decide who can sign up, and a contest's rule decides what a choice is worth. Read the contest's own page for any step that joins those two, and treat a platform's page as background.
- No Greek regulator is named for duplicate votes in the reporting cited.
- The organiser's written terms decide the unit, the window and the sanction.
- A platform's account terms decide who can sign up, not what a choice counts for.
- Ask whether a second choice removes the whole entry or only the extra choice.
- Read the disqualification clause in full, not only its heading.
Rules that apply
The organiser's own terms decide what counts as a duplicate in a Greek contest, and this page reads those terms as the only binding text. Three settings sit in them: the unit of the limit, whether day, category or phase, the window it covers and what happens to a second choice. A contest can leave one of the three unstated, and the page does not assume an answer for it. Il Contatore reports the examples as examples and treats any rule not in the terms as an open question. Each cited report was read against the page it came from, and this page was last reviewed on 21 October 2026.
What we decline
Whether any Greek contest was run without duplicate choices is not answered here, because the reporting covers two contests and audits neither count. The page does not describe how a duplicate is spotted in practice, and it never gives a method for casting a second choice. It promises no result for an entry that is flagged, and it cannot undo a count that an organiser has already closed. Sanctions for a second choice sit in the organiser's terms, which this page does not reproduce.
Questions and answers
A duplicate vote in Greece is a second choice cast by the same person in the same contest, and the contest's own limit decides whether that choice is counted or discarded. The Greek examples cited here show two limits: one vote per day in a basketball fan vote, and one vote per category in each reader phase of a book award. Read the unit of the limit first, because a second choice is a duplicate only under the rule that names it.
No Greek regulator is named for duplicate votes in the reporting cited here, so this page does not describe a regulator's treatment of them. The reporting does show how organisers treat them in their own rules, with a daily limit in the fan vote and a category limit in the book award. A regulator's view on a specific contest is a question for that regulator, and this page cannot settle it.
The reporting cited here sets out no statement that organisers are required to make, so this page lists none. It shows what the examples did state: a daily limit that closed at a fixed midnight, and a per-category limit that applied in each reader phase. An entrant should expect the same two things in any written terms, plus a plain statement of what happens to a second choice, and treat a silent rule as an open question.
An entrant in Greece should check the unit of the limit first: per day, per category or per phase. Then check the window's edges, including the fixed midnight a fan vote used, because a choice outside those edges is outside that count. Last, read what the terms do with a second choice, since the examples name a limit but not the sanction. Anything the terms leave out is a question for the organiser, in writing.
Yes. The Greek basketball federation's fan vote for the 2020/21 season allowed one vote per day until midnight on Sunday 27 June, so a second choice on the same day falls under that daily limit. The Public Book Awards 2025 allowed each reader one vote per category in both reader phases, so a second choice for the same category in the same phase falls under that limit.
One mistake is to read a per-day limit as a limit on the whole contest, when the fan vote rule ran by day until its closing midnight. Another is to read a per-category limit as a limit on the whole awards, when the book award counted each category separately. A third is to treat a data-use clause in sponsor terms as a duplicate rule, when it only describes how entrant data is used. There are other mistakes, and this page lists only these three.