Well Eric, unfortunately this short article can't go into all the details of what happened -- but the AJC acted in bad faith in my opinion. It has nothing to do with the money -- it's about the PRINCIPLE. I disagree with you that AJC had the right to do what they did under the rules. I think it says something that the AJC took TEN DAYS TO COME UP WITH THAT EXPLANATION THEMSELF. Must have had their lawyers working overtime to justify what they did.
We played by the rules -- and legitimately got the most votes. Any other vehicle's owner could have done the same. And yes it took work -- what pisses me off is that for all the effort we expended for the benefit of the AJC to register new users for them, they turn around and dismiss us without so much as an apology. we were disqualified from the contest because other viewers flagged our van picture as "obscene" - which on it's face is laughable. The AJC then struggled to justify what had happened - the whole thing just stinks and they won't own up to it.
I agree, lots of vehicles on their were more legit examples of cool custom cars - the Solstice is rather sad as an example; the van has more spirit as a piece of a Americana and the paint job is a paen to vintage american sign painting, all done by hand - also a vanshing art. A much more interesting show vehicle than the Solstice - as would have been several of the other entries. But "abomination", LOL - dude, what's YOUR beef?
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation