Yoshi's words: "We are working to identify the issue in the corresponding program; however, as the process is very complex and there are many patterns involved for the lottery conditions, it will require some time to pinpoint the problem."

Let's take "process is very complex and there are many patterns involved for the lottery conditions" part.

It's transparency time, SE. What is the complexity of choosing a random number between 1 and foo? More importantly, what "patterns" could possibly involved?

I admit I only recently graduated with my programming degree, but I'm also 46 and I have a brain. This statement ticks me off to no end. Here's why:

If the lottery is fair, the drawing is simply a random pick from those who were allowed entry. Rules for allowing entry may be a bit picky and complicated, but since you allow bidding on infinite plots until a bidder goes broke, I highly doubt it's all that complex of a system. If there are other criteria involved, they need to be spelled out in no uncertain terms in a very public and easy-to-find place.They are not. They are being kept secret.

My personal opinion: there is no complicated set of circumstances at all, and this is straight PR to cover up someone's ineptitude or mistakes. But let's assume for a moment that Yoshi's statement is true.

In a nutshell, it means the lottery system is not fair at all and is coded to favor some, while omitting others.

Positive side possibilities: This could be a preventative measure to keep an individual or FC from winning more than one plot a week and making plots remain empty another cycle. I don't think this is the case, but it's a possibility.

Negative side possibilities: These are more likely and more numerous if complex patterns are being used. Again, these are possibilities, not accusations.

1. Older FCs and FCs with more members are being favored.

2. Players with less gaps in subscription and/or long-term players are being favored over casuals and come-and-goers.

3. Some other favoritism is being enabled.

4. Players with a history of coming here and complaining could be excluded from ever winning.

That's just a few possibilities, but I feel they are the most likely scenarios if there is some hidden, complex algorithm at work in picking a simple random number out of a pool of consecutive numbers. This is shady af.

We need those algorithms if they want to keep our trust, or they need to just come out and say they screwed up on something simple. It happens. Apologies are old, and solve nothing. I'm sick of apologies. I want fixes and transparency, not excuses and more long waits. We waited ten years, and you've had more than enough time. As I stated in an earlier post, from now on this company will be forever be known by me as the company that couldn't deliver it's promises. From the diminishing content all the way to needless nerfs and changes. SE screwed up first semester code. That's all I see.