I think you misunderstood what I'm saying here, somehow still. Once you put in once and do not get something and do not get picked, there is no avenue to put in a second time without possibly getting that account flagged. You run the risk of losing an account in good standing over this. That's the first problem.

The second problem is, why is it that someone who happens to live in the same house as anyone else is less important and should have less of a chance to get it than someone else? That's why the roommate thing is an important distinction.

Just because you live alone or with other people who are not interested in the product, that means your chance of getting it trumps someone else who lives in a different living arrangement and lives with someone else who also wants one?

That's bad logic predicated not on factual information but on an emotional response to the scalper problem and I'm not here for it.

It does not change anything because either way, two different people want a product and could potentially get a product except the way the lottery is set up, there's a chance of penalizing someone who's not doing anything wrong and invalidating their chance. Simply because of where they happen to live.

And your argument is that this is okay because the other people who have the chance don't live together. That's not a criteria that should determine who's chance is more worthy. Logically that's just emotional nonsense dressed up as ok.