" 
 :*I made a brief mention of this elsewhere, but I'll expand on it here:  You're taking the wrong tack. 
 :*We're not about rules here.  Even the editors (like myself) who get saddled with the ""process wonk"" millstone are not (mostly) about rules.  We're about common sense, and respect, and honesty.  So any appeal to the ""rules"" or loopholes therin is doomed to fail.  Not only to fail, but to rub the stink of ""wiki-lawyering"" into you to a degree that is darn hard to scrub out. 
 :*I know it it's nonsensical in some respects.  You're mad about absolute power being unchecked, but find that your actions have highly restrictive limits placed upon them, and you're not even allowed to argue about it.  Sort of like the real world, eh? 
 :*So, first things first:  remember that the power structure here is not monolithic.  That means that people probably aren't trying to be perverse.  Different laws for every cop so to speak.  So don't to shoot too many sparks at people who are trying to do their best.  Which is most of them. 
 :*Secondly, you want you vote to count, try to make your case simply, disspassionately, and with evidence to support it.  Something like, ""While I understand that the desire for smoothly running blah blah of the editors without suffrage to date blah blah only three have between 150 and blah blah spirit of the law blah blah.""  Mostly just normal, common sense straight talk. 
 :*And then go and edit some articles.  It's great fun, which is why you're here to begin with, right?  Come and ask on my talk page, I've got 1000 things to do that will be a hoot.  Copy-edit four or five porn articles and you'll be ill with laughter.  Or maybe just ill, as actual milage may vary.  "