There has got to be a reason for it, but I have yet to see it in print anywhere. DS received a nomination from 1 MOC. He received letters from his other 2 MOCs saying that they knew he had gotten a nomination from the first MOC and they gave theirs to another deserving candidate. Maybe if DS was a better candidate, he would have gotten one from another MOC? I read on here that some have 2-3 nominations. I can't help but think that those candidates have an advantage. I can't fathom why that would be fair, so I must assume that, somehow, it all washes out in the end. As I have heard it said here before, why would an MOC from a state that collaborates want to disadvantage their nominations?