The requirements were somewhat ambiguous. I am not sure I would support a negative rating, though I agree this could potentially be interpreted as shady behavior. I would make this suggestion for a solution. The terms should first be clarified, then the people who participated but did not meet the post requirement should have their stakes rolled over to the next drawing after meeting the new clarified requirements (assuming the program is still active). This IMO is an equitable solution for all parties and is mutually restorative for all.
Eh, no you didn't, you kind of just demanded the part you want and left the rest out.
The issue with the other parts is that they only ran the program for a week (so there is no 'next drawing'). I would be all for them perhaps putting all valid entries after the first week and raffling based on that. Note that that post was made prior to your post. I've made a new suggestion to them
and quoted your post.