Oops I guess that was one of mine. However I think I am on the same side of the fence as Rad Ranga and opposite Monkeybiz and a lot of others. My opinion is the best player in the game should get the votes, not just the best player on a winning team, regardless of the margin. Even more if it is one star alone having to battle an entire team I am likely to give some credit.
Remember ages ago, maybe it was before your time, we had the discussion of LeBron and 4 girl scouts against a NBL team. The final score could easily be 100-50 but with LeBron scoring 50 and being clearly the best player on the court I would still give him the 3 points. Others like Monkey have said they would never give it to him for being on a team that lost so badly and so a random NBL guy that scored 20 would get the 3 points for dominating a girl scout.
The good news is C-Cat doesn't agree with me, he is on Monkeys side that the MVP is for the best player on the winning team. It's just a matter of opinion. No-one has had more of their MVP votes overruled than me and look through all the appeals threads and find a single time that I minded. It is all just subjective in my opinion anyway. Monkey and C-Cat have one opinion and Rad Ranga and I have another. The great news is if I do give votes to the loser in such a circumstance, because C-Cat has the opposite point of view you have an outstanding chance of a successful appeal.
If I get overruled, so what? It's happened so many times in the past and will happen so many more in the future. As long as the players involved in the match are happy it is all good.
As so many people have pointed out it is just a bit of fun and I actually am much more happy to have people reading, discussing and debating the MVPs than being indifferent. We have 48 people in here and it is amazing that almost everyone is so totally reasonable and cooperative.