Normally it would be useless to specify this, but in this circumstance I would like to say that what the HoJ thinks is not necessarily what other jurors think.
We agreed to accept Nemo's proposal to submit the Italian votes on the last day, even though we had already written our votes (I've been the third one). It seemed to be something he particularly cared about, whereas we didn't have strong feelings, one way or the other, therefore we simply accepted his request. I mean, we thought that if there's a deadline, there shouldn't be any problem submitting them in on the deadline.
But I understand that if this helps the organisers, then we could send our votes right away. We didn't think we were going against the rules to be honest.
That said, I would like to add that I do not agree with the whole question of strategies, all the calculations about votes and so on. When I read certain statements I am quite amazed (and annoyed) because they are certainly bigger than this pastime.
Our HoJ was clear from the beginning, I must admit. He immediately explained his idea, which is the same idea he stated here in the topic, but he also asked us how we would create our own rankings. The four of us made it clear that we would vote only and exclusively according to our tastes, without making any further calculations.
For me this is a game free from these thoughts and it remains so. We could have sent our votes even on the first day, if it was up to me, but since I am not the HoJ I do not decide for the others, I do not decide alone and it is not my job to submit the votes.
Our HoJ has also made himself available privately to back out and leave his role, but I don't know if this possibility is included in the rules.
I don't want that what one writes to fall on everyone else and it would be cowardly of me not to expose myself on this point and hide instead.