Board Thread:Townie of the Month/@comment-27575896-20180501201028/@comment-32329805-20180517194236

ProfessorArceus wrote: Hah, now you really are a funny one. I'm not here to fire shots at people, but trust me, I don't like to hold back if people have a go at me. If I think that putting spaces between my points won't help, I won't put spaces between my points. If my opponent can't be bothered to look twice at my arguments, it's not worth my time.

Is it the end of the world to say that they care about the ToTM? Yes, you were proved wrong, but the tone and sass in that post! It's on a whole new level. I can guarantee that Rubik had no evil intention, or malicious plan. They just wanted to express their opinion. You needn't defend someone who isn't attacking you. It just makes you seem either paranoid, or just a generally rude or aggressive person. '''I think this is an issue of lack of correct emotion expression. I did not intend any sass in that, probably the wording.'''

Honestly, your posts so far on this thread have really annoyed me. You claimed that Zed lied, which is pretty outrageous without any proof whatsoever. '''Yeah. I did. Was it very rude? Perhaps, i should've used the word "incorrect" rather than "lied", and it would've been alright. Maybe. '''Then you're proved wrong and you don't apologise? '''Again, lack of correct emotional expression. I didn't think it was that rude. That's why.''' That's just rude. Hell, Zed couldn't tell if your post was or wasn't sarcastic on a serious thread like this! ​​​​​How do you even achieve that? '''I think the real question is why didn't you call me a Hypocrite? I've been asking for Civil conversations, you had the ultimate chance to call me off for being rude yet asking for Civil conversations.'''

WolfiZee wrote: WolfiZee wrote: ProfessorArceus wrote: If there was no eligibility requirement, someone who puts no effort into the wiki can easily win. '''I disagree with that. The wiki isn't made of idiots. We tend to choose people who put effort into the wiki by default.   I've said before that this community isn't stupid. But that doesn't mean that we're scientific calculators. We still have feelings. If a nice guy looks like he's doing loads and is always really positive, but actually just happens to be in a similar timezone and posts occassionally when you're online too, you can be easily fooled by it. More visible posts are on the Special:Forum and you get notifications from posts here too. I post when you do, it looks like I'm just really active, even though our time zones are a coincidence and so are our conversations. I'm not saying that the Wiki is stupid. I'm saying that everyone who doesn't do intense research can be fooled. Not that the nominee is being cunning or anything like that - just simple coincidence.  ​​​​​All i have to say is, good point. Honestly it's not a huge deal but for the sake of this debate (which is focused on this), it is. Why should we warp reality for a debate? Nonsense.  Well, obviously, I haven't 'warped reality'. People genuinely feel rather strongly about the topic. You heard Rubik and saw the other threads. Anyway, if we're discussing something small, I have no reason to relax my arguments just because the subject is small or less relevant. That was what I was trying to say. Don't have a go at how I said it - yes it may have not made a great deal of sense, but now you know that people do care and this is an issue. ' Yes. Yes i do.''  Eligibility only ensures that users are working relatively hard for the wiki so they deserve the reward. '''​​​​​​Does it really matter, though? As i said, we tend to choose people who put EFFORT into the wiki by default.''' Again, I never said that the community was stupid. But again, there is the chance that timezones and coincidence will fool us. Wiki notifications. 'Tend to' isn't good enough. And good enough isn't good enough, yes i'm digging myself into a deeper hole. If we can guarantee that all nominees have put effort in, we can't go wrong with who we vote for. Perfection is impossible, but anyways sorry i somehow managed to Un-bold this. It's either ToTM becomes extremely casual and is barely a reward, or people have to put effort. I' prefer the casual part. ''' If people want it this why, I won't challenge you all. It will become much less of a reward, but if you look at how many people want to improve ToTM, or care about ToTM, I'd guess that people won't want it to become like that. ' ​​​​​​​''  I'd prefer the latter, because that's how everything should be. Put in effort and get a result. I intensely practise my musical instrument every day and I get good at it. I excersise hard every few days and I get fit. I strictly keep to a diet, I lose weight. Effort should mean reward. Not idly sitting around commenting one nice comment every other day then going offline. " I disagree with that. The wiki isn't made of idiots. We tend to choose people who put effort into the wiki by default." ''' I feel like I've covered this enough now. ' Yes you have.'' It all comes down to the community's lack of responsibility to ToTM. ? The Staff should not force work on us and even if they did, I'm sure we wouldn't accept it properly I agree 100% - some of us, I guarantee, will vote blindly. Some isn't a Majority or Plurality. ''' And, yet, 'some' can make a major change. 'Some' can be the 1 vote to earn me ToTM and not Raven. 'Some' has a bigger effect than you think, especially with such a small community where every vote matters much more than in other situations.  The Mafia totally has a say in who gets lynched.  Fair enough - I have no duty to thoroughly look into edits. I don't either, i completely agree with you on that aspect.''' Also could we please start seperating our arguments into seperate paragraphs? Thanks. This is where we last were. Alright, i think we settled that argument.