Board Thread:Townie of the Month/@comment-25646419-20180501103218/@comment-27575896-20180518152822

I'm very iffy on the current forms of "eligibility" and we've discussed it a while, but for those who check people for eligibility, I am using ToSM as an example and becaused he's the right example:


 * Every role idea credit is based on the thread and the response. You may post five times in one thread, but you only earn one credit. Your response cannot only be: "its way too overpowered debuff it and maybe ill reconsider" or anything like that, without valid reasoning or a real review. If you are following along with someone else post, it counts if it's a good, detailed review. Otherwise, the first poster wins all.

Salem has zero earned mainspace for last month or this month, so his 20 credits are from pretty much just Role Ideas. A LOT of them are from the Politician role idea, and they seem ENTIRELY from it. I only saw about two good ones in that thread. The Constiglience thread is a Joke idea,so it wouldn't count as that one has a lot of posts as well. There was a Neutral Discriminist one, but overall here's my problem with this stuff and forms of eligibility:

I think we quickly overlook how many edits go into a certain thread, and instead of checking them throuroughly, we just slap on an eligible tag and there we go, when they possibly aren't even eligible or not even close. This leads to the "eligible" users slacking off for the rest of the month not doing much of anything other than games and joke threads, since they already know they don't need anything else and just need to convince others to vote for them. It's following the "you haven't won so you get my vote since you haven't won despite being here for a while" aspect, which I don't see very fair.