Board Thread:Townie of the Month/@comment-27575896-20171101150106/@comment-32881402-20171108185440

Addfire wrote: ProfessorArceus wrote: SpicyJusticeLass wrote:

ProfessorArceus wrote: You can be an efficient ass and get promotions. If something needs fixing and you fix it, but you insult the other guy who can't do anything properly, I see no reason why you can't be ToTM. After all, it's a community vote and being an ass might not affect some people's opinions about you. ...please. That's not the point I'm trying to get at. I don't care if you're nice or not, it's just what you bring to this community. You should still treat people nicely and with compassion. People will view your contributions as less helpful if they're dealing with someone they find repulsive and annoying.

My two cents, anyways. And what you bring to community shouldn't just be 'being nice'. Sure, you can be kind to everyone else, but that doesn't make you a good candidate for ToTM. 30 edits might seem like a lot, but I have 13 edits until I'm eligible and I can easily farm those by answering simple questions. Then, I'm equal to the guy who had 100 quality edits that is also an asshole. If it were up to me, I'd easily pick the asshole who's actually helping. I think that's a flaw in the system, though. Imo it shouldn't be up to randoms like us and it should be the person with the most quality edits. We can raise the standard and the system will work. Maybe it's just me who doesn't think that being nice should count. /shrug But if you act like an asshole, then it puts a bad face on the community – you of all people should understand that, if you remember way back when you were on the forums and gave glimpses of what you saw of the community... you described us as toxic, or something along those lines, because of people acting like assholes.

I think it's more important to not be seen as toxic than to be doing something that could be considered quality. I only saw it as toxic because you weren't doing anything productive OR being nice. I know many people who are assholes but are incredibly successful. When I see half-assed reviews of 'REJECTED lol ur role is bad', it makes the community more toxic than just YOU'RE SO BAD AT ROLEMAKING. STOP IT NOW BEFORE YOU END ME. Your role involves way too much RNG and this swings the game loads, making it unpredictable and unbalanced. Your excessive dependency on what happens in chat is also too unpredictable to make a balanced role, since it's dependent on Town's mood which is beyond your control. Generally, roles like this aren't good because they have no control around what they do. This is bad because they have such little influence over what happens in the game that either a) They're so small and useless that they aren't worth adding, or b) They are dependent on another faction.' It might just be me, but I'm not particularly interested in the 'Ah, good try!' '''part of it as long as you're a decent critic. I'd prefer a comment that is productive and harmful than a comment that isn't productive but encouraging.

Now, you tell me that encouraging people is productive? Well, in some ways it is. But if your initial review gives nothing to improve on and you just say 'Keep up the good effort!', it isn't actually helpful. I didn't pick on one or two reviews. There were threads full of awful reviews (I'm aware that there was a misunderstanding, now) and it really didn't make you all look like a good community.

Note - This is barely an argument. It's a heavy debate, maybe, but it isn't derailing the thread. We're sharing our opinions on eligibility and the current system being a community vote, aren't we?