Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27575896-20190124185247/@comment-27575896-20190125190600

Don’t want to cause any confusion for the first two: Dtaff and users can both nominate people, that doesn’t change.

It’s the votes that are different and rather the staff vote for the winner.

ToTM previously had two votes, but it was reduced to one from a staff discussion since finding those votes in already junked up ToTM threads is painstaking, and ties I think happened multiple times. The other issue is that the two votes were basically a free vote for yourself. You vote yourself and vote another, which leads to ties if everyone else doesn’t focus on one specific person from what I remember.

Nominees reason a certain amount of edits the way it currently is for that month leads to constant shitposting with the current users. Sure, they do mainspace, but I can guarantee you if it’s at least 100 edits for a month, a good percentage will be of shitposts or role reviews. Not that role reviews are bad, but it steals everyone else’s opportunity.

Plus, the created system BASED from those edits is hard to understand. Role reviews function as a first come first serve unless the review is garbage, and staff determine those factors. Mainspace has to be decent cans can’t be little tiny fixes, and rummaging through each edit when mixed with shitposts is hard.

Letting users do their own contributions in the way they see fit rather than specific edits in my view is a lot easier. Staff would choose the winner at the end of the month, and during the month nominated users would do their own wikia contributions. Whoever the staff deem helped the wiki put the most would win. And the staff would be constantly reminded to avoid bias entirely.

Plus, multiple-time winners might become an actual thing if they go on a mainspace run like I did in my older days. Allows for staff to start decorating the usernames of users with colors/fancy text like staff have.