Board Thread:Townie of the Month/@comment-27575896-20180501201028/@comment-32881402-20180507221952

ZedKiller13 wrote: ProfessorArceus wrote: Then change that about the eligibility system. Eligibility should not be based on anything as subjective as what is suggested here. '''If we implement that system, you're just picking your favourite townie since whoever you see to be eligible is likely to get your vote. Just vote your favourite townie even if they do nothing, I can say that they're eligible.''' If you don't need mainspace edits, change it. People still pick their favorite nominee when they are or aren't eligible because either two reasons:

"They haven't won yet."

or

"They should win twice."

That's my issue. Nobody has ever won twice, period. It's ALWAYS SOMEONE NEW.

I don't think it's about picking your favorite townie at all. If we remove the edits required system, we could base off of a trial-like state: people come and look at the nominees with a blank slate and no opinion, and then check how they have been doing. They present the negatives and positives of the nominee and discuss why they would be a good choice. That just won't work. It's your responsibility to do that as a Moderator, but not ours as a community. You act like we will all fucking interrogate nominees and know everything about them. No! We are a community which votes for someone simply because they look like they're doing work and being friendly. Hell, we don't have to even do it for that if we implement your opinion. We can just say "this guy is eligible imo". What if I told you that I voted for TheSheriff1 because I liked the fact that they have 2 "f"s in their username, and a "Sh" sound? There's nothing stopping me from doing that. So we have to make sure they're doing hard work with solid eligibility, in the form of something relatively objective. Now we know that they're helping a decent amount, they can deserve to be ToTM.

We aren't lawyers. We aren't detectives. What did you expect?