Board Thread:Site Discussions/@comment-5008588-20141128001117/@comment-4534514-20141202230325

BlueSpeeder wrote: ModrenSonic wrote:

BlueSpeeder wrote:

ModrenSonic wrote:

BlueSpeeder wrote:

ModrenSonic wrote:

BlueSpeeder wrote:

KoreanHedgehog wrote:

BlueSpeeder wrote: Well, I took the time to contemplate on my decisions and motives, and I've decided to restate my stance without being rude.

I oppose simply because we can change the rules. Here's the ways I find the most efficient:


 * Users that won an Emerald Award for a certain category will be removed from the poll for the next three months.
 * Backing that up, all users with user rights will be placed in their respective polls. You will not leave any out, regardless of their absence.
 * Three people will be tasked with the Emerald Awards. All of them must live in different time zones.
 * However, we must be diverse on choosing our managers of the awards. This means that we shouldn't have two people handle the awards that live in the same country, but if it must happen, then it must.
 * Finally, EVERYONE will get a turn or a shot. For the case of the Joker and Social polls, the person that won the award will be removed from the poll and return either six months later or a year later, that way EVERYONE gets a chance.

How about that? Any thoughts? Changes? Any chance I can help. I live in Korea. As long as you're willing to do so (and as long as you know who to choose), you got it!

SplashTheHedgehog wrote:

BlueSpeeder wrote: Well, I took the time to contemplate on my decisions and motives, and I've decided to restate my stance without being rude.

I oppose simply because we can change the rules. Here's the ways I find the most efficient:


 * Users that won an Emerald Award for a certain category will be removed from the poll for the next three months.
 * Backing that up, all users with user rights will be placed in their respective polls. You will not leave any out, regardless of their absence.
 * Three people will be tasked with the Emerald Awards. All of them must live in different time zones.
 * However, we must be diverse on choosing our managers of the awards. This means that we shouldn't have two people handle the awards that live in the same country, but if it must happen, then it must.
 * Finally, EVERYONE will get a turn or a shot. For the case of the Joker and Social polls, the person that won the award will be removed from the poll and return either six months later or a year later, that way EVERYONE gets a chance.

How about that? Any thoughts? Changes? Change 6 to 3 and one year to 6 months Can do. Is this a good enough compromise? Oh yeah. Users with user rights should be placed in their perspective polls IF they have been active and worked. I didn't add that rule in because, if that was applied, literally two rollbacks would be eligible on the poll (it's rather sad, but that's irrelevant). I think everyone with user rights should be allowed for the user rights poll. Unless we categorize our users with privileges, then I oppose that idea. But then they would get recognized for doing nothing. You have a valid point, but if we allowed that, no one different would be nominated on the poll (specifically the rollbacks poll, since Ultra and Sesn look like the only rollbacks that usually edit).

Plus, what would you rather have? The same users winning constantly, or have everyone get a chance to avoid repetitiveness? You have a point as well but I still think it shouldnt work that way unless you were to add a limit for each category. Well, let's analyze the amount of users with user rights: there are thirteen administrators, nine chat moderators, and twelve rollbacks. Based on my viewpoint (this doesn't have to be exactly like yours, but just as an example), only eight of the administrators are active/using their rights at least every month, four of the chat moderators monitor and keep an eye out on the chat room, and four of the rollbacks. By going with the rules I established above, if we were to follow your suggestion of nominating only active users, the administrators would be fine, but the chat moderator and rollback polls would not.

In short, by not adding everyone with their respective user rights, not only would the same users win constantly, but there wouldn't be enough candidates for the polls. Wouldnt the previous winner be removed? That way, it would be one more person added to fill that previous spot.