So is POTM dead?

[Reply #40 on:]

No one is immortal

Keanu Reeves might be.

Cross Keanu Reeves with Keith Richards and we'll at least be making some advance towards immortality.

And on the subject of resurrection, a topic somewhat cromulent with respect to immortality, there have been a lot of posts this month.  Perhaps even sufficient to warrant a poll, here.  Possibly.

[Reply #41 on:]

Is PottM dead?

[Reply #42 on:]

There has been quite a few posts these last couple months

[Reply #43 on:]

Can we open potm threads yet, or do you have to do it Tachy?

[Reply #44 on:]

If you guys think there were sufficient posts last month to warrant a poll, go ahead and open a nomination thread and make a few noms, and I'll sticky the thread when I get a chance!

[Reply #45 on:]

Awesome!!

[Reply #46 on:]

Is PottM dead?

[Reply #47 on:]

I was wondering if we ought to open a poll for August PotM, since last month's nom/voting threads had a respectable turnout. But considering the return of a number of heavy-hitters--coffeeBot, FishyJoe, canned eggs, Bendersfan, Scrappylive, etc.--didn't actually happen until the start of September, we might be better off just skipping this month and opening noms at the start of October for September PotM.

The decision we now face, as I see it, is thus: should we only have PotM in months where there might conceivably be enough diversity of old-but-new/actually new/interesting/eligible posters to warrant going through the whole process, or should we just do it every month regardless of that month's relative levels of activity and accept that some months it'll just be slim pickin's? I do not think I feel strongly about it either way, but someone else might.

[Reply #48 on:]

I do not think I feel strongly about it either way, but someone else might.

So!  You're one of those filthy Neutrals, eh?  Get her, Kif!

I was wondering if we ought to open a poll for August PotM...

I am but a humble servant of this dark realm.  If interest in POTM develops after any given month and a handful of people vocalize it, I'll be happy to make a nom thread and poll.  Provided that those people expressing interest sign a blood oath, swearing by the Suns of Warvan that that they will actually make a few nominations and vote in the poll

[Reply #49 on:]

I do not make oaths, swears, or promises.

[Reply #50 on:]

Fair enough, sir!  In that case, a simple "Yeah, I'll get around to doing that if I remember" will suffice, then

[Reply #51 on:]

I came to this board to nominate coffeeBot for POTM, since cB returned and posted a lot, helping breathe new life into this place. As well as to nominate Tachy for pointing me to the PEELeclipse 2024 thread from Facebook, which brought me back here to post, as well.

I opened the September Nominations thread and immediately saw it was already closed. Hmm... That's curious.

I then noticed it was the September 2016 Nominations thread.

I backed out and realized I couldn't find a single nominations thread from this year.

I read through all of this thread and grew sad.

I agree with most of the points raised in this thread. Especially Gorky's argument over the technical revolution in how we browse the web. I didn't have a computer for a long time, and even now that I have an okay computer I don't have a comfortable space to frequent it. So that, plus a lot of crazy stuff going on in my personal life, has had a huge impact in my ability to be present at all on PEEL.

Now, if you excuse me, I'm going to go cry in a corner and mutter incoherently something about immortality and TMC's butter plan of yore.

[Reply #52 on:]

I backed out and realized I couldn't find a single nominations thread from this year.

* Tachy coughs politely *

Poster of the Month for the past Year because winna - POTM July 2017 Nom Thread

[Reply #53 on:]

A worthy correction and a link to an irregularly named thread -- one that is also already locked, anyways.

[Reply #54 on:]

Tachyon said anyone could make the last one, so presumably you can make the next one.  The weird title was my fault, but it was edited to describe it better.

[Reply #55 on:]

Thanks, winna.  I'd prefer that if someone wants to create a POTM nom thread, that they please first solicit input from people and only proceed if there is a reasonably large response for people who will both nominate and vote.

It was nice having the POTM thing last month.

[Reply #56 on:]

I think we should have it this month. There seems to have been an uptick in PEELer presence.

I hereby solicit input. What do you all think?

[Reply #57 on:]

So, a POTM for August? I will nom and vote for such a thing.

[Reply #58 on:]

My only concern (and that's putting it strongly) is that, if you are to follow things to the letter of the PotM law, you could only nominate for August those people who were actually around here posting in August--and there was not nearly as much activity in August as there is now, in September. So while we do have a lot of people around to do the nominating and the voting, there is not that large a pool of posters who are actually eligible to be nominated for August PotM. Which is why we might be better off waiting until the end of this month to just do a September PotM. Or we can just nominate whoever we want for August PotM regardless of whether they actually posted between the dates of August 1st and August 31st. I'm down for whatever--just had to get the pedantry out of my system first.  

[Reply #59 on:]

Yeah, I was originally thinking about nominating people for September posts, which would mean nominating in November. But my stupidfingers wrote the idea stupidly.

[Reply #60 on:]

Personally.  I don't like the PotM laws... at all.  The spirit of the law is more important to me, which is in my opinion, if we're going to have nice things, don't be a jerk ass about it, and share.

I think everybody here is capable of that.  Under PotM law, which we created and enforced, we stopped having PotM for a year.  I feel to some degree, creating the rigid codification of laws concerning PotM contributed to this.

I'm not upset or condemning of the fact that we democratically created and enforced these rules.  However, I think in a way it made PotM more chore like, rather than a celebration of having wonderful peers.  I don't disagree as much as I did with people winning multiple times, though I have always felt I would rather everyone who has the opportunity to, should receive a realistic chance to be recognized.  For example, I have no reason or desire for winna to be recognized in that manner any longer; there are and have been many wonderful people here, and I think those individuals would gain much more from that recognition.

In the before time, just being nominated for PotM was really exciting, and lots of people seemed to have fun participating and discussing and campaigning for themselves and others.

To be more concise, the reasons, to me, for having PotM have been enjoying a group activity with active participation (even if the discussion generated by that level of participation are silly or inane or obtuse or even to a small degree offensive) for fun's sake, and secondly to make someone (or several, many nominees) feel special for a short moment.  I'm not advocating that fun be codified, as everyone has different parameters for what they consider fun; I am suggesting, though, that whatever actions we take with PotM they in general be for the sake of maximum fun, not because we have to.

Along that line of thought, I consider that the nomination process is far more enjoyable for most people than the voting process; clicking a radio button seems like a less enjoyable activity than discussing what we like about certain people, and how we felt about the month in general.  Perhaps some people like just clicking radio buttons though.

I'm okay with holding off a month, and I am also fine with nominating people who posted last week.  I find these options equitable at this time because there is much less activity now than in the past.

This is why I probably won't make the next nomination thread... it wouldn't make sense to me to have something nobody wants, unless I want to be a jerk ass.  I will probably nominate, discuss, and vote if and when somebody decides it's a good time to have this next.  I also trust Tachy to be in charge of this for the moment with good judgement.

I'm not advocating in this post that we ditch the PotM rules, but I don't see that following strictly to all of the rules to be particularly beneficial right now either; waiting two weeks after the month is over to nom and vote people based on information they're unlikely to remember, especially when activity across the board is down as a whole, seems to me like a great way to have less fun; lately it's been pretty active though, and that seems great to me.  I would enjoy reading other people's opinions on these matters too.

That is how I see these matters; my voice does not represent the law, and I believe other voices here are equally valid as mine in this discussion as well.

EDIT:  I originally posted this at work; I have edited it comprehensively for clarity's sake, as well as, to expand more on how I feel about PotM.  I'm pretty much fine with whatever we do, but I can only speak for myselves.

[Reply #61 on:]

It was in the spirit of the law that we did a POTM poll in August, for July posters.  And it was a lot of fun.  I definitely would like to keep the posting eligibility periods the same, as in you nom/vote for people who made posts in the previous month.  So if there's sufficient interest in August posters, then creating an August POTM nom thread now is where it's at.  And next month for September posters.  I rule this fractured sub-domain with a soft, padded cudgel, and at the moment intend to exclude from any poll only the previous month's winner.

That's a nice motto for life, winna: Don't Be a Jerk Ass.  

Yeah, I was originally thinking about nominating people for September posts, which would mean nominating in November. But my stupidfingers wrote the idea stupidly.

Yeah, Mrs. Mellinger warned me about you, buster!

[Reply #62 on:]

[Reply #63 on:]

Is there anyone around who hasn't been POTM before?

[Reply #64 on:]

Is there anyone around who hasn't been POTM before?

PEEL has 12878 members, so I'm gonna go with yes.

[Reply #65 on:]

Of the folks currently posting, though? Probably, yeah, all of us have already won. The question, then, is this: Does it render a meaningless internet popularity contest more meaningless or less meaningless if the same people people just keep winning multiple times--and, relatedly, is our goal here to go for broke and make a complete mockery of an already mockable institution, or to let it die with a degree of dignity by retiring it for good?

And the most important question of all: Does anyone give a fuck either way? I'm gonna say, you know, probably not. It's a fun diversion and a nice acknowledgment of posting, uh, excellence (whatever that means), but if we never do another one again I would not be particularly torn up about it.

[Reply #66 on:]

It was fun resurrecting POTM one time this summer.  And I'm not certain, but think it might have been AllEggs' first win.

If we should happen to get another flurry of posting some month and have another POTM it'll be fun.  And if not, then no big deal.

[Reply #67 on:]

Sometimes.

I'm not 100% certain that I wake up in the same reality that I left when I went to sleep.

The dreams, too.  I can't explain them anymore.

[Reply #68 on:]

Yeah, well, I'm gonna go start my own POTM Nominations Thread, with blackjack and hookers. In fact, forget the POTM Nominations Thread!

[Reply #69 on:]

If we should happen to get another flurry of posting some month and have another POTM it'll be fun.  And if not, then no big deal.

We should be able to have a POTM for September 2023 if somebody can convince one of the POTM moderators to come back from the dead long enough to oversee it.

[Reply #70 on:]

I have a hunch at least one of those moderators could be convinced to do so...

[Reply #71 on:]

Umm, wah? If I survive the week I'll see what I can do.

[Reply #72 on:]

I am completely in favor of another POTM. We've been active enough to warrant one. If not, the nomination-worthy post thread is always an entertaining read.

[Reply #73 on:]

Yes, please bring back PotM! That was always a very fun part of old PEEL. Also, it gives me more incentive to make posts that are actually good.

[Reply #74 on:]

I choose to interpret the second option in this poll as an emphatic rejection of the answer 'yes' to the question 'Is POTM done for?'.

Also, it gives me more incentive to make posts that are actually good.

I was sorely tempted to reply 'lolz 2true' to this

[Reply #75 on:]

UnrealLegend was already declared Poster of the Month for August in this thread, but sure, feel free to have nominations and a poll for September if you'd like.

[Reply #76 on:]

UnrealLegend was already declared Poster of the Month for August in this thread, but sure, feel free to have nominations and a poll for September if you'd like.

I'm pretty sure that nothing Winna does is endorsed by the orphaned child's brain in [-mArc-]'s closet that I assume PEEL is hosted on.

Don't you want a poll? Don't you want to vote? I mean, even if all of the options are UrL, it's not real if we don't get the fun of voting.

[Reply #77 on:]

Yeah, North Korea style elections.  If there's only one candidate, there's only one choice.

[Reply #78 on:]

We have to update the PEEL wiki to reflect UrLs declaration of PotM.  I'd do it, but my current database setup pretty much consists of a word processor document in a strange, foreign format type.

[Reply #79 on:]

As much as I'm flattered by winna's infatuation with me, a PotM win is meaningless unless it's earned. Our founding fathers intended PEEL to be a democracy, damn it!

Wait, PotM winners get to run the place, right? My memory is a bit fuzzy.