Forums: Index War Room Changing UOTM/FU rules
Forum logo.png
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new topic.

The last time it was brought up about changing the rules of UOTM/FU it was thrown out. However this month we had no UOTM/FU with the only nomination not being legible for the award, along with the reasoning "I didn't know who else to vote for". Frankly the lack of a user, as well as the reasoning shows that the current system does need reworking to ensure not only we are giving the award to someone that deserves it, not just "someone to vote for". The last time it was brought up the biggest fear was that the award would be bias towards older users, to resolve this there is the following solution: New users and users being re-voted will have separate voting sections, this will mean in a month where we lack any users to achieve the needed edits to get the award, we award a user that already has the award and has had a good month, or if there is a user that has done well as well as a pre-existing user that had a good month, then both can receive the award without fear of losing out on votes. I feel this new system will allow us to carry on the UOTM/FU system and award users that deserve the award instead of us going though a month trying to force a user to get an award.

23:15, April 30, 2013 (UTC)


Pictogram voting support.svg Support — I liked the idea of a "featured users" where both old and new users that stood out could be featured. This idea is very similar, if not the same from what I though of a while back, but it wasn't the right time. I like the idea of "Hey we have no significant users that haven't been featured, lets see an old user that has and what they've done." Idea. The splitting into new users getting it and old in two sections sounds like it will bode well, and we'll be able to have a featured user., May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per P90. Have there be two FU's by default, one new and one old. There seem to always be old recipients editing, so even if somebody new wasn't nominated, the box would still have at least one name on it. This would suit both people who want to congratulate new users and older, active users alike. Personal The Antibrony Sig.png Talk page 00:43, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Weak Support — Though in the past I've been vehemently against making this change, in the hopes that newer users have a better chance of being recognized. However, in light of recent events, I do offer at least some support to the idea of letting Users who have already won Featured User be able to win it again.

On a different note, can we also change the name back to User of the Month? I just don't like the sound of Featured User... personal issue, but I'd like it thought about. 00:49, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

If this goes forward and we can revote users, then I'll happily allow it to be renamed, since that way it once again fulfills its role as a "User of the month" since its open to everyone. Since Featured Article can only get the award once the award was renamed to reflect similar circumstances. 00:54, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment — I know I haven't been active as of late and my view may be thusly skewed, but it seems to me that lately we just haven't had quite as many new and active users as we once did. Is that perhaps the actual issue in not having nominees? Joe Copp 10:38, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

That's one of the reasons we would have two sections for new users and old, so in case there isn't a new user doing outstanding work we could at least feature an old one that had been in the month where no users that have not gotten it before did not stand out., May 1, 2013 (UTC)
While that may be a contributing factor, the proposed solution still sounds like it would work even in a situation where we have new users to nominate.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  11:59, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Definitely sounds like a suitable and flexible solution that still favours new winners of the award yet makes allowances should we not have new winners to give the award to.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  11:59, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per all. Crunchastictalk 19:38, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — I suppose I see the value in this change. But how do we define who is an "old user" and who is "new"? Joe Copp 10:30, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

"Old" basically means someone that has been rewarded before. "New" is users that have not. As you've seen this month, there were no "new" users suitable for nomination, which is what led to the discussion., May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per P90 --Cataphract_%28Civ5%29.png SlavByzantine_%28Civ5%29.pngTalkDromon_%28Civ5%29.png 10:35, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Support am I the only one who doesn't use that template — Per P90. -- laagone (talk)  11:23, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Just a heads up, I'd like to get this closed before the 19th, so we can start this voting month with the new system in place. While there's no rush, I want everyone to be aware so no one complains they didn't get a chance to vote.

14:18, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — I agree. Pinkiepiejump.gif FireBird-Pinkie Pie!  FireBird- (talk) 00:56, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per everything. Jar making tacky jelly 01:02, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — I'm ok with this system.

Just a few questions though: How many times can the "old" user be put up for nomination? And (probably not going to occur but) what happens if there are no people to put up for both sections?   ParagonX7 跟我谈天 01:05, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

An "old user" can be put up as many times as they do well (however there will be a slight period between votes, like 3-4 months, to stop a user going up every month). With this new system I highly doubt they will be a month where no one does anything, but in that case we'll do what we did this month and claim everyone won the award. 01:32, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
In addition, the 3-4 month delay will only occur if the user wins, users that didn't can be put up next month if they did well again. 01:33, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment — It is worth considering changing the system, but I think the proposal raises a somewhat curious question of user participation and activity. The exact reason as to why Featured Users has become reminiscent of a graveyard in recent times is up for speculation, but the cause is at least a little bit troubling. In my view, either interest in Featured Users is very low, or new user activity is lacking; seeing as my lurking nature inhibits me from knowing much about the latter, I gather the former is more likely. It follows then if there is no enthusiasm for Featured Users, its status or even its presence should be reevaluated. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 01:35, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

While new users have been lacking, I've seen plenty of users that still consistently edit month in and out. I feel those users could still do with earning an award at the end of the month. While its possible that newer users may not have much enthusiasm for the award, we can't just rule out all the users that work extremely hard for the Wiki. Frankly this seems somewhat bias to re-evaluate the entire system based on the activity of new users. This ward should be to award the User of the month, if this award was meant for anything else then it should of been called New User of the month. 01:39, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
In addition, if this award was made to encourage new users, then what do we have to encourage them to stay? Frankly for a lot of users, such as Argo, Verantha, Callofduty4, MLGisNot4Me and others I've ran out of awards to give them because they've already earned them. It would be nice if users knew that they had an award they could consistently get if they were putting the effort in. 01:43, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
I have no agenda here; I was merely adding a tangential observation. When I say reevaluate, I do not mean any substantial, bureaucratic appraisal of the entire system (this is an award, after all, not a wiki policy), rather a brief consideration of whether Featured Users is worth keeping around if interest has been consistently declining. It is a nice tradition, but if those that enjoyed practicing said tradition are ambivalent about its existence, then it does raise the question of whether it is relevant and necessary. One might argue that declaring "Everyone!" as the Featured User does not speak well for its health, and that by doing so, it devalues the intention of the award. Personally, I have no strong feelings one way or the other, but I figured I would at the very least open that thread of discussion.
And if I may, I resent the idea of "[running] out of awards to give." There is a certain point where there are diminishing returns on the purpose of awards if they are given too often, just as the 23rd gold star on a test will not seem any more important than the 22nd. Awards should inspire further action, not the other way around. Not to harp on the past, but to cite an example, the whole Chat Moderator Award deal rather irked me—and others—if only because it seemed an award was being given out for sport. While it is somewhat reassuring to know that it has since been merged with something else, I sense that the attitude toward awards has altered only slightly since then. I do not intend to come off as belligerent here, but I think it is important that we recognize that awards, even Featured Users, should be avoided being treated like stickers. They are a nice pat on the back for good work, but that pat on the back has to mean something for the recipient. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 02:27, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Bovell here. Sam, when you said "It would be nice if users knew that they had an award they could consistently get if they were putting the effort in", I feel like you may be looking at the award in a different sense than what is required, like Bovell pointed out. Maybe a rework of the system is needed, but perhaps it is just that we are taking this award too much for granted. I also agree that some of the more minute awards like that for the chatmods are a bit arbitrary, but the larger ones (such as Overall Achievement) carry significant weight with them, and since they are only given out once in a long while to only the most exemplary of users, they mean that much more. Perhaps what I'm getting at is that FU/UoTM is flawed in that it hands out an award too often and that we may be taking it too seriously for what it is, but on the most basic level it seems like the very idea of an "award" has been skewed over time. Joe Copp 03:04, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
For the past few months we have been basically forcing the award onto users as it does seem we need one every month, which is why this Forum was brought up. It is meant to be a "pat on the back", but it seems that it's been hard to distinguish just one user that has done enough and hasn't been rewarded before to be rewarded. That is why this was brought up from what I have seen., May 4, 2013 (UTC)
As I rose before, if this award was supposed to just be awarded once, and only to new users, it should of been named "New user of the month". Also I do not understand why the lack of new users means we should take a possible award away from the older users. In the last forum everyone complained adding older users would be unfair since it would mean newer users wouldn't get the award, and now we've had a month where no new users got the award people are complaining that the award needs to be re-evaluated. This whole award seems to be bias towards new users, and frankly at this point in the Call of Duty franchise users come here to join chat and comment on blogs, none of the users have interest in editing. It's not a disinterest in the award, it's a disinterest in editing. One anecdote is a user currently in chat complaining about an error with a page, but when being told to fix it he refuses as he wants someone else to do it. This update allows the award to remain active by awarding the users that do feel bothered to edit, and still allows new users to earn the award without hindrance of running against a more active user. The issue is not in the award, the issue is in who is doing the edits. 16:27, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
The thing is, this is orders of magnitude better than forcing the award as we do now. There's nothing wrong with giving an award to someone who has done well for the month, and there isn't anything wrong with opening up the possibility of earning it to previous winners. I'm not really seeing any potential flaws... and if you're worried that the award is somewhat dead, this should at the very least breathe some life into it.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  20:11, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Me likes. Giving both old and new users the chance of getting FU/UOTM will be a good addition to the community section of the wiki.-Diegox223 Zed's dead, baby.Personal Diegox223 Deadpool logo.png01:45, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — I have to say this would be a more organized way of determining featured users, both old and new. It can also be more user friendly in that some newer users can be acknowledged for hard work and strong contributions. CoolioDoolio93 talk  18:27, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per all. Zombie DropperTalkRay Gun 3rd person view WaW.png 01:39, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — All per.

15:30, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — PER ALL Iw5 cardicon soap.pngN7 TC 15:55, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per N7 Madnessfan34537 15:56, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per all Shock3600 —Unsigned comment was added by Shock3600

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Absolutely good idea. YELLOWLUCARIO TALK  16:19, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — Per madness 16:24, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Support — I agree, this is a much needed change to the currently outdated system. PierogiTalk 20:37, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Semi-closed — As everyone's supporting the idea, I'm just gonna go ahead and implement this. The factors I see is the voting system (a new section for users that have already won the award alongside the current system) which we can see in action on 19th, apparently it's gonna be called "User of the Month" again, and that users will have to wait a four-month gap (as suggested by Sam above) after winning before being able to be nominated. However, I'm not entirely closing this forum yet, so if you have anything you'd like to bring up, feel free to say. -- laagone (talk)  11:51, May 6, 2013 (UTC)

I changed 2 rules on the UOTM page. Firstly a user can vote twice (once in the new users section, once again in the revotes section). Secondly I allowed it so a nominee could still vote, but not for themselves. I think these are minor things, but if anyone wants to talk about these changes, feel free to respond. 16:01, May 6, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - Everyone seems happy. Everything has been set in place.

10:30, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.