Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-5082922-20131103042759/@comment-7317707-20131103200906

1. While I liked the interaction and input of all of the users opinions, I felt as if this was very time-consuming and should be condensed down to save time...

2.The voting, I feel as if people just saw their friend's tributes and though "OMIGAWD IT'S *insert user name here*'S TRIBUTE OMFGHGGGGG IMA VOTE FOR THEM".

3. Yes, while you have a fair and wise opinion, you have a certain tribute preference, while other users would have a different one. I feel like 2-4 judges would help to even out the preference on a certain tribute type.

4. Wasn't a fan of the nominations, maybe it should be reduced to one. I feel like you had too many submissions, and that takes quite some time to sort through them all.

5. That was my least favorite part, I believed it should've been removed entirely.

6. No! People are, whether they wish to admit it or not, biased to their own tribute. I feel like it would be more fair of they could not submit their own tribute. If their tribute is worthy of TOTM, don't you think someone else would eventually nominate it?

7. Yes, BUT certain aspects of it need to be changed or removed entirely. This trial run pleasantly surprised me, as I expected it to be more of a train wreck, and instead it was more as if the train arrived a bit late to the station. I feel like the user base should nominate tributes, with valid reasoning, and a council of 2-4 judges examines each tribute p, followed by discussion by the judges and a selection.

RULES:

1. yes, it is only fair to give other tributes a chance.

2. Yes, obviously. We are completely and utterly off schedule. October TOTM is up in November. I feel like we should either do a quick, private selection of November's TOTM or leave it out entirely and post a public December TOTM nomination page now so December's TOTM is elected in December.