[B3A]

I think its a cringe requirement in a contest.
I don't know if that has beed discussed already but I think it care create some missleading image for a potential scammer as there isn't a reputation reason "Reputation only for the contest"

I think it ruins the use of reps.

QE: Duration should be regulated over the prize aswell (50$ prize cant be 1 month , if its 1k$ let it be 2 ) but lets start with the basics.

[Omniscient]

It's called Popularity for a reason. It's not related to Marketplace.

[Tyr]

Rep got ruined a long time ago unfortunately. Nonetheless, I have spoken to a few people here who truly do care about their reputation so I dunno. If anything maybe spicing up the different preset messages you can leave for either a positive or negative pop should be rotated with different prompts on quarterly basis but this would require Omni or another staff member to develop a mechanism of maintaining the original prompts left behind in the reputation (i.e., "A high quality member.") to remain unchanged in the member's popularity history which just is not conventional or possible for the way we have configured pop to work with MyBB through plugins etc. This is too much work in my opinion although I do not know much about MyBB. Not to mention this has been heavily modified over the years from what a traditional MyBB forum looks like to where it is actually pleasant to use in comparison to others that actually still use it.

Apologies for rambling but I had an idea from you saying this and did not want to create a separate thread. To keep things on topic, I do understand why you feel it is a cringe requirement as it is quite literally 98% of the threads there, however, the thread creators could take initiative themselves and perhaps make things spicier via the contest requirements by leveraging the reward amount/type's value over a popularity requirement. The problem is, nobody is going to do that and it sounds silly unless there is some type of extra reinforcement that encourages the contest creator to get a separate reward back from their giveaway.

At the end of the day, most of those contests are either created by new members trying to pivot their way into the community that either want the green apple award, contribute to other HF groups running contests via donation to increase positive group branding throughout the forum, are feeling generous, or want something else in return.

Furthermore, this would make the Green Apple award irrelevant, potentially lowering the post count of the community in general and could even impact the forum economy. Reputation actually goes deeper than you think, particularly to new members on this forum. I think we can definitely do something to make things a little more interesting in there other than the traditional "pop max unlimited this and blah blah."

I mean look what I did on accident by trying to be clever. I accidentally introduced a new rule to the contest sub-forum over that. I think everyone has their own view on what popularity really means. What if we added a stipulation where if they are giving away xyz amount of bytes, they are allowed to do this by setting a cap with corresponding rules for the thread creator? Example would be if someone is giving away only 2k bytes to 3x users, they must add an additional requirement to the entry since this is under the 10k minimum for giving away bytes. I also think that this would stimulate the marketplace for bytes and drive byte vendor sales facilitating more marketplace sales.

Anyway, I do not know. I do not run this forum. I only talk a bunch of nonsense most of the time tbh.

Have a good day everyone.

[B3A]

It's called Popularity for a reason. It's not related to Marketplace.

It still doesn't seem proper to "require" max popularity for a 2k bytes contest entry.

My thoughts only anyways ; you can close this if its hard no

[Omniscient]

It still doesn't seem proper to "require" max popularity for a 2k bytes contest entry.

My thoughts only anyways ; you can close this if its hard no

I'll tighten up contest entry requirements soon enough.

[Jamika]

I think its a cringe requirement in a contest.
I don't know if that has beed discussed already but I think it care create some missleading image for a potential scammer as there isn't a reputation reason "Reputation only for the contest"

I think it ruins the use of reps.

QE: Duration should be regulated over the prize aswell (50$ prize cant be 1 month , if its 1k$ let it be 2 ) but lets start with the basics.

Trust now is based on contracts rather than popularity i think

[B3A]

Trust now is based on contracts rather than popularity i think

Early contracts can’t be based elsewhere but I see your point

[Jamika]

Early contracts can’t be based elsewhere but I see your point

Actually we all saw even og members scamming, so you should take care anyway

[Chrome]

I tend to agree that the contest section is now filled with low byte prizes and very little money prizes. I ran my recent one a little bit different by offering a cash prize, I also stickied it to the lounge to donate some cash to HF at the same time.

It's good to see Omni responding to tighten up the contest section on HF.