Jimbo: Sammygirly:
Actually being one of the most prolific posters does not necessarily mean that the QUALITY of the responses of the other LPSG'ers should not be judged any less important. In my opinion if you post just ONE response (or start a topic) that really helps someone, makes people think, brings some new information, etc., then you are in the spirit of the LPSG group, "special award" notwithstanding.
To select 15, 25, 50 or whatever of the most frequent posters then have us vote on THAT pre-selected group is unfairly biased on whether or not those particular posts by this chosen group happen to be revelent/important/interesting to the people voting. Also quite of few of the posts by the most frequent posters read more like internet chat, just agreeing, wisecracking, etc. and not really supporting the thread with any new information. Not saying this is bad, but it tends to distort the numbers.
A different way of doing this would be to vote on the topic/response that is the most informative/original, etc. and give the award to that poster. But whose "criteria" would we be using then? So to me any kind of award is this sort of forum is just about meaningless because it is almost impossible to quantify fairly. I also tend to believe that the most prolific also tend to be the ones who will be doing the most voting, and therefore not really representative of the LPSG membership at large.
I therefore cast my vote for keeping the spirit of the board open and "non-competitive". Frequent posters, seldom posters, lurkers, whatever...it's all good. I just don't want to put a damper on those contributors that may feel "left out" or feeling not as appreciated because of some arbitrary process. Would Grandpa really want this?