294 members online in the past 24 hours and...

[Raggedy Man]

...and theres only 50 or so votes for FOTM?!? I dont understand why you cant be bothered to vote. It only takes a few seconds to vote for your favorite entry. 

[Max-fossils]

Someone's angry 

 

It is true though that the FOTM deserves more attention, it's a great contest!

I like the "Just do it" tag too 

[Kane]

Voting in any of our rolling contests is voluntary.  

 

Although I agree it would be great to have more participation in voting, we also have to understand that different members have varying degrees of participation on the forum, and their own reasons, contributing in different ways as much or as little as they like while still using TFF as a great resource.  

 

To add to the complications, this month's choices make it incredibly difficult given the exceptionally high calibre of entries - a good problem we are facing each month.  

[Sacha]

If I don't get to it when it comes out, it falls off my "unread Content in last 24 hrs" activity stream so I don't see it again. I don't know how other members interact with the topics, but since new comments aren't added frequently, I could see where it would go un-noticed. 

[jcbshark]

Just look at how many folks don't vote on things that can actually have some bearing  on their daily lives.......we re fortunate to have the opportunity to do so in so many areas and I won't have others making the choice for me stepping off soapbox now....and if you don't vote you really lose the right to complain about the outcome 

[RJB]

I knew that the one post of the Tealliocaris multiblock from Scotland was going to take this hands down.  I had to go out to the garage and have a good cry, blow my nose and wipe the tears out of my eyes but I think Im over it now?   

 

RB

[Raggedy Man]

2 hours ago, Max-fossils said:

Someone's angry 

 

It is true though that the FOTM deserves more attention, it's a great contest!

I like the "Just do it" tag too 

No not mad...lol. Just feel that if there were more participation in these events we would get more out of the forum. Thats all. And to be honest, it was just surprising seeing the gap between total number of votes and members on in a 24 hour period. Though, its a hard month to vote as every specimen is amazing...maybe they're stumped? Lol

[Wrangellian]

Usually I don't bother to vote because I'm stumped but this month it was not so difficult. But as it turns out, by the look of things, I probably didn't need to vote anyway...

 

I always feel a bit bad for those who don't get any votes or very few, and I've thought about voting for something that it less likely to get chosen, but that's not how it works!

[RJB]

Hey guys, to me, you vote or not vote,  it really doesnt matter.  All cool stuff and whoever wins, more power to em.  its just an emblem below your avitar. 

 

RB

[MeargleSchmeargl]

3 hours ago, RJB said:

I knew that the one post of the Tealliocaris multiblock from Scotland was going to take this hands down.  I had to go out to the garage and have a good cry, blow my nose and wipe the tears out of my eyes but I think Im over it now?   

 

RB

 

I know the feeling.

 

#relatable

[EMP]

6 hours ago, Raggedy Man said:

...and theres only 50 or so votes for FOTM?!? I dont understand why you cant be bothered to vote. It only takes a few seconds to vote for your favorite entry. 

 

1- Most people on this forum probably just lurk, maybe posting every once in a while if ever.

 

2- I didn't know the FOTM existed until over a month in (even with a good half year lurking beforehand), partly because it's hidden by the bigger subs like ID. We need to market it better.

 

3- Most people probably aren't active hunters, and likely don't collect very often/find interesting things.

 

4- People may think that their finds won't win regardless, and would be inclined to not participate because of this. I mean, let's be honest, every month so far there's always been that one find that you know is super spectacular and is going to win. That may be disheartening a lot of potential members from participating.

 

5- There's still not a separate plant category, which annoys me a lot and likely turns off others for this reason: there's no way a good plant fossil can compete against a good trilobite or ammonite, which always turn up. The same holds true for a good, rare coprolite versus a complete fish skeleton. Basically the categories may not be giving enough of a chance for certain kinds of fossils people are collecting, turning them off from the contest.

 

6- People just don't care about it, those aren't their finds up there and the decision has very little impact on their lives. Honestly the only reason I submit finds at all is because it's a convenient way for me to show my favorite finds and talk about them, not because of the competition. It's not because I want to decide what the best fossil find is.

[MeargleSchmeargl]

1 hour ago, EMP said:

5- There's still not a separate plant category, which annoys me a lot and likely turns off others for this reason: there's no way a good plant fossil can compete against a good trilobite or ammonite, which always turn up. The same holds true for a good, rare coprolite versus a complete fish skeleton. Basically the categories may not be giving enough of a chance for certain kinds of fossils people are collecting, turning them off from the contest.

 

Plants are actually pretty big contenders for inverts, especially the good ones. Take the Lacoena Cone for example (which was either July or September last year, if I remember correctly).

[Fossildude19]

Don't forget, it's summertime here in the US. I know I was off for a few days. Many people are on holiday or vacation, and may not have access to wifi or any internet, for that matter. 

Participating is voluntary, and while some may feel it is helpful and interesting to participate, others have no interest in the contest for one reason or another. 

 

As far as having a separate plant category, this was discussed a while ago. When the contests are divided further, there is no meaning to the Award. 

We get to showcase world class fossils from the entire planet here, right next to the common finds of highly fossiliferous areas. That people go out and are able to find these things amazes me. 

 

The Fossil of the Month contest is intended to be a fun outlet for people to showcase their best finds of that month. As such, I think the importance placed on the award is not nearly as important as the fact that the fossils were found, and are cherished by the finders.    

 

 

 

[Darktooth]

Here is my two cents. As of right now we have 22, 855 members. 7 entries for verts, 9 for inverts. Personally I would like to see more people enter a find then vote. But as already been mentioned people participation level is based on whatever they are comfortable with. All anybody can do is encourage, and not be pushy.

[Max-fossils]

17 hours ago, Wrangellian said:

I always feel a bit bad for those who don't get any votes or very few, and I've thought about voting for something that it less likely to get chosen, but that's not how it works!

 

Don't be 

 

I only submitted a find once ( I don't often find awesome fossils), and only got (I think?) 3 votes for it. What counts most is if it's YOUR find of the month! That fossil, maybe not liked that much by the others, still remains a favorite in my collection.

[Shellseeker]

An occasional reminder is helpful for those who have a stronger committment/responsibility gene, but not everyone does. I would think that someone who has been recognized (MOTM for example) may be more persuadable .  Send them a PM 48 hours before voting ends that voting will end and TFF vitality depends on your support

 

Carrots are much preferable. So how should we define the carrots.

 

When I sign_in today, I see most recent gallery entries -- pretty good. Maybe we could show one of the FOTM entries with a link to voting thread. There may be other options to basically get those who sign on today to consider voting for FOTM or MOTM.

 

These are just suggestions that likely have flaws.. Think of them as examples. Add your own. 

 

Jack

[EMP]

12 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Don't forget, it's summertime here in the US. I know I was off for a few days. Many people are on holiday or vacation, and may not have access to wifi or any internet, for that matter. 

Participating is voluntary, and while some may feel it is helpful and interesting to participate, others have no interest in the contest for one reason or another. 

 

As far as having a separate plant category, this was discussed a while ago. When the contests are divided further, there is no meaning to the Award. 

We get to showcase world class fossils from the entire planet here, right next to the common finds of highly fossiliferous areas. That people go out and are able to find these things amazes me. 

 

The Fossil of the Month contest is intended to be a fun outlet for people to showcase their best finds of that month. As such, I think the importance placed on the award is not nearly as important as the fact that the fossils were found, and are cherished by the finders.    

 

 

 

 

I have to disagree with that.

 

First off, the problem is that of the over 20k users, a total of 16 entries were reported, some of those, I believe, from the same people. The immediate problem we face is first getting this whole contest more popular, and people more active in it. Right now, in my opinion, one big obstacle to this is how broad the categories are.

 

You see, right now as things stand we're putting a shark tooth or coprolite in the same category as a skeleton of a mammal. Quite obviously the skeleton is going to win, because it is such a cool  find. Any potential people who might want to participate and post their favorite finds of the month are going to be intimidated by this and wish to same themselves the trouble of submitting a fossil. The same applies for plants and other inverts. Right now we're putting fern fronds in the same category as whole trilobites, pristine ammonites, and wonderful crinoids. What do you think would happen if a person from West Virginia who only really collects lepidondedrons is going to think when his or her find is suddenly competing against a well preserved death assemblage of crinoids? Now, I know you'll probably make the argument that the process is to select the best specimen, but the problem is that right now is that the system we have is doing it at the expense of other fossils. Let's face it, most people naturally gravitate towards certain kinds of fossils based on their own collecting and how some types are better known than others. Not as many people are enthused about a plant, and that hurts people who put up plants as the combined invertebrate-plant category allows a person's bias to kick in against the plant entries.

 

This also begins to touch on another subject, and this is one is a bit more gray then the other. The problem is that this contest seems more of a "which fossil looks the best" kind of contest as opposed to which fossil is the top find. What I mean is that a person could put up a very rare, but maybe not spectacular looking fossil of a shark tooth or plant or whatever, and have it lose to a good looking, but far more common, ammonite or big bone, or something. This ties in to the idea above that right now the contest is, in a way, working in a manner to discourage and limit the pool of entries to only those that people will be drawn to and vote for based on pre-held notions they have, not from a more objective viewpoint. Potential applicants will begin to second guess themselves about participating, and soon withhold their finds altogether.

 

This is a very big problem for one reason: participation. A person will be far more likely to want, and actually, participate in FOTM if their own finds are up there with the others, and they feel that there exists a genuine competition between finds and ability for them to win. Right now, as evidenced by the lack of entries and lack of votes, this is not happening. Therefore, in my opinion, the best way to boost participation is by creating more specific categories that would more fairly pit fossils against one another, encourage more people to submit entries, and be able to submit finds that could have a better chance of passing the "looks" test.

 

My proposed categories would be vertebrates, invertebrates, plants, and ichnofossils.

[minnbuckeye]

I guess this is an appropriate time to add my 2 cents worth to this discussion. In spite of being an amateur fossil hunter, I have found a couple of fossils over the last two years that likely would have competed very strongly for fossil of the month. Unfortunately, current rules in place disqualified my potential entries to this "FOR FUN" contest. When I find a unique and potentially valuable fossil, I let the professionals prep it. Unfortunately, I have little say  when I receive my finished product back. So when the prepper and I meet to retrieve my find, it has been past the month in which the "majority" of the prep occurred. It makes NO SENSE that two of my most treasured finds from the contest have been dismissed for breaking this rule. I hope  change can truly occur so that more entries can be enjoyed by all or at least have someone give me a LOGICAL reason this rule can not be altered. So far I have not received adequate explanation.

 

 

Mike

[ynot]

31 minutes ago, minnbuckeye said:

So when the prepper and I meet to retrieve my find, it has been past the month in which the "majority" of the prep occurred.

In a case like that it is when You get the fossil back that makes the "finished preparations date". As long as You have before and after pictures it should be ok to enter.

[Fossildude19]

1 hour ago, EMP said:

 

I have to disagree with that.

 

First off, the problem is that of the over 20k users, a total of 16 entries were reported, some of those, I believe, from the same people. The immediate problem we face is first getting this whole contest more popular, and people more active in it. Right now, in my opinion, one big obstacle to this is how broad the categories are.

 

You see, right now as things stand we're putting a shark tooth or coprolite in the same category as a skeleton of a mammal. Quite obviously the skeleton is going to win, because it is such a cool  find. Any potential people who might want to participate and post their favorite finds of the month are going to be intimidated by this and wish to same themselves the trouble of submitting a fossil. The same applies for plants and other inverts. Right now we're putting fern fronds in the same category as whole trilobites, pristine ammonites, and wonderful crinoids. What do you think would happen if a person from West Virginia who only really collects lepidondedrons is going to think when his or her find is suddenly competing against a well preserved death assemblage of crinoids? Now, I know you'll probably make the argument that the process is to select the best specimen, but the problem is that right now is that the system we have is doing it at the expense of other fossils. Let's face it, most people naturally gravitate towards certain kinds of fossils based on their own collecting and how some types are better known than others. Not as many people are enthused about a plant, and that hurts people who put up plants as the combined invertebrate-plant category allows a person's bias to kick in against the plant entries.

 

This also begins to touch on another subject, and this is one is a bit more gray then the other. The problem is that this contest seems more of a "which fossil looks the best" kind of contest as opposed to which fossil is the top find. What I mean is that a person could put up a very rare, but maybe not spectacular looking fossil of a shark tooth or plant or whatever, and have it lose to a good looking, but far more common, ammonite or big bone, or something. This ties in to the idea above that right now the contest is, in a way, working in a manner to discourage and limit the pool of entries to only those that people will be drawn to and vote for based on pre-held notions they have, not from a more objective viewpoint. Potential applicants will begin to second guess themselves about participating, and soon withhold their finds altogether.

 

This is a very big problem for one reason: participation. A person will be far more likely to want, and actually, participate in FOTM if their own finds are up there with the others, and they feel that there exists a genuine competition between finds and ability for them to win. Right now, as evidenced by the lack of entries and lack of votes, this is not happening. Therefore, in my opinion, the best way to boost participation is by creating more specific categories that would more fairly pit fossils against one another, encourage more people to submit entries, and be able to submit finds that could have a better chance of passing the "looks" test.

 

My proposed categories would be vertebrates, invertebrates, plants, and ichnofossils.

 

 

 

Did you read the entire thread I linked?, ... because a lot of the same arguments were made.  

 

First and foremost, this contest is supposed to be for fun.  It is a way for people to showcase their best finds for that month.

 

This is a world wide, world class Forum - the finds are going to be from all over, and quite excellent. The competition is stiff.

Of the 20K + members, probably about 80 -85 % of those people were likely drive by ID requests, who only participate for a short time.
Figure we have about 600 -700 regularly participating members. And participation is not mandatory.

 

The onus falls  on the entrant to summarize what about their find is unique and special.  

Plants and ichno fossils have won in the past.

 

But ultimately, no one can make anyone else participate, either by submitting a fossil or voting. 

And ultimately, no one can guide the parameters used by members  to vote. 

 

1 hour ago, minnbuckeye said:

I guess this is an appropriate time to add my 2 cents worth to this discussion. In spite of being an amateur fossil hunter, I have found a couple of fossils over the last two years that likely would have competed very strongly for fossil of the month. Unfortunately, current rules in place disqualified my potential entries to this "FOR FUN" contest. When I find a unique and potentially valuable fossil, I let the professionals prep it. Unfortunately, I have little say  when I receive my finished product back. So when the prepper and I meet to retrieve my find, it has been past the month in which the "majority" of the prep occurred. It makes NO SENSE that two of my most treasured finds from the contest have been dismissed for breaking this rule. I hope  change can truly occur so that more entries can be enjoyed by all or at least have someone give me a LOGICAL reason this rule can not be altered. So far I have not received adequate explanation.

 

 

Mike

 

Mike, ... we have to draw the line somewhere.

It is a Fossil of the Month contest. 

The rules are designed to give the best chance of celebrating a fossil that was found that month or that the majority of the prep was finished in the current month of the contest.

 

Would it be fair, say, ... to allow a fossil that was found 12 years ago, that was mostly prepped in the past, but had some small amount of prep done to it in the current month, to be allowed in the contest for this month?  Where does it end?  

 

There is logic in the rules, as stated,.. I think.  

 

It should be possible to get before pics , then, get the after pics sent by the preparator before the piece is shipped back to you. 

 

But even then, there is no guarantee that the fossil will win.

I have entered fossils that have lost, and I count myself lucky to have been able to submit what I believed were worthy finds.
I'm sorry if you feel slighted by this, but, the rules are the rules, and we do have to draw the line somewhere.  

*******************

 

Bottom line is - we have great fossils posted here, each and every month, ... and if you are proud of your find, enter it.  It's nice to win, but it is equally nice to showcase a prized fossil.  

 

[JohnJ]

Well said, Tim.

[minnbuckeye]

8 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

It is a Fossil of the Month contest. First and foremost, this contest is supposed to be for fun.  It is a way for people to showcase their best finds for that month.

 

The rules are designed to give the best chance of celebrating a fossil that was found that month or that the majority of the prep was finished in the current month of the contest.

 

Would it be fair, say, ... to allow a fossil that was found 12 years ago, that was mostly prepped in the past, but had some small amount of prep done to it in the current month, to be allowed in the contest for this month?  Where does it end?  

 

 

 ynot said it well:  In a case like that it is when You get the fossil back that makes the "finished preparations date". As long as You have before and after pictures it should be ok to enter. 

 

It seems to me that a simple alteration to the rule that states entries that require the fossil to be prepped by someone other than the entrant can be entered in the month that one receives the fossil back from the prepper. In my last case, I found a rare trilobite in a ventral position (upside down). No way would this have competed for fossil of the month. Flip this over and prep it from the dorsal side down and it is a beautiful specimen, worthy of some votes.  Now this is NOT something I would want to tackle nor did I want to trust shipping this by mail. The prepper and I met at a fossil show to return the trilobite in it's finished state, But a month after his prepping was completed.

8 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

There is logic in the rules, as stated,.. I think

 

 I think there is more logic in the way I suggest. Yes it requires a change in your rules but it also allows more honest collectors to enter their finds. I could have simply said the prep occurred in the month that I received it back. But I am an honest man and knew by current rules my trilobite would not qualify. So stating " Would it be fair, say, ... to allow a fossil that was found 12 years ago, that was mostly prepped in the past, but had some small amount of prep done to it in the current month, to be allowed in the contest for this month?  Where does it end?  "  is implying that a deceitful person would attempt such a thing. So this is why there is not to be a rule change. My point is this same deceitful person under the current rules would lie anyway and say his/her fossil was prepped in the month that they entered it. So this argument is not logical. Also the way I stated it, as soon as this person received the fossil back from the prepper, that is the month it would be eligible for entry, not 12 years later.

 

8 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

But even then, there is no guarantee that the fossil will win.

 

As stated in our private conversations, I am accepting of the rules as stated and did not feel slighted not being able to enter. My goal was NOT to win, but to showcase a very nice find. The purpose in my contact earlier was not to change rules for my benefit but to allow future findings such as mine to be able to enter this  FOR FUN contest. The more , the merrier!!   

9 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

It is a Fossil of the Month contest. 

  

It has been pointed out to me many times that this is Fossil of the Month contest. I agree with this. So should any prep done past the month of find be disqualified? More food for thought. But if not interested in change like this, do not use it in your defense for the changes I suggest.  

 

 

[Fossildude19]

On 7/6/2017 at 8:05 AM, minnbuckeye said:

 

 ynot said it well:  In a case like that it is when You get the fossil back that makes the "finished preparations date". As long as You have before and after pictures it should be ok to enter. 

 

It seems to me that a simple alteration to the rule that states entries that require the fossil to be prepped by someone other than the entrant can be entered in the month that one receives the fossil back from the prepper. In my last case, I found a rare trilobite in a ventral position (upside down). No way would this have competed for fossil of the month. Flip this over and prep it from the dorsal side down and it is a beautiful specimen, worthy of some votes.  Now this is NOT something I would want to tackle nor did I want to trust shipping this by mail. The prepper and I met at a fossil show to return the trilobite in it's finished state, But a month after his prepping was completed.

 

I think there is more logic in the way I suggest. Yes it requires a change in your rules but it also allows more honest collectors to enter their finds. I could have simply said the prep occurred in the month that I received it back. But I am an honest man and knew by current rules my trilobite would not qualify. So stating " Would it be fair, say, ... to allow a fossil that was found 12 years ago, that was mostly prepped in the past, but had some small amount of prep done to it in the current month, to be allowed in the contest for this month?  Where does it end?  "  is implying that a deceitful person would attempt such a thing. So this is why there is not to be a rule change. My point is this same deceitful person under the current rules would lie anyway and say his/her fossil was prepped in the month that they entered it. So this argument is not logical. Also the way I stated it, as soon as this person received the fossil back from the prepper, that is the month it would be eligible for entry, not 12 years later.

 

As stated in our private conversations, I am accepting of the rules as stated and did not feel slighted not being able to enter. My goal was NOT to win, but to showcase a very nice find. The purpose in my contact earlier was not to change rules for my benefit but to allow future findings such as mine to be able to enter this  FOR FUN contest. The more , the merrier!!   

  

It has been pointed out to me many times that this is Fossil of the Month contest. I agree with this. So should any prep done past the month of find be disqualified? More food for thought. But if not interested in change like this, do not use it in your defense for the changes I suggest.  

 

 

 

Mike,

 

The rules were put in place LONG before I had anything to do with moderation or administration.  
 

It really is not a matter of "not being interested in changes". Change is often embraced here on the Forum. It is a matter of fairness to those who find, collect, prep, (or get pictures of the prep)  and enter their fossils for the contest in the current month, as stated in the rules. 

We have changed the Contest in the past, to make the distinction between verts and inverts/plants.

Ultimately, any further change in categories would only make it easier to win for people who collect those categories of fossils.  

I agree with the original tenets of the Contest, and feel more categories would dilute the award.

 

You ask...  "So should any prep done past the month of find be disqualified?"  No. But to make it fair, the majority of the prep needs to happen in the month of the contest. And the before and after pictures need to be included in the post. I think this is more than fair, and logical.

 

This is supposed to be fun, contest. Honestly, I'd rather see an award go to people who posts in the Collections Gallery Area.  

 

You state that you had to wait a month to get the fossil back. That unfortunately, does not meet the criteria.  Nowhere does it state in the rules that you have to have the fossil in your possesion at the time of the contest. The Month when prep is finished is just that - When prep is finished. Not when you receive the fossil back.   That is where the line ends. I'm sorry that your two fossils were not eligible according to the rules. 

 

Again, with e-mail, it really should not be that difficult to get pictures of the fossil once prep is done.  

 

"Yes it requires a change in your rules but it also allows more honest collectors to enter their finds".  

As far as dishonest members, ... well,... unfortunately, we have had some in the past, and it has affected Fossil of the Month Contest. It is a sad but true reality.

Who knows why petty people are motivated to be dishonest when it comes to a virtual award sticker on their profile.  

Bragging rights and a badge on the profile is not really worth any dishonesty.

 

If showcasing your finds is all you are after, ...why not post them in the Collections Gallery?  

The Member's Gallery, Member Collections, and the open boards are all available to showcase personal finds that we are proud of, as well.

Why not make use of these areas?  

 

 

 

 

[Raggedy Man]

 I hope I didn't offend anyone as that was not my intent. My comment should of been more constructive describing areas we could improve upon for more participation by our members who lurk or feel shy due to their level experience within our collective passion for fossils. 

[EMP]

2 hours ago, Raggedy Man said:

 I hope I didn't offend anyone as that was not my intent. My comment should of been more constructive describing areas we could improve upon for more participation by our members who lurk or feel shy due to their level experience within our collective passion for fossils. 

 

19 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

 

 

Did you read the entire thread I linked?, ... because a lot of the same arguments were made.  

 

First and foremost, this contest is supposed to be for fun.  It is a way for people to showcase their best finds for that month.

 

This is a world wide, world class Forum - the finds are going to be from all over, and quite excellent. The competition is stiff.

Of the 20K + members, probably about 80 -85 % of those people were likely drive by ID requests, who only participate for a short time.
Figure we have about 600 -700 regularly participating members. And participation is not mandatory.

 

The onus falls  on the entrant to summarize what about their find is unique and special.  

Plants and ichno fossils have won in the past.

 

But ultimately, no one can make anyone else participate, either by submitting a fossil or voting. 

And ultimately, no one can guide the parameters used by members  to vote. 

 

 

Mike, ... we have to draw the line somewhere.

It is a Fossil of the Month contest. 

The rules are designed to give the best chance of celebrating a fossil that was found that month or that the majority of the prep was finished in the current month of the contest.

 

Would it be fair, say, ... to allow a fossil that was found 12 years ago, that was mostly prepped in the past, but had some small amount of prep done to it in the current month, to be allowed in the contest for this month?  Where does it end?  

 

There is logic in the rules, as stated,.. I think.  

 

It should be possible to get before pics , then, get the after pics sent by the preparator before the piece is shipped back to you. 

 

But even then, there is no guarantee that the fossil will win.

I have entered fossils that have lost, and I count myself lucky to have been able to submit what I believed were worthy finds.
I'm sorry if you feel slighted by this, but, the rules are the rules, and we do have to draw the line somewhere.  

*******************

 

Bottom line is - we have great fossils posted here, each and every month, ... and if you are proud of your find, enter it.  It's nice to win, but it is equally nice to showcase a prized fossil.  

 

 

I guess...but if we're trying to find a way for more than just 10 people from participating (less than 1% of all "active users"), quite obviously the method you've been using doesn't work. But if you wish to keep things as they are that's fine, it's not my website nor is it my contest. I'm just saying that maybe if you wanted to tackle this problem you could expand the concept a little more.

 

It is nice to showcase a fossil...but no one is doing it. We had 15 entries this month, and January had less than that. factor in that some are from the same people over and over again (like me), and we're looking at only a few (less than 10) people participating. That doesn't really seem like a contest where the best, "world class fossils" are really being presented for "stiff competition". That seems more like Users 1-15 have these favorite finds of the month, and we should vote on those. I'm saying it'd be a lot more of an actual contest if we changed a few things.

 

Regarding the whole preparation month thing. I would like to say that a big part of your argument seems to be hypotheticals and slippery slopes. We're not arguing about what may happen, we're arguing about the current example (we know is happening) brought up about the prep month. We don't know for a fact any abuses you stated may happen.