Re: [Decision] Small & Medium Award for Modders
Defining these awards by way of comparing them with the Opifex requirements simply beats the purpose of it. Unless I misunderstood the whole purpose of these 'smaller' modding awards. Regretful musing about modders that one thought should have received the Opifex does not help either, collecting pertaining info and nominating them does. My guess is that the 'exceptional' definition level at the time prevented them from being nominated. If that is the issue then it's not an issue for this discussion - although it's certainly an indication what could happen if the proposed awards have the same vague criteria.
I was under the impression that the awards we are discussing are for modding publications that do not qualify for the Opifex - in other words simple (small) or extended\extensive (large) contributions. The ultimate purpose being that one acknowledges and encourages modding contributions. This is certainly not helped by discussing Opifex requirements - whether something is exceptional is, and always will be, a subjective standard that needs to be collectively agreed upon. One way to kill this small and medium award proposal is to attach equally nebulous requirements. and yes, I basically repeated myself to drive that point home.
Someone publishes a modification that is a bit more then just changing a line or two of code or recolour a texture then give him\her a pat on the back by way of a small award. If there is continued contribution over a given period or quantity then hand out a medium award. Its what I wrote in my previous response and it hasn't changed.
Suggestion: seeing that Opifex is basically an elevated award with the same premise I would suggest to stipulate that any of the awards discussed here shall be 'replaced\upgraded' by the Opifex award.
I am not sure for what reason citizenship is being brought into play - if that's a prerequisite then that's another way to kill my support. I am a firm believer in 'egg before chicken': encourage participation and make that acknowledgement visible. That acknowledged participation will be an incentive and visible marker for anyone interested in promoting members for citizenship.
In other words: put my support on hold until some consensus has been reached, I'll review it then. There is no way I am going support a measure that potentially gets applied to dozens of members (probably the most handed out awards) if it requires the same arduous procedure like major awards. That was the reason why I mentioned tangible requirements in the first place.