- Yeah I don't think putting more sP into the economy is going to help a balance it out, y'know?

So achievements would be logical to me. Achievements are rad anyways. :D

the only thing i can see coming from this is thread after thread after thread of "upvote my pet!!!!!" as well as the aforementioned popularity contest. not a fan, don't leave the spotlight wins in the hands of users. what i do find worth implementing is the checklist of what might be missing or w/e from a pet profile keeping it from living up to the minimal requirements.

i'm not too keen on the downvoting because .. idk, i see it as sort of an insult to someone's characters. however, i'm up for an upvotes system that'd favor those with better and more appealing pets.

while you're reconsidering spotlight however COULD YOU PLEASE MAYBE GIVE THE OPTION TO REMOVE SPOTLIGHT TROPHIES OFF PETS.. i have at least one pet that i've namechanged and completely redone as a different character for the sake of stats, and he can't win again because his ID won previously 8(

The checkbox reasons we absolutely need! It wouldn't even be bad to get some user feedback on what should be on the list just in case the staff misses any common critiques.

I'm a bit iffy with the voting system, though. There are some people with strong opinions on pets whose entire profile was commissioned, or on fanpets, or on anything in general. Some people may even downvote for very personal reasons/out of spite.

And also, I agree with 's suggestion on giving pets another chance to win spotlight. Maybe have a time limit or put a fee on it, idrc. I just have some pets that I've long since changed their stories and character or adopted that have already won spotlight, and it kind of disappoints me that I can't enter them again.

This is so gonna be a popularity contest or otherwise favoring known, trademarked characters. Y'all can bookmark me tbh

And just censoring out the pet's name and the username won't work, since most pet profiles will mention the pet's name throughout the story. =|

the controversial part Something I'd like to see implemented into the spotlight system is a requirement that the user who owns the pet needs to have completed at least one (maybe 2?) components of the page themselves. So, no winning for purchasing the layout, making someone else write the story, making someone else do the art, not doing your own treasure chest, etc. If this IS now a requirement (last time I checked it wasn't), then please feel free to correct me! c:

Thank you! I think it could work really well, because then you won't have the same people and their pets part of the "10" and you could have a threshold for how many people it takes to get a pet "kicked" so to speak. Like if 50 voters say that the profile coding doesn't work, then it gets removed. This could stop a few mean people for putting bs reasons that aren't true.

YES! i really wish this was a legit rule. I don't care if you doodled a sketch of your pet, but please just complete ONE thing yourself!

Having users vote seems like a bad idea. It will turn into the Summer in Centropolis Avatar contest all over again. I didn't even participate in that part of the contest because I knew I wouldn't have a fighting chance. I hate popularity based things.

Got some suggestions here c: Staff pick users like repeat spotlight winners, profile makers and story writers to be the ones who vote. That way its users who know what it takes. Or like users can fill out an "application" of why they want to help judge spotlight winners? But not a fan of just anyone and everyone being able to vote and making it a popularity contest. And a big fat yes to the Checkbox

Just no to the down voting, there's enough negativity in life and online as it is... and I would really hate to see it become the popularity mess that is Neo's BC.

Checklist - yes.

in fact, the only thing I find useful about this new proposed system is the following:

I 1003% AGREE WITH YOUR CONTROVERSIAL PART JS

Scratch the voting please.

Also, just to add some opposite thoughts(not that I disagree, just adding to discussion) on what has said, what about those who are not very creative? Would that mean that they do not deserve the spotlight? One could argue that time spent earning sP/CSC would be the same as time spent on a pet, no? Also, even if something like that were to be implemented then how would it be policed?

well that's something at least. i don't have much of an alternative to user-based voting etc., but i think the rotation voting or w/e is thus far the most reasonable other option alongside the "X amount of remarks abt missing X and you're out, please fix and try again".

Have you guys thought about just hiring new staff only to handle Pet Spotlights? Or would that be too much? I know I'd apply.

You could add to the Pet Spotlight Nominations rule that you can't ask to be up-voted.