Originally Posted by
Hetalia McAzuslut
Depends how we define "best". Some people might say it is purely volume, some might say it's purely how meaningful those posts are. I consider both those sides wrong, we need a standard where we give each post a value from 0.0 to 1.0, with an infinite number of decimal points available for it. 0.0 will be pointless and inane, 1.0 will be the most worthwhile post in existence. Then, we have a group of, say, 10 people who judge each post. Then, you average out what each posts gets from those 10 people, and that is the posts value. Then, you add up the total points a person has based on what each of their posts receive, and whoever has the highest total is the "best" poster. Of course, I'd rather just say different posters have different merits, there is no unanimous best poster.