Nominations must be at the very least 350 words long.
An article is featured every month, or at the admins' discretion.
Whichever article has the most votes at the end of the month is featured for a month.
Each downvote counts as a point down for the nominee.
In case of a tie, the one with fewer downvotes wins.
Admin votes carry the same weight as regular users' votes.
All nominations and votes must be signed with four tildes (~~~~). Unsigned nominations and votes will be nullified.
Nominations and votes CANNOT BE CHANGED. Each user can only vote ONCE, for and against.
An article cannot be nominated twice in a row (if an article was nominated in the previous voting, it cannot be nominated again in the current one).
Users cannot nominate articles two months in a row.
Only six nominations max for every monthly voting are allowed. Any nomination surpassing this limit will be automatically disqualified.
CHEATING WILL NEVER BE TOLERATED. Any user who starts downvoting candidates just to rig the results or go asking other users to vote on his candidate will receive a warning and, in case of reincidence, a one-month ban. No exceptions.
The use of sockpuppets in IAFH is extremely forbidden, resulting in the permanent ban of the sockpuppet's account(s) and in the deletion of your nominated Inconsistently Admirable.
Once the vote was posted, there is no turning back to edit the description of your vote. If you voted against a candidate for a trivial reason and had your vote discarded by an admin, it will be forbidden to go back and edit the reason of your vote to make your denied vote valid again. Doing so will result in a week ban, NO exceptions.
There is a limit for how many times a Inconsistently Admirable can be nominated in a period of time. If a candidate is downvoted but still being brought to IAFH more than once in the following months, the limit is 3 attempts. If a Inconsistently Admirable is downvoted 3 times, the Inconsistently Admirable cannot be proposed again until 12 months has passed after the last proposal. Bringing the Inconsistently Admirable back before then is a violation of this rule and the candidate will be erased from the nominations. For this limit to reset, the Inconsistently Admirable must not be proposed for 12 months after the last proposal.
Suggestions[]
Be original and creative with the nominations.
Don't vote against a Inconsistently Admirable if you haven't read the article about it yet.
Don't vote against a Inconsistently Admirable just because you know nothing about him/her/it.
Don't say anything that may be offensive to another.
If you're going to vote against, present an actual argument for your reasoning. "He's boring" or "I don't like him" aren't arguments.
The correct nomination format is as follows:
For:
Against:
(if anyone votes against:) against reasons for against
(if anyone votes against:) against reasons for against
Comments
Invincible's Comic series has first been published in January 2003, rendering the franchise to turn 22 this January. That, the iconography of the comics for being a subversive take on the superhero genre, and Omni-Man being a well-written character that is a homage to the legendary and pure-hearted Superman is why I chose to nominate him for this January. Unlike the symbol of hope himself, Omni-Man renders a symbol of initially conquest and supremacy that stems from his genocidal race, the Viltrumites. Yet despite his heinous actions, he manages to redeem himself and become more admirable like Superman does, defending Thraxia, destroying Viltrum and advicing Invincible before dying, making him transform into a much more benevolent, yet still extremist dad. And before you ask, I doubt it's too early to have him headlined as while yes the show is ongoing, this nomination does not focus on the TV Show adaptation of Omni-Man, only the comic version.
(if anyone votes against:) against reasons for against
Comments
*For this headline, I am choosing Kokichi Oma (Alternately written as Kokichi Ouma in the Japanese version), titled the Ultimate Supreme Leader, from the Japanese visual novel game Danganronpa V3: Killing Harmony (Also called New Danganronpa V3: Everyone’s New Semester of Killing in the Japanese version). The first reason I’m choosing him is because Danganronpa V3 will have its eighth anniversary on January 12. It’s a pretty obvious reason for nomination, since many people have nominated a character from their media due to an anniversary. Well… why am I choosing him? There are several other Inconsistently Admirables from the same game. The reason is that Oma is perhaps the most iconic Inconsistently Admirable in Danganronpa V3. He is well-recognised amongst some non-fans, despite the game not being extremely popular that one in two people know it or trending to a point of extreme popularity. In fact, his famous-ish line “It’s a lie” is pretty iconic. According to a MyNavi poll regarding the most popular character in DRV3, he was voted to be the second most popular student, showing his popularity. While polarising amongst fans, he can be perceived as an interesting, 3-dimensional character with ambiguous motives. At first, we perceive him as a sadistic villain wannabe, however he is eventually revealed to be a well-intentioned extremist even though it may or may not be true. Moreover, Kokichi has many moments that some fans find funny. In fact, one of his lines in the prologue, his line “What’s wrong Kirumi?”, as well as the scene where he called Shuichi Saihara “Shumai” have become memes in the Danganronpa Community. Also, he is very intelligent, another quality that fans may find likeable. He was capable of manipulating Gonta Gokuhara into killing Miu Iruma as an attempt to end the killing game. Another example of his intelligence is when he created a case with Kaito Momota that the mastermind could not solve. What a smart guy… In conclusion, I feel like Kokichi Oma would make a good candidate for January 2025’s headlined Inconsistently Admirable. With him being hilarious, intelligent and complicated yet iconic, he seems to be an ideal choice.
