It’s quite funny to see how things have changed since I started here… there was a different core group dominating the leaderboard… yet none of the same comments we are seeing now…
Perhaps @Steve976 you hit the nail on the head… I think Dire Staights had a song about that… 🤷
I think there is a real catch 22 here by both sides of the coin are really the same.
The truth is that a few competing is working hard to keep the community alive is false as it is also the other members that are participating that are also keeping the community alive.
It is the same as saying that participating in the leaderboard is killing the community when not being active on the community. (As the saying goes it takes a community to raise a child ( or our case a community ) )
The prizes are fun to have but is not as important as having fun and meeting and conversing with folks.
There a lot of ways to have potential changes without making changes actual changes to the leaderboard. Just a few off the top of my head.
Set prizes as 1, 5 and 8. It should keep the whole board active.
Set a point value to hit to be in the “leaderboard running” (like 200). At the end of the month, they can draw 3 names out of the 200 point pot to win. Top 10 on leaderboard all get tickets.
tickets for the top 10 on leaderboard but have competition for the prizes. Say 3 prizes then can do 3 contest and/or for 3 of the weeks be a specific core update winner (thread or say photo contest winner)
tickets for the top 10 on leaderboard but use the prizes and host a cross social media contest with them.
Can always do 1-4 and then also have a month with the current leaderboard format as well.
Can do a combo of 1-5. 1 Prize will be for the top 1, 1 prize given to an update winner, and/or 1 winner from the 200 point pool winner.
Changing the dynamics of the current points set up could 1. cause additional issues or 2. reduce the ability that some folks may need to get points for leveling (I know on Anker, you can always hear how the lack of points now is making leveling a real grind)
Just my thoughts.
Some nice ideas @Duane_Lester.
I like #1 specifically… and may suggest in addition make it randomized each month so it changes… but then that’d be #2… 
I’d also like to see that the top spiff, doesn’t go to same person in consecutive months… 2nd and 3rd place spiffs would be ffa each month.
Curious as to how constant nattering and comments directed to some of the newer members makes things fun and welcoming community?
I like 2 a lot. Encourages activity, doesn’t put a high pressure target on getting the most points. Number 1 makes it even more painful as people try to stay at the “sweet spot”.
I don’t think leveling matters much around here, so not too worried that will be an issue. The benefits to leveling up aren’t that great with how far apart the levels are.
The funny thing is when I first came here the same few people were always at the top 3 positions. I continuously finished in 4th (out of the prize). I don’t remember any of you guys complaining then.
Now that a different group of people are in the top 3, we suddenly need to change how the leader board works. I wonder if it could be the people that are finishing towards the top now aren’t in the same clique as the ones that use to finish in the top 3? Just saying.
I finished in the top three a number of times, and regularly asked for changes to the system while doing so. See a few threads, lots of comments on other suggestion and discussion threads by others as well.
Then I took a break from the community that lasted most of a year. Back now (but in moderation), still pushing for a better system.
Glad you have found the opportunity to win some cool stuff! Hopefully you will still have the opportunity in a system that encourages wider participation if they change it.
Well I can say with certainty that when I was finishing in 4th, no one was complaining (that includes you).
I also don’t quite understand how giving someone who finishes in 10th (with ~100 points) the same opportunity to finish in the prizes will encourage others to post more? If anything it would seem to encourage the opposite. Why try for the top spots if all you need to do is finish in the top 10? It’s only human nature.
PS I didn’t finish in the top 3 last month.
My suggestions were intended to benefit everyone who finishes 4-10 or who opts out of participating because they have no chance today. Whether that counts as complaining on your behalf is up to you.
If a new system increases the incentive to be in the top 10, it will encourage more people to try for an achievable goal with a valuable prize possible. So activity goes up, but more distributed. 100 points to be on the leaderboard is a historic low mark for this forum, over 200 is more common, I would expect it to be 300-400 with prizes for the top 10. So 1-5 might be somewhat less active than now, but 6-15 would be more active. I like that balance.
Especially if the rules prohibit winning more than once every few months, it rotates winners through.
It has nothing to do with cliques or when people started to complain but all is about the health of the community. There has been several changes to the leaderboard based on actions of past leaderboard winners as far back as the early parts of the first year of the site creation and not recently.
https://community.soundcore.com/gallery here is a good example… this was taken away due to pictures were basically being done and it was the same shot but at different angles. (like take a pic and step back 7 paces and take a pic)
As I had to state to somebody else who held the same reasoning that it was due to cliques . I always thought we all on the community were all in the same cliques. If you are hearing rumblings of change it has been mentioned off and on since the beginning of the site and throw in a year and 1/2 of inactivity in the Anker community and a fear that the communities was going to be dissolved for other social media outlets
Have you not seen the current user section. After the top 5 commenters it is almost null. If there are only 3-4 people trying for the top then I would almost be certain that number of people commenting to be 8-9 or 10 would be increase several times trying for the bottom. ( It would be more active as folks would try to stay at that magic number. As somebody else jumped into the 10th place then you would have to comment to take it back.)
The big question is why not give folks at the 10th place an opportunity to win or not even on the leaderboard a chance. If they can not dedicate that amount of time but will participate some and are coming to the site, I think that qualifies them.
In that way of thinking, why not just put everyone who posts during the whole month’s name in a hat and draw 3 winners? That would encourage everyone to post, not just the top 10.
That would probably work. A random selection from top “X” where points not including new threads would mean it moves from the same few to more. X = 10 needs thinking, I don’t have a view.
Note I didn’t write “great deal” or “thanks for the share” reply which can happen when folks trying to not truly engage to farm points.
This is why I prefer talent based competitions as the mundane points farming doesn’t work. Also why I don’t like random as you simply get a few hundred replies of folks who don’t care for the community.
Posting a reply like thanks for sharing a good deal or interesting story doesn’t mean that you also don’t make posts that answer others questions or try to help them solve their problems.
If someone chooses not to do that it doesn’t make them better than someone who does. The, my posts are better than other people’s posts is both subjective and and tiresome. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
On the last day of the month, as it’s much quieter now when the leaderboard winners are safe, and the traffic is closer to what it is naturally as if the leaderboard prizes didn’t exist, I think your idea where a random winner from top X would today have all the traffic from all the members trying to get in / stay in would be active today.
While I still prefer talent based competition, knowing that is an effort on the judges, your idea looks today the best one. It would keep the community more active all through the month, especially towards end of month.
Sent in the spirit of the more active members the better the support and ultimately the better products we all receive.
This month is amusing, because steve could pass vertigo by getting the full 25 points today - but probably doesn’t want to for the better prize at 3rd place.
The same thing was an issue on the very first months leaderboard - those who were going full out for the top 5 spots with huge itunes gift cards were trying really hard, and then everyone who preferred a $100 soundcore coupon to a $50 itunes gift card were doing very little and trying to stay at 11-15 instead of 6-10.
Duane has that Motion+ locked up - hope that is as nice of a prize as it appears, looks like a very solid speaker.
Existence of prizes brings activity, the way you win drives nature of activities. Anker has a random select prize now and it’s caused > 100 users. The leaderboard drives… 6 ish users?
For sure when no prize many disappear but some stay, so the most active is an open system.
I would only be able to pass him if he let me because he had a 19 point lead going into today.
Truth be told, the prize I really wanted was the Motion + because I already have a lot of Earbuds and Headphones, including the Q20+, but Duane crushed us. Congrats @Duane_Lester. 
All that being said, you finish where you finish and I’m grateful for any prize that might come my way. Heck, I’m grateful to wake up each morning!
In conclusion:
I put in my best effort each month and let the chips fall where they may.
ISTR Duane won a lot of the weekly competitions like music choices.
I’m well aware of that. I wasn’t saying he didn’t deserve it, he did.
You bring up a good point though. You don’t finish in the top 3 buy just posting, you also have to win some competitions along the way. That’s why I think it would be unfair to change the way things are done. If you put in the effort, you should be rewarded.
All that being said, if the powers that be want to change the way things are done, then they will. If they want to take a more Socialistic approach, like putting everyone’s name in a hat that posts in a given month and drawing winners, that’s cool with me too. I’m flexible. Personally I think rewarding effort is best, but I don’t make the decisions.
I fully agree with rewards for effort. There’s plenty done right here I’m not suggesting changes (photo of week, thread of week etc) where there’s a reward for contributing meaningfully.
I suggest try a different approach for a test period and see if it drives up engagement or makes it worse.
Not sure I’d go with the word socialist. To show how inaccurate that is I could make an equally incorrect view the current method is Oligarchy where the few get far more than the many.
Good products come from listening from consumers, that comes from support, beta testers and a highly engaged community.
Some really “old, fantastic regulars” were disappearing in the past.
These I am really missing.