"Changing the Hot 20 isn't NEARLY enough to do that. But let's take it to it's logical end, instead of thinking that you can win the war with the first shot. Let's say you DO somehow magically make the Hot 20 a list of the 20 best images. To do that you'd need to form a committee to decide which images are worthy. This committe would have to be chosen from all the members here. Then you'd have to make sure that they're morally upright and of unimpeachable character so that they won't vote in THEIR pals. Then, once implemented, this committee would need to peruse every image posted to the gallery to decide which are the best. The Hot 20 would then be a static gallery, because then the committee would have to wait until someone posted an image better than the worst of them in order to update it to the current best." What if you appoint a new committee (jury) of six-or-so members drawn from a random pool of known active accounts? What if jury membership rotates every two weeks? What if the nominees for the Really Good 20 are drawn from those 50-or-so images that garner the most hits in the sample week? Don't you then get a reasonably fair sampling of the group aesthetic in terms of hits plus juried selection?