I was, and still am, trying to clear up what the things are that you feel need improving. No reason to try out solutions when the goals aren't yet understood.
The intent behind the "FAQ" idea seems like an odd mix of trying to filter out the mass of "theory" topics (the actual FAQs by definition) and/or group together the "decent discussion" topics (a minority selection of posts by whatever criteria that is judged). The Golden Quill awards was a regular post designed to highlight a group of "decent discussion" posts, but ran into issues as people felt jilted by not having their contributions "officially" recognized. Which makes sense - why should one user's "Scientific Nature of Spells" discussion be more "valid", "valued", "important", or "superior" to someone else's extensive and highly-participated-in roleplay? What does highlighting and awarding one type of post over everything else accomplish other than to alienate the fans of and contributors to the mass of entertaining, fun, casual, and demonstrably most popular topics?
It seems there is little to be gained by "officially" choosing the "best" posts. However, fans of these different interests can self-organize and create their lists of own favorite posts any time they want. Again, if user(s) wants to create a "Decent Discussion" club and organize topics, they are welcome to do so. But to try and have some official ranking or categorization of posts as "better than others" does not appear to be supportive of, or productive for, the fandom as a whole.
ETA: No, not mad at all. Sorry if it seems that way, just trying to sort out what was intended as many of your posts on this topic are laden with value judgments about what is "decent discussion" - as this is only your opinion, who would know what posts qualify other than you?