The issue of the title has been discussed , a vote was conducted and the matter was closed. I begin to suspect argumentum ad nauseam at play.
Anyway, looking on the bright side, you are free to start your own competition. Fill the ballot card with obscure titled players who don't play here or contribute to the community. Good luck with that.
GMMelik is a very strong site contributor. I'm happy to see his name there. Surely the title welcomes everyone?
I'd like to nominate Kayden Troff for his blog and IM Shankland for his blog, doing well at US chess championship and also being 366 days older than me but being a GM candidate
I think we should drop the "Chess" from the title of the award - that way we could reward social popularity with a Player of the month award.
GMMelik is a very strong site contributor. I'm happy to see his name there. Surely the title welcomes everyone?
Of course and giving a proper reason for a member goes quite a way towards justifying the nomination, especially when many of us have never heard of a proposed member.
If you look back through the months you'll see that members I've proposed have had a couple of paragraphs, extolling their virtues, linking to their best games and achievements.
It's the arbitrary nature of TheMouse's nominations that rankle: I'll nominate this list of titled players (that don't play here)! what, not allowed? I'll nominate an alternative list of titled players!
Where's the appreciation of one's fellow contributors?
Aww.. you want the title, too, PrawnEatsPrawn?
#3 PrawnEatsPrawn (I think I remember we could have 4 nominations, or something of the likes?.. I can't quite remember the rules 'to a tee' but anywho, I'm sure someone will set me straight if I'm wrong..) because you have a funny username.
#4 TheMouse. You got guts. I'd be bawling and 'laying low' if I got hissed at the way you do.. because I'm a sook. And, you also have a funny username.
What's with these funny usernames? I'm not knocking it.. I'm just saying - some of the usernames on this site are just hilarious! The profile pictures even more so..
I'm not even eligible, ProKnight is under instruction not to accept any nominations for me. 
Stick around a while, you'll get the hang of it.
LOL. I don't think Cystem_Phailure wanted to be nominated either, but there he is (.. he he..) on 'Schindler's' list.
WE LOVE CYSTEM_PHAILURE!! (lol.. I don't think he'll flick the birdie, like a certain Russian woman did - geez, that was daft)
I am so insecure I have no aversion to trophies, awards, attention. I would settle however for someone to comment on my crossword (titled Chessword).
I've not looked into that yet. Kinda.. er.. spread myself thin joining and participating in these chess.com groups, getting a hammering from my opponents (not enough tutorials for me - too busy on here.. and in the photo section.. and in my group(s) homepages.. and.. well.. lots of distractions here..)
I'm not addicted. I just like a lot! GIMME GIMME GIMME
Anywho, Chessword, eh? Will get back to you on that one..
I am admittedly spending too much time on the forums. I have a tourney group imminent to start and do not want to take on more games in case I am overloaded.
Nominations from me: (for now)
sjpdna for being a great friend and for doing so much to help my group "Child's play" come a successful way since September 2010.
Chessword - good setup. I only knew three answers in that crossword, though. I've been playing chess about as long as I've been a member on this site, which isn't very long... but, that's not to say I'll stay ignorant to 'the world of chess' - 'slowly but surely' said the turtle to the hare..
Anywho, this is CPOTM, isn't it -
FunMum #1 Cystem_Phailure #2 (TheMouse #3) for reasons I explained earlier.. oh to fight the urge to campaign..
You can save one of those nominations and use it for someone else-- I nominated Mouse back in post #21 for his amusing stubborness and not getting it (and he continues to amuse), and he's already on the list of candidates. As for his age, I hadn't looked at his profile until your comment, but what difference would age make anyway? There's no age limit, high or low, that acts as a license to post without responses. There's also no way to know whether listed information is correct, either-- according to their profiles, we have a lot of members who were born in 1900. 
List:
trysts
pdela
fullmetalalchemist
nonowho
Estragon
Cystem_Phailure
TheMouse
Elubas
Conquistador
FunMum
artfizz
Windows-7_
Here_Is_Plenty
kco
TheGrobe
oinquarki
VMikhalevski
kaidanov
mParagua
GMMelik
sjpdna
There's nothing wrong with TheMouse' nominations. You lot are just picking on the player because you looked into (his?) profile and had a look at (his?) birth-date (like I did). No way you'd be so eager to jeer at TheMouse' comments if TheMouse was ..just....a..bit...older...
SET THE ALARM!! AGE DISCRIMINATION HERE!!.. WOOOOAAAAAOOOOOWWW (that's a poor attempt of a 'siren sound' by the way..)
Hilarious!
Why thank you, oinquarki..you got it, though going by Cystem_Phailure's last post, I'd say 'can't win 'em all..'
The only thing wrong with his nominations are that they are for players who have zero visibility on these forums and will likely score lowly. Of course he may nominate whomsoever he wishes but really, what's the point?