The current Project of the Month article has one or two paragraphs dedicated to why the staff picked the project for the award. For every award winner these reasons are similar - updates during the month, attention towards the project, having a certain quality, or it just being evident that the project deserved it. If articles with just that information appeared frequently, it would be too obvious and trivial to even list the information. The purpose of having an interview is not only to give the site actual content, but to get new and helpful information from the developers working on the project.
I have stated that I am in support of having something to where there would be a news article series which would be more frequent. There are sometimes when only giving kudos to one project a month is wasteful when there could have been multiple projects which had some merit. I don't think however that the Project of the Month should be at all scrapped because it is something which is worth the effort of having it. In its ideal state when we have good months (read: just because this month isn't good doesn't mean all further months will be as bad), it represents an award for quality with quality. Having a coexisting lesser, more frequent news article series for projects would help address quantity and would help out.
But overall, and this is the real kicker, any ideas are worthless without people both willing and able to do them themselves or with help. The sad thing is that I know for a fact that if one person really tried they could do the Project of the Month as it exists now mostly by themselves; I've had to do this for most of them while busy with school, it isn't hard. I mean really, ten questions and filling in a template - easy as pie. Even if what you had was easy, chances are it'd still be a pain in the ass for others to help out with it.
Meh, and I remember when we had the Project of the Week and at that time you and others, myself included, thought that changing it to Project of the Month would be for the best - because at that time no one was having any updates. With what you're proposing now, the idea of the frequency for when it possibly arises can be a good thing, but if it got to be where someone would post an update and the staff would be like "woo look at what just came out, did you see it?", well they probably already would have and we'd just be wasting their time.
