Subject:
|
Re: BZP hits 7,000th member-Lugnet is lagging behind.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 1 Jun 2003 05:17:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
869 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Laswell wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
> > So what? Sorry Dave, you are just coming off as bitter here.
>
> I'm sorry you feel that way, but it was not the intent. My intent was
> primarily to point out that this was an apples/oranges comparison, and also to
> help defuse another Brick Vs. Bionicle argument before it could happen.
But why? The original post had nothing to do with what you replied to. You just
took his post as an invite to bonk BZP on the head. And for what? Was it really
to "help defuse another Brick Vs. Bionicle argument before it could happen"? I
strongly doubt it. It seems that the only person that is still talking about the
Bionicle vs. the rest of the Lego community is *you*. You seem to take evrey
chance you possibly can to try to remind people about it - why? That is last
years drama, please let it return to the grave from which you have brought it
back from, please.
> I figured if people could see that there's not such a huge difference in the
> number of people who post to the two groups, they might not see this as a
> reason to harbor resentment for the popularity of Bionicle
Agian, here you are bringing this up - and for what? You are the only person
still making any amount of noise on this still. Maybe you have not noticed
Bionicle and Bionicle parts are no longer being treated like the stepchild they
once were treated as. That was back in 2001 and part of 2002. Let me welcome you
to the year 2003, where people have gotten over it and actually like it now.
> Comparing paid LUGNET memberships to free BZP sign-ups (including those
> who don't even post to the BZP forums) is a faulty way of looking at the
> situation,
Um, no. AFIK there is no way to tell how many memebrs have signed up to post
here on Lugnet. I am sure it is quite a bit higher than the paid members. You
know, not everybody has trouble figuring out you do *not* have to pay to play
here. AFIK the number of 'you have to pay to participate' forums are very, very
small compared to the free membership sites.
And keep in mind that Lugnet and BZP have the same basis of memerbship. Both are
free to play - and for both if you would like to pay you can do that. There is
*no* difference between BZP and Lugnet in this matter. You seem to be making a
big deal about how BZP is free - so why are you not making a big deal about
Lugnet being free as well? It is easy to see that memebrship is free here on
Lugnet, as well as on BZP.
> I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that there's not really any positive
> sentiment for anything Bionicle related here anymore.
Yet again you bring up a dead issue. Really David, I wish you would just drop
this. You posst something about this in almost every songle one of your posts.
Why oh why must you keep beating a dead horse? Let it go already. And the
setiment towards Bionicle is the best it has *ever* been here on Lugnet - it is
only recently that it has been started to be embraced by the AFOL here on
Lugnet.
> Saying that you have the most popular forum because you have 7000 members
> is misleading. It suggests that you have 7000 people actively participating
> in your forums. I have yet to see a response that actually comes forward and
> states clearly how many people do actually post instead of skirting around
> the issue, much as you just did.
David, we never said we were the most popular because we have over 7,000
memebrs. We said we were the most popular forum based on the number of posts we
get a day. We get more posts in a day than Lugnet, FBTB, and Lego.com gets in a
day *combined*. That is what brought the claim on, it had nothing to do with the
number of members. Heck, we still had more posts than the other big forums had
when we had 5,000 memebrs. And I am basing it on posts per day -- a huge
difference. Post per days means people who are posting NOW, not everything built
up for 2 years
> I saw Rich point out that you deal with duplicate accounts when it comes to
> voting in MOC contests, but there was no answer to my question as to whether
> you can guarantee that there aren't people who create duplicate accounts just
> to increase their chances in the random giveaways. Given the percentage of
> current BZP members who signed up just for the Rahkshi giveaway, I'd be
> shocked and amazed if there wasn't at least one instance of this, but I've
> only heard about it being discovered in regards to contest voting.
I'm sure that some people do try to register duplicate accounts to enter the
contest more than once. However, BZP has an IP checking device that checks the
IPs of members to see if a dupe is registered. Obviously dialps lie AOL hinder
this wall of protection, but it has worked well enough form what we have seen.
I'm sure the count of number fo vistors per day at Mask of Destiny is a bit off
too, as the same individuals may check MoD at school, then check again at home.
That one person then counts as two unique visitors.
> > You are so far off here it is funny. No matter what age group you aim for
> > there will always be people that post just because they like the sound of
> > thier fingers hitting the keyboard.
>
> Who said this has anything to do with age? All I'm saying is that if there
> are rewards for posting, you'll see an increase in the number of posts that
> people make. Some of them will be relevent, but a lot of them won't,
You just proved what age had to do with it right there. It is the age range we
have where if they thing sometihng is cool they will probally say somehting like
"hey thats cool! I like it alot" where somebody here on Lugnet would give a more
detailed reason why they like it and why they think it is cool. Many memebrs on
BZP are not at the level where they can come up with a post on the level of say
Tim Courtney - but is there anything wrong with that? Of course not. And are we
to punish the kids who just say somehting like "hey, thats cool!" when that is
the level they are at? I sure hope if you ever have kids you do not hold them to
some silly standard like it seems you want us to hold the kids at BZP to.
> and my experience was that only the most blatant of count-boosting posts got > dealt with.
You do not have any idea in any way, shape or form what we do as far as
punishments. We deal with the overwhelming vast majority of problems behind the
scene in PMs. We try to keep it out of the public eye because as a rule, we try
not to pubically punish people. Yes, at times we do make it public, but thats
just for a reminder that yes, these things are wrong. So please do not try to
make assumptions on something you have no idea on. And the most common form of
punishment is a loss of posts - this goes directly agianst your incorrect
theory.
> Considering the amount of discussion that revolves solely around the
> reward structure, you can't honesty tell me that you believe there aren't any
> BZP members who start looking around for threads to contribute to when they
> get close to the next post-count level.
If you really have noticed an "amount of discussion that revolves solely around
the reward structure" then you should have also noticed we close 100% of those
topics as soon as we see them and remind them that is not what being a member of
BZP is solely about. Yes, the kids may like it. And yes, I am sure some look for
posts to reply to when they know they are close to the next level. But is this
keeping you up at night or something? Why is it bothering you so? It is not
hurting anybody, and as long as they are not spamming it is ok. Many of the kids
find some post to post in and do add something of substance to the topic. And
there is nothing wrong with that at all.
> If they're posting just to get new ranks, how well does that represent the
> popularity of the forum in general?
Seriously, if you think that is the only reason the kids take part on BZP you
really meed to take another look. The popularity of our MOC contests are
unmatched anywhere, and thats only a small portion of what BZP has to offer. The
ranks are just an extra. Ya, some people do care about them, but again, is this
keeping you up at night or something? Really David - who cares other than you?
> Without getting a clear answer on how many people actually post on BZP, the
> total post count is a highly inaccurate means of measuring forum popularity.
Nope, not at all. There is no way we can give you a number on how many memebrs
are 'active' on BZP, there is no way *any* forum leader can tell you how many
memebrs they have that are 'active' in their forums, there is just no way to do
it. Why you ask? Well, how do you define 'active'? I am sure if you ask 100
different people on how often you participate on a forum you must make to be
considered 'active' you will get 100 different answers. Person A may think his
one post a month means he is 'active', where person B may thing that is not
'active'. So you see, the level of 'activity' is pointless - there is just no
way you can define what 'being active' on a forum means. And even if a memeb has
0 posts that in no way means they are not 'active' - they may be very active im
PMs, trades, voting in contests and entering contests.
> > And I noticed you failed to mention that we do regular sweeps to clean out
> > non-active memebrs.
>
> Actually, I didn't.
Actually, yes you did. You did not mention in any way that we clear out memebrs
on a regular basis, or any basis for that matter.
> I just figured there was a high likelihood that dead
> accounts might still be counted in the total member tally.
You figured wrong. Say we have 500 memebrs and 25 get swept out for whatever
reason - the member count will say 475.
> It's simpler for
> software to move on to the next consecutive number than it is to go back and
> reuse dead ID numbers,
Maybe for the software you use, but that is not how ours works.
> and if the official membership tally involved just
> looking at the highest ID number, you'd be counting every dead or banned
> account, no matter how regularly you cleaned them out. When you say that you
> have 1000 members and that Joe Somebody is your 1000th member (and I do
> remember something like that happening), it does kinda suggest that no more
> than 999 people have previously signed up for memberships, including people
> who might not still be around.
lol, you do not remember anything like that happening because it has not. I am
not sure if you just have a bad memory or if you are flat out telling a lie. Our
forums do *not* behaive like that at all. We *never* made any sort of
announcment for memebr #1000. The only members we touted were #3,000 and #5,000.
Memebr IDs (what the software uses) and memebr numbers (what is dislplaied) are
2 different numbers alltogether.
> Saying that your forum is popular because of members that don't actually
> use it is nothing more than pure misrepresentation.
Again, we did not, and will never make that claim based on the number of
members. We are basing it on posts per day -- a huge difference. Post per days
means people who are posting NOW, not everything built up for 2 years
> > You know, it is you that compared the members on Lugnet to the members on
> > BZP - but do you know that had nothing to do with Alex's post?
>
> Really? So the fact that he said LUGNET is lagging behind in membership
> means what exactly?
Why would you think it meant anything different than what he said? He wanted to
suggest some improvments to Lugnet that may attract new members - plain and
simple. Thats what he said, why would you assume differently? You know what
happens when you assume....
> Could it be that he's concerned with the idea that a forum dealing with one
> single theme is seeing more action than a forum dealing with all LEGO in
> general? I think he probably is, and rightly so.
Agian, why would you assume more than what he said? And even if you *really did*
assume that - why would you go off and take all the cheap pot-shots at BZP for
no reason? I still say it is bitterness plain and simple.
> On a smaller level, the whole Bricks Vs. Bionicle thing is unhealthy for
> the LEGO community in general. The people on both sides are missing out on a
> lot of great building potential, both in regards to MOCs and the community in
> general.
AHHHHHHH! I seriously want to scream! You just keep going back and back and back
and back to a *dead issue*. I am serious, you are the only person still hung up
on this for whatever reason. Maybe it is because you missed it when it actually
was an issue - but it matters not. This is a dead issue and all you are doing is
reminding people of a not-so-pretty period of Lugnet history. It is time to move
on David..
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: BZP hits 7,000th member-Lugnet is lagging behind.
|
| (...) I'm sorry you feel that way, but it was not the intent. My intent was primarily to point out that this was an apples/oranges comparison, and also to help defuse another Brick Vs. Bionicle argument before it could happen. I figured if people (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
