Why I miss old clickies: a lament...

[The Coil]

Ok this is my last post on the subject of clickies (I promise), and probably my last post on this forum (*sniffle*). It's been a good run. RD has spent enough of his life responding to my essays on clickies...

A few final thoughts (and let me say, RD, I agree substantially with most of your previous post, and I disagree with some areas. I shall focus here on my disagreements, just because it's a lot more interesting that posting something along the lines of "yup!". And anyway, if I agree with you, I can just give you a clickie to quickly and easily let you know...oops, wait, already gave you one, so it'd be pointless to give you another. :P)

So if we can give the the ability to spread clickies freely, will members abide and handle the responsibility as adults? What kind of assurances can be offered to rectify this? I don't mind the 20 or so emails a week I get about club questions and issues, but if they suddenly grow in double or triple size and are relative to clickies, then it becomes something of an irritant. :rolleyes:

Did you get this volume of emails (aside from ones from you-know-who) under the old system? If so, I understand completely. If not, why would you expect to get them by returning to multiple clickies?

As for your suggesting that the clickies system is making the posting counts here go up or down, I find that completely unsubstantiated and feel many other effects are in play for the slow down of posts in the club overall.

I'll give you that there are other effects in play. Doesn't change the fact that clickies are one such effect. I'll address this a bit more later in this post. But really, this is an arguement that can't really be resolved beyond "I think it does, I think it doesn't". Not saying you're wrong, not saying I'm right, just saying nobody can really claim to know all the reasons for sure why the post count has gone up or down. All I'm claiming is that old clickies had a positive effect on the number of posts. I think that's an unassailable conclusion. All you need is one person to say "Yes, I posted more under the old system". We've got at least one, in $hirr$Leto. What might be up for debate is wheter or not clickies have a significant or desirable effect on post count. The first one is essentially unknowable, the second completely subjective. This is one of the reasons I have no stomach for organizing a "change the clickies" campaign. It essentially comes down to a subjective judgment call, one that is going to get made with or with out my opinion. I'm not annoyed by that, that's just the way it is.

I'll even contest that most of the members here that utilize the rep system are not affected or influenced in making their posts here by this.

I assume you meant the opposite of what you wrote in the first sentence there. And I'd agree with it in the positive, ie "most of the members here that utilize the rep system are not affected or influenced...etc." But I don't think I ever made the counter claim. I'd argue that there are some prolific posters are influenced by it (beyond just me and #hirr#Leto, too, btw). But again we're in the realm of "I think/you think". My minimal claim (and again, I think unarguable) is that some (I shan't offer a percentage) posters are influenced by it, generally in a positive manner.

Claiming that a new clickie system is the downfall of our community and thus reducing members' interactions with each other is simply preposterous.

Never claimed it was the downfall of the community, just that there was a drop in postings when the new clickie system was instituted. I think old clickies encouraged posting. There's less now that there would have been if the system hadn't been changed. And that sentence as you've written it is preposterous. It's got the cause and effect backwards...my point has always been that the new clickie system reduces the opportunities for interaction, which will thus lead to the downfall of the community. Although "downfall of the community" is a bit stronger than I'd have put it (unless I actually used those words earlier, in which case I stand by them totally. ;) Stupid long threads...you forget what you've said... ). And to me, preposterous is arguing that clickies don't affect the amount of posting that goes on here in a thread that is 8 (maybe nine by now) pages long with over 800 views.

All older game forums are slow, any game that is 5 years old is not going to have a lively community outside of newcomers asking questions and opponent searches. What is the expectation for any forum to reasonably thrive, a year past the game release? 2 years? most don't make it 6 months...

...To expect the CM community to get a major rise of activity without any releasing of new components is wishful thinking, to suggest it would get a rise from a clickie system revamp is plain silly.

As I've said before, this is precisely the problem. Old game forums don't have much going on generally. The Blitz was different for the last six months with the rise of the clickie. It was exactly the "new thing" that spurred conversation. I bet half of the significant threads on this forum since I first typed "clicky" while taunting POS contain some reference to clickies. Maybe they're silly, but it's hard to deny they played a significant role in the life of the board for a while. How many recent threads besides this mention clickies? Not many, I'd bet you. Old clickies were fun, new clickies are less so. I'm not arguing anything deeper than that. For me (and I think at least some other people here, again, I wouldn't venture to guess how many), more fun = more posting. Since it's become less fun, I've posted less. Not because I'm greedy for clickies. Not because I'm impurely motivated. It's just not as much fun, so I do it less. Simple as that.

What is the benefit of allowing multiple clickies, as opposed to 1 opinion rating per member.
No real benefits, as it is not substantiated that clickies increase or decrease any activity amongst members in posting or doing samaritan tasks. I feel members post when they feel like it and always strive to help each other out irregardless if they were getting a clickie or not.
1 rating of a person should be enough to show your feelings about them. In the past system, this was questioned, but not enforced upon.

As I've said earlier, it is substantiated. It affects @hirr@Leto's posting, it affects mine. That the effect exists is unarguable. How significant that affect is is arguable. But the reality is neither you or I have anything but an intuitive guess as to the significance of the effect. So at best I think you can say "the benefits are at minimum small, but the real effect is unknown". To claim "no real benefits" is misleading at best.

How is the giving of more clickies promoting more posting and member interaction.
If members are simply wanting clickies in order to do something around here, then it's time to shut the place down.
TheBlitz was not built on clickies it was built on membership loyalty and common interests. I don't see any ties between the clickie system and Blitz livelihood.

Once again, go back to my pickup basketball game example from my first post. What you're saying here is something like "I can't believe people want to keep score when they play basketball. If people can't just enjoy the game for the love of basketball, we should just stop playing". There's a surface logic to it, but it's way too simplistic to deal with what is really going on. It's not that anyone is saying "If you won't give me a clicky, I won't post", even though -hirr-Leto pretty much said that. But if you read carefully what he (and I) are arguing it's a bit more subtle. It's more "clickies were a fun, meaningless, silly thing to talk about. Now that they are gone as we knew them, it's less fun to post here. Therefore, we post less. Not because we're mad. Not because we thought clickies were important in any reall sense. They were just fun." People keep trying to make it into this sinister "I only post in order to garner precious clickies" thing that I don't think anyone was ever into.

What methods are going to prevent abuse of the multiple clickie giving between members who simply give them without regards to the overall purpose of the system?

Suggestions? or perhaps this wasn't even given a thought? I saw mention there MIGHT be a way around this, but no solid ground. I know how it is handled now and would have to resort to the same methods unless other ways are more convincing.

Umm...I made several in response to your last post. But I'll say it again, it's pointless for me to make suggestions, because I have no idea what's feasible. I'm just pointing out problems...I leave the solving of them for those who are willing and able to. I go to my mechanic and say "My engine is rattling". He doesn't say to me "Well, do you have any idea how I should fix it? Or haven't you thought of that". He suggests a way to solve it, and I say "that sounds good". Difference is, I pay my mechanic, so I have higher expectations that he'll care about my percieved problem. I expect you (and whoever else is relevant) to make your own assessment of the problem and possible solutions, and whether or not it's even a "problem". I don't expect you or anyone else to jump when I say "this is a problem", as indeed you have not. :) I was originally just bringing it up as a "you might want to think about this" kind of thing. You have have thought about it, and apparently don't see it as a problem. Again, this is why I'm not real interested in agitating across the forums for change...it doesn't matter what we think, you guys running the site will do what you think best. Again, not complaining, just pointing out this is how it works. I think it works pretty well, given the relative health of the Blitz. I just disagree with your assessment on this particular issue. Which is fine...reasonable people disagree all the time.

What is/are the fault(s) of the reputation system and is it/they correctable?
The biggest fault lies in the misconstrued concept that rep points actually count for anything more than a common rating of how people might feel about your actions past and present.

Hehe...now that's not quite fair. You asked yourself about faults of the rep system, and answered with a (perceived) fault of those who are pro-clickie. Speaking of misconstruing, I shall say it one more time, in the hopes that this silly straw man argument shall go away: Nobody thinks rep points count for anything. I certainly don't (although I think my clickies for prizes idea should be re-looked at). I haven't seen anyone else claim they thought clickies count for much of anything. So I'm not sure who this claim is directed at. In fact, I care about them even less than that, in as much as I don't even pay much attention to them as rep points.

To some they are rewards for action, but this dulls them and they become worthless in terms of value, due to excessiveness. Some claim they are special, but since anyone can give them out, they are a common as potatoes. Some claim they are incentives, but they might start to look like bribes just to get things to happen with repetitive use.

I think it is you who are starting to take them too seriously now. I'll say it again. They were fun. They were a fun thing to talk about. Slinging them back and forth was fun. People posted more because it was more fun to post. I freely admit this is a perverting of the intent of the rep system, but it served a more valuable function than the rep system does.

No one will be happy with the reps or without them, it's a typical human trait to find fault with even the simplest of things, all for the sake of debate.

Again, I think you're overdoing it on the hyberbole. Nobody will be happy, with or without reps? We're all doomed to unhappiness? Dang...

As to the second part of that sentence, well, sure. That's what makes threads like this fun.

What is the benefit of starting everyone over from scratch with the new system?
I see none, as older members have earned their reps over the last several years. To restart them in favor of new members or even because of a new system is like telling a General he's back in KP duty, because we have a new pay scale.

Ok, starting over may be too extreme, but it seemed to me like the simplest solution (in terms of work involved for whoever). The best solution would be to have old clickes (those given pre-change) and new ones counted in the same way...that is, you should only get one rep point from each member for old clickies. As it stands now, if someone multi-repped you before the change, they are still counted multiple times in your rep score. New ones are not. Resetting might be unfair to the old folks, but leaving it as is renders rep scores meaningless. Imagine if the that happened with ladder points: You instituted a change wherein games only gave you one third the points they used to, but kept the point totals the same from all previous games. It'd render the stats pointless.

Where do new members earn the right to obtain equal rep points without even putting forth the time and efforts of the older members who have already posted all their tips and helpful advice time and time again?

Careful, RD, you're starting to sound like you think people care about rep points.

Whether or not coding changes to facilitate adapting certain features of both old and new systems is possible, lies entirely in the hands of Raz :)

Yeah, we both keep telling each other that as if the other doesn't believe it. That's why I haven't offered many solutions.

So to close my book here I say this.
Clickies are only as important as folks make them out to be. :whis:

I've said this before, but I'll say it again here, because it kind of sums up my major confusion about the "why do you care about clickies" camp: I don't understand how anyone can ask that question with a straight face who posts their results on a ladder site. Why do you care about ladder points? "I don't," you respond, "I just use it for record keeping". Ok, why do you care about your record? Of what possible significance is that? Why bother to keep track? Can't you just play for the love of the game? If people are only here for the stats, we should close up the Blitz... At least, that's the analogous arguement. They're both about meaningless numbers...but it's more fun when someone is keeping score, even meaningless score.

Anyway, that's all I've got to say...

RD, McI, everyone else, thanks for your work making this board happen. I (and others) appreciate it. It will go on long after clickies, I'm sure... But it'd be too bad if you threw away all the fun clickies brought to the board, I think...[/quote]