Sounds like someone, or some people are having a tempertantrum. My suggestion: Charge everyone for playing, those who don't want to play because they don't like it will have two choices, pay or leave. Since nobody wants to pay for what they don't like you get rid of the whiners.
Sounds like someone, or some people are having a tempertantrum. My suggestion: Charge everyone for playing, those who don't want to play because they don't like it will have two choices, pay or leave. Since nobody wants to pay for what they don't like you get rid of the whiners.
Charging everyone for playing wouldn't leave BS out of whinners. On the contrary. Most of the whinners are active players that feel that their expectations about the game were frustrated. I spent §45 dollars here, and regret every cent. It will be interesting to see if the first BS premium members, whose membership is about to expire, are going to renew or not.
If other premium sites were run like BS you would see the same sort of reactions. To say the BS whinners are part of the problem is the same as saying that someone buying a defective product is responsible for the defect and not the company's fault. Not saying the current owners didn't do their best. They have the merit of trying.
My advice to future owners, if any: Learn with the errors of current management. To insist in "more of the same" is the fastest way to long term disaster. Hint: The techinical problems weren't the main problem. Lack of communication was.
No one ever thought that your trying was wrong, it was the response of management to the players that was the main issue.
I asked a simple thing, to make sure that the ideas were dropped on an even basis, and the result was my being called a whiner, told to deal with it and resultant messages still refer to me obliquely when time schedules are mentioned. I paid for my membership almost immediately on starting to play this game, and I think it has a LOT to offer. What I think it lacks is some consideration for the people who pay to play it, and some willingness to listen to them without slapping them down for making a comment. As Afonso said, communication is important. Not listening to people and dismissing them or attacking them for something isn't communication and can be the biggest problem with this game.
As it is, I still enjoy playing, I just don't see any point in conversing with anyone in the forum, where I'll just be attacked again.
Although this "is a joke", the placement of the link on the B$ front page admin section indicates that it is clearly meant to be read. I hope that the 'joke' part isn't meant to be a means to respond to reactions by saying "have you no sense of humour?".
It is a reasonable observation that there are two broad sets of opinion regarding the systemic nature of the game. On the one hand there are those who favour what I have come to call a 'token' game and on the other there are those who favour a realistic game (this is the opinion that I subscribe to).
I liken it to the difference between Chess and WarGames. Both are representative of battle. Chess is a game of formalised tokens, whereas WarGames is far more realistic.
Clearly both approaches have validity. The reason why I favour a realistic game is essentially that markets need to be driven by human behaviour in order to be balanced and self-sustaining.
The downside of basing the game on tokens is that the game will consistently require a large amount of administration. This has been proven to be true both by the time that the game was with Seyed and with the current team.
It is highly unlikely that I am going to change my opinions on these matters. I have given them deep thought and have discussed them in depth with the admin team and others in #blogshares and the forums.
My question is this: am I to understand from the detail of the eBay auction text that my opinions are not welcome and that I should depart?
BTW: If I had $75k to spend, I would spend it a writing a game that more closely corresponded to my conceptual vision rather than buy Blogshares.
@ Rob, if there's someone that tried it's you. Or at least I see in you the most visible face of someone that worked hard to correct the game technical problems. That's why I wanted to come back. If someone deserves some recognition it surely is you. But the lack of communication and clear objectives for the game created an hostile environment. Will give you an example that you may understand. Imagine that you buy a hosting package for your site of 100MB of space, 5 GB of bandwidth, unlimited subdomains, etc. In the 1st month everything goes fine. In the 2nd month you notice that the rules changed. You now have 50MB of space, 1 GB , and 10 domains. In the 3th month the guys decide to change it again. This time to 200 MB, 10 GB, and unlimited domains. They also decide to give you a free month as a compensation. All this mixed up with lack of communication from the hosting company. Every time you contact them, they call you an ass because you know nothing about managing a webhosting company. Later you found out that a few clients were given extra space because they're friends of the owners. This is how I ever saw BS.
I never runned or intend to run a company, but every manager knows there should be some clear rules for others to follow. You can't change rules everytime someone whins, or to soften rules everytime a friend takes advantage of a game bug. In that Seyed was a good manager. He had a plan and followed it liked we or not. Lack of communication yes, but I remember he never changed his attitude about the use of API's and tried to create a friendly environment for developers. He had a strong will and didn't change the rules according to the wind. He also didn't favored his friends, for what I remember.
BTW, like Alan, if all of a sudden I had all that money to spend I would also prefer to start from scratch.
Well, one thing that can be said, is that at least this piece of information is very clear. What I read is basically: suck up or shut up. Might sound funny to some but it's not my kind of humour.
As often has been said, this game is no democracy. While in the past I was under the impression input from the community was valued (although perhaps I should already have had doubts, seen the use of words like STFU and BOOHOO), at least now it's very clear that only a certain type of input is actually valued. It's okay to praise, it's not okay to criticise.
It might be a tradition to build upon screwed things (as this tradition was already set by previous ownership, with each major change to the game having unexpected side effects and no effective corrections being made), and it might be nice to feel superior and display signs of arrogance or whimsicality, make fun of people etc., in my humble opinion it's not the road to success.
Afonso mentions favouritism and I don't think this game has ever been free from favouritism. Not when Seyed still owned the game, and not now either.
The argument that ownership has spent thousands of dollars, isn't impressing me much. It shouldn't be an excuse for bad management. The argument the plug can be pulled any moment, isn't impressing either. If it's too expensive, if not enough gratitude is expressed, then do pull the plug.
I'm a longtime player and I used to be a very active member of the community. My premium membership would have expired, if it wasn't for the free two months that I probably should be thankful for, for the rest of my life. This doesn't change the fact that it is highly unlikely I'll be renewing my premium membership.
Here is some reading material: http://www.site-reference.com/General/Don-t-Forget-Your-Existing-Clients.php (Don't forget you existing clients), http://marketing.about.com/library/weekly/aa070203a.htm (Customer relationships are key to your marketing strategy), http://www.bath.ac.uk/imp/pdf/47_EriksonVaghult.pdf (Effects on new customer acquisition by retained customers in professional services [pdf file]) and an amusing story about customer support: http://ecommerce.internet.com/how/customers/article/0,3371,10363_1568881,00.html
I just did a quick Google, and there might be better sources. Not everything might be applicable but I'm pretty sure you might learn a thing or two.
I've been silent about things that already bothered me for a longer time, because I also spent lots and lots of time at #blogshares, and considered some to be online friends. I was told there was no need for me to add to the bitching, I've gotten sarcastic comments and I've been called a spoilsport. To me friendship isn't about agreeing with each other all the time though. So, as you might have noticed, I've decided to speak up. Not only behind the scenes as I've tried, but in public as well.
I appreciate the amount of time dedicated to BlogShares by e.g. Rob and Áine, even when at least Áine mentioned on the forum she is employed by BlogShares (as I wonder how many hours she spends and how much she gets paid). I'm sure they would have liked things to be different. Unfortunately things are what they are and I see what I see.
Want to throw me out of the BSEC for that reason? Be my guest. Want to ban me? Once again, be my guest. At least I will have spoken my mind.
WOW, I am impressed. Morgaine, finally decides to speak up. Now, doesn't it feel good? To speak up, whatever the consequences are? Doesn't if feel really good? No sarcasm. Really. Just shocked. Congratulations. You probably whon a place in the BS Hall of Whiners. But, personally, who I really would like to see speaking up is Aine. If that day ever comes I will eat my hat (as if I have one).
Afonso, I am enjoying your much calmer method of dissent. I think you are becoming more effective at conveying your message.
Alan, Bingo. Even at US$150/her, twice the product in half the time. I have the experience to know that is not a bogus estimate but based on actual experience. The eBay auction would be construed as a joke even at 1/10th the price.
Morgaine, I have a much greater appreciation of your opinions. Lately I've noticed you speaking up and every instance seemed balanced, fair, and poised very legitimate concerns. I apologize for not giving your opinion more respect in the past, but that was mostly cause you rarely aired it. I wish you had aired your opinions more.
To current management, The whole problem can be summed up simply. You insisted on treating this like a private little toy, but became surprised when others had different expectations. Not knowing all problems traced back to that is the problem. All other actions seemed to stem from that fundamental misunderstanding.
MLT, thanks, but it's not my merit. It's easier to be relaxed when you don't get a STFU as an answer to your arguments.
BTW, just my opinion, but I really don't think it's a good idea to extend premium memberships for the 2nd time. That way people won't give proper value for that fact. It's the same as saying I love you to everybody. The word looses its special meaning. It would be more fair to extend memberships according to players karma. 100 karma gets one free month, 200 karma, 3 months, etc...That way the subliminar message would be: If you actively contribute to the game you will be rewarded. To reward all premium members at this time just means you're afraid they don't renew. But, using an american expression, or whatever...that's just my 2 cents.
Also, as every marketing professional will tell you, a company shouldn't give away something that the consumers don't see as a bonus or improvement. Why the hell you think that when you buy some package with extra size as a bonus they paint it of another color? So you can notice the difference in size! Even net companies have a special page about the improvements from previous software versions! They don't do it because it's cool. They do it for us to say: ahhhh, these guys are so cool. How to achieve that effect in BS? Use a diferent color in the profile of the lucky players whose membership was extended.
I will make mine M's words. Do some reading about management practices. You may learn a few things...some of them are pure common sense applied to managing a business. It's not rocket science. Your children case you have them can teach you a few things as well.
I've been around pretty much since the beginning with this game. I've worked my way up into the top 10 players list. I've seen my own ups and downs in this game. I've had co-op play (of which I do not now by choice of my wife and friend). I've gifted shares to many folks. I've helped other out via bonds, etc. I've seen my networth valued at over 202 Trillion B$ at one point recently.
Yes, I am rambling. I say these things to support my commitment to this game and community of players. I've got my share of those who don't like me too. We all do. If you are one of the top players you have a target on your back. MLT knows this firsthand as well as a few others.
I'll be a target now too. I'm a premium member who feels like non-renewing when the time comes. Yep, non-renewal.
Why you ask? No offense to Rob for he is trying the best he can. I appreciate his contributions and chats in #blogshares regarding code changes and tweaks. I'm considering this because the game itself doesn't have much substance at present, more specifically, the ideas market. Above that I feel the premium members are not being taken care of. We are the main folks who have supported this site. Non-premium folks have the free ride. We at least paid for our participation.
In any business, you take care of the paying customers. Period. You also want to make yourself marketable to new customers to buy your service.
Will I be branded a whiner? Of course. I'm not worried about it. You know what. I can gripe, I'm a paying customer. Well.. at least until it's time to renew. Then I get to consider, "Do I want to continue to play a game of which offers very little risk and minimal enjoyment at present" or will I consider, "Wow, I've seen some changes and strides here that have improved gameplay, I think I will give them a chance."
I haven't seen the improvements overall. I've seen moments of hope through Rob's tweaking, but not enough to for me to consider staying on as a premium member.
I know I am not the only one who feels this way. I believe many, many more premium members are not getting their "dues worth."
My B$ worth for ya'll. Thanks for the time. Rob, thanks for your hard work. Aine, you too Evil Queen.
Question: Going on the thought about Seyed sticking to his guns, should I further modify the ideas market algorithm to relax it's restrictions and adjustments, so that things where the way they were before - with the same problems?
... or should I say "It's still gameable, learn how"?
Why does it have to be all-or-nothing? Why not listen to the constructive comments rather than attacking everyone?
If you give everyone a Monopoly board and then throw a bunch of Parchesi pieces at them with a rulebook from Cluedo how can they make sense of the game.
As it stands, the ideas aren't being released with anything resembling the frequency stated in the previous 'press release'. It's better to fix one thing at a time than try to strip down the entire machine. And the first thing to be repaired would be customer confidence. I'm another considering not renewing my Premium membership.
Uhm, Su, how about you take a chill pill? ;-) I was simply putting Afonso's words about Seyed in mind, and asking everyone for an opinion regarding what should be done regarding the ideas market. This may need to go to the forums at this rate, but there's a few small holes in your argument, most likely not because of ignorance, but because these things are not generally known...
At 00, 15, 30 and 45 minutes past the hour, a script is run to produce ideas. The first thing this script does is... go to sleep, for up to another 15 minutes. The timer is randomly factored for each generation, this method has been proven to prevent anyone getting the upper hand by knowing in advance when ideas will be produced, even the admins don't know. With this timing scheme, ideas are still produced on average every 15 minutes, you see. Idea production is absolutely dependant on one thing, and that is the spiders. At the time of writing this, they have checked 515,174 blogs in the last twenty-four hours, about 80% of the entire stock index. On each production run, all of the blogs checked since the last run are factored in - tallies of industries, total values, links, etc, there's anywhere from 2,000 - 15,000 blogs included each time.
There are a few factors against idea generation:
1. If none of the blogs checked are in any industries, no ideas.
2. The "dead forest" - currently about 70,000 blogs that are not parseable for one reason or another, previously at 140K before a bunch of 404 blogs were removed. It still takes the spiders a few *hours* to get through these, during which time virtually no ideas will be produced. Code is slowly being formulated to automatically stop parsing these blogs after a certain number of failed attempts, after which point it can be manually re-activated, or will be checked at a much lower frequency. Until then, each time the spiders complete a run, they start from the top again, every blog, every time.
3. The spiders suffer from a lack of garbage collection, and possibly a few memory leaks. Over time they slow, and need restarting every few days. Usually that's always happened, but can be a factor.
4. If the spiders are stopped for a period of time, which usually does not happen unless circumstances absolutely require it, no ideas will be produced.
I promise you, idea production is scheduled at the frequency I posted on the front page, and so far, in response to feedback in #blogshares and the forums, I've been tweaking the algorithm. It's effects vary, but I think some will be happier so far.... oh, and I also believe in fixing one thing at a time, wish it were always that easy.
As the game currently stands, it faces a fundamental dichotomy: either the game resorts to being a money-printing machine, or the game faces certain sclerosis as the top ranking richest player list becomes fixed in stone.
I know that the choice seems stark, but that is because it is.
At the end of last week, I undertook a simple analysis of the top ten richest players and their holdings. The results of this analysis make for interesting reading.
Currently, there are two types of top ten player: 'old' and 'new'. The 'old' are those who earnt their ranking over the lifetime of the game. Examples include MLT, Morgaine, and myself. The 'new' are those who took windfall gains from the changes (crash, followed by real hyper-inflation of ideas prices). Examples include Demonsurfer and David Rutt. A couple of players are effectively hybrid - having initially earnt a top ten place as 'old' player, but who currently have a balance which looks like a 'new' player: mars/iris and Just James are examples.
* The ideas holdings of 'old' players are typified by flat holdings counts across industries with low peak holdings, and a large industry count.
* The ideas holdings of 'new' players are typified by very large spikes of idea counts in a limited number of industries, along with a small industry count.
* Hybrids have a holdings curve like an 'old' player across many industries, with a small number of significant peaks overlaid.
What are the figures behind these patterns. Let's have a look at some players:
MLT: (old player)
10m ideas held in 798 industries, with 3m ideas held in the largest ten industries by holdings.
mars/iris Securities: (hybrid player)
338m ideas held in 722 industries, with 262m ideas held in the largest ten industries by holdings.
demonsurfer: (new player)
482m ideas held in 37 industries, with 472m ideas held in the largest ten industries by holdings.
Note that these are simply chosen to be indicative.
We can start to see the shape of the problem that faces Blogshares here. The 'new' player type has gained massive ideas holdings that currently underwater, representing unrealised gains.
I did some further analysis to discover a bookable value for these unrealised gains. I asked Rob what the 'normal' ceiling price of ideas is currently. The answer: B$100k. Now this only represents a 'normal' ceiling and prices are actually able to rise above this ceiling under certain circumstances. It is therefore reasonable to assume that players will not dispose of ideas unless this nominal ceiling is reached - therefore we can use this to quantify the bookable unrealised gains. The numbers are astonishing:
Remember, this assumes that players do not dispose of ideas at 'extraordinary' prices.
At this point in time, it worth reiterating that a large number of 'excess' ideas have been removed from the public market, and that code has been implemented to prevent the aggregation of ideas in future in the public market. This means that a) these players hold the vast balance of all issued ideas, and b) when they dispose of these ideas nobody else will be able to have holdings such as these, let alone at the purchase terms that these players were permitted.
The dichotomy is now laid bare - either these players are permitted to reap their rewards and let ideas resume their 'traditional' pattern to enable other players a chance to compete, or lock down ideas pricing with restrictions to prevent such a massive increase in money supply to the game and accept that no other player will move into the highest ranking of richest players.
What is the way out? To me, it seems that the only alternative is to reset the game, or directly reset individual players to remove the aberrant effect of recent changes.
Nasty choices. I discussed all this in depth with Rob in #blogshares, so I can't be accused of pulling in on the blindside with this analysis. It seems that the choice of Admin has been to ignore this information.
Ummm, Wolf, how about taking a pill yourself. One that makes you listen to the entire section here of people NOT just me pointing out that customer relations are the thing that keep a company going. And this IS a company, isn't it?
I've watched the idea falls off and on over a few days, and sometimes not a single fall in an hour. If you get so het up about what I say, why bother replying to me. After all, if I was at a customer service window making the same comments, certainly your first comment to me wouldn't be 'take a chill pill'. It's a shame you haven't taken a look at Morgaine's comments or MLT's about being responsive to your customer base. You really do seem to have a problem with anything I say, no matter what it is. As it stands, I was correct, here or in a forum my comments aren't welcome. So be it. I'll just keep playing till the game collapses or dies from lack of paying customers.
At the risk of repeating others that have posted here before me, I hereby post a message that has been on the shelf for some weeks now. The tone of voice may be unusually harsh compared to my usual one, but I think it is time to stop treating a fatal disease with just band-aids. Or, as we say in Holland (freely translated), soft healers make stinking wounds.
I agree on calling the main problem one of poor communication, poor customer support and poor management.
Regarding the changes in the ideas market (that are in themselves fine), for instance, players should have been properly warned before they were implemented. You don't change calculating factors in the game if they can render a lot of work/time worthless (values of portfolio's have been greatly decreased) and then announce these changes after the fact (when the harm is already done).
This manner of conduct shows us that we are nothing more than pawns in some VERY misplaced megalomaniac ego trip of inconsistent ppl who obviously do not take players that have supported this game, whether financially (by becoming premium members) or just by playing and sticking around through shitty times, seriously.
A flagrant disregard for what creating a community is all about is becoming core value here. The increasingly defensive tone of voice from the people in charge is a sign that they have no control over this thing whatsoever. Which almost certainly means that most suggestions we all may (have) offer(ed) will not be taken into consideration.
As an inevitable consequence, I hereby announce that I will not be renewing my premium membership. I may or may not resign from the game entirely by that time, depending on how the current owners respond to the well-deserved criticism posted in this thread.
On a personal note: hats off to ya Rob (and others that have worked like devils to keep this thing afloat, despite current ownership), but I strongly urge you to stop trying to please everone and to start using your common sense. Spend the time you have available on things that are worth it.
To the owners: I agree with people who imply that the best course of action would be to break B$ down and to start over instead of trying to fix the unfixable. A word of advice: in doing so, keep it simple and make sure it works properly. Then, and ONLY then, incrementally enrich the gameplay experience by adding well-tested functionalities to the game, after extensive market research.
And it might be a good start in trying to repair your massively damaged image to apologize to the entire community. You have been behaving like spoilt little kids that over-confidently went on an endeavor that has proven to be WAY out of their league (or in other words: that miserably failed at succesfully dealing with the challenges that came along with taking over B$) and that now stubbornly refuse to acknowledge it.
But I also realize that having said all this, from your point of view anyway, I have made it impossible for you to do so without seriously losing face.
A classic Dilemma 695 that is easily resolved by letting go of your own point of view for a minute. That is all I ask for. Funny how it seems so little to some and so much to others...
Rob, the answer is in Dodo's words. You seem to be a talented guy, but you're not a fireman are you? For what I understood a few days ago the current owners don't even recognized your work.
But that doen't look strange to me, looking at the way I was banned and re-banned, and at the way players that I have always seen as strong supporters of this site were treated. No need to list the names, 'cause they know who they are. I guess that them as me only come back to check BS because we remember of how funny and lively it used to be during Summer last year. At least that's what makes me check back. Hopefull that one day the sell sign is not a joke and that someone WHO REALLY LIKES THIS GAME, tries to make it a place where bloggers from around the world can meet and have some healthy fun. I do respect your effort, patience, and above all the time spent here, but I DO NOT RESPECT kamikaze owners who think that running a site is just putting some money into it and expect it to grow for itself. Of course the result would be disastrous. It's the same as having a kid, give him some toys, and come back a few years later wondering why the hell he shows no love or afection to you.
Hope is the last to die, but at this stage I think it would be better to slowly change my visit rates. Maybe in a month or two it changes ownership, or the new owners change their attitude, or maybe not and it all stays the same.
Take Dodo's advice Rob. People should be where they are valued and respected, unless you're like those captains who are the last ones to leave the ship.
Sad to see you leave Su. For this short period you seemed like a very nice player.
I forget to say. In the remotely chance that things really change here and that you decide that portuguese language blogs deserve a decent place here (after all there's more portuguese language blogs than farsi), and in the remotely chance that you think that portuguese language bloggers would be very welcome and deserve a decent manual, you know where to find me. Adeus.
Su... I have tried again and again to explain things to you, only to get a response back that indicates that you just want to be argumentative. There's a smiley right after that sentence about the pill, it's meant in jest, not trying to shove said pill down one's throat. Now I think you need to take the red pill. ;-)
I bother replying to you simply because I do care about what people in this game want. Sure, I'm not that way every single moment, partly from differing conditions, partly because I'm sub-human. If I didn't care, prices on a variety of industries would not have risen to the points they have now (not at previous rates, but 3x higher than they were before), or for a better non-directly related example - the artefact completion tool wouldn't have been written.
There will ocasionally be periods of hours when no ideas will be produced, the alternatives are that I finish up code to handle such 'bad' blogs, a couple of hours worth of coding at the most, or watch for then the queue ends and manually delete out the first 50K or so - which I've done twice recently. In fact, the spiders are slogging through the bad ones right now.
---snip---
2004-05-10 16:16:55,776 : INFO Thread-5 LinkParser - Worker 1 finished 50 urls in 1068secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:18:06,199 : INFO Thread-18 LinkParser - Worker 14 finished 50 urls in 6147secs (1 successful)
2004-05-10 16:18:23,926 : INFO Thread-25 LinkParser - Worker 21 finished 50 urls in 1783secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:18:31,837 : INFO Thread-9 LinkParser - Worker 5 finished 50 urls in 1220secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:20:52,723 : INFO Thread-23 LinkParser - Worker 19 finished 50 urls in 986secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:23:13,197 : INFO Thread-27 LinkParser - Worker 23 finished 50 urls in 1364secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:26:24,487 : INFO Thread-6 LinkParser - Worker 2 finished 50 urls in 2323secs (1 successful)
2004-05-10 16:26:48,027 : INFO Thread-24 LinkParser - Worker 20 finished 50 urls in 1718secs (0 successful)
---snip---
See those times? And either none or one out of those 50 checked actually succeeded. Here's what it looks like when all is well...
---snip---
2004-05-10 12:41:53,833 : INFO Thread-28 LinkParser - Worker 24 finished 50 urls in 132secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:41:59,795 : INFO Thread-24 LinkParser - Worker 20 finished 50 urls in 152secs (49 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:02,934 : INFO Thread-16 LinkParser - Worker 12 finished 50 urls in 136secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:07,384 : INFO Thread-25 LinkParser - Worker 21 finished 50 urls in 156secs (49 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:09,009 : INFO Thread-19 LinkParser - Worker 15 finished 50 urls in 148secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:11,753 : INFO Thread-29 LinkParser - Worker 25 finished 50 urls in 134secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:12,540 : INFO Thread-12 LinkParser - Worker 8 finished 50 urls in 153secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:12,553 : INFO Thread-15 LinkParser - Worker 11 finished 50 urls in 199secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:16,463 : INFO Thread-10 LinkParser - Worker 6 finished 50 urls in 133secs (50 successful)
---snip---
See not only the difference in success rates, but the difference in the time taken? THIS is why at times no ideas will be produced, and unless I sit down and figure the code out, or babysit the queue once a day, it's going to happen again and again. A few days ago I worked extensively on the indexing errors tool, which is tied to delisting, to try to clear some of the mess up. Put about 2 hours into it, and it still needs a bit more before it can really go to town without delisting PB and Blogger.com in the process - yeah, several of the Top 100 are 'bad', but I can see the uproar if they get delisted. Blogs come and go, it's not a problem that will cease of it's own accord, the bad urls will build just as the index itself does.
Anyway... it actually feels a bit funny when you're talking about MY customer base, etc - more than anything I still consider myself a 'volunteer' to the cause. While I am officially employed by B$, it isn't exactly turning a profit yet, but I'm happy to keep working on the game anyway. This does not mean that I'm exempt from paying attention to peoples' wishes or requests, far from it. Just saying that while it may not matter to the marks who paid their $15 and just want to play, this whole time I've been working on the code because I like the people and I like tha game itself. To me, that matters. Want to help? Socialize, help prioritize and then herbalize. :)
Su - It would please me greatly if you would visit #blogshares sometime, and if I'm not there to chat, ask people about SubWolf (except for C, he lies). You may find I'm not the bastard you think I am. Then again...
Final thought - Three major priorities on my mind are:
1) Getting these bad blogs handled properly.
2) Rewards for karma.
3) Fixing the ideas market.
Afonso - it's not like I've had thousands of dollars thrown at me already in return for my work, it's appreciation from the game players that matters to me most. Of course, there's the downside that one receives negativity also, but in many cases it's worth it.
... and yes, I wouldn't be first to jump ship if we struck an iceberg... but perhaps I wouldn't be last, either. ;-)
Update: Creamed 50K blogs from the top of the spider queue when I got home, wasn't enough to get them clear out of it, but don't really want to prevent those that are accessible denied a look.
Also: Delisted 3,659 blogs a few minutes ago that had never been indexed, generated an error at least three times, and were absolutely not in the Top 1000 blogs. Will be utilizing other queries to safely remove as much as possible.
Oh gosh, I'm easily amused but I'm having a heck of a good time by watching all the techno folks run around and all the aspiring gazzilionaires running around here.
I'm mostly having fun finding those quirky blogs to fill the voids in the content of the offerings and I've read some pretty good blogs whilst exploring. I've learned a lot of stuff I didn't know before and some I wish I didn't now know.
I've been involved in online groups ever since the early days of CompuServe. Anyone here remember trading message using ASCII and then DOSCim? I was a volunteer staff member on the old CompuServe fibercrafts forum and wore out a few pairs of asbestos knickers doing that job. Volunteers in charge never do much of anything right - it goes with the territory. It will be nice when someone has time to slot in a few more artefacts and some moguls to work on the content.
Thanks to those who make my hanging on the phones easier by letting me play the time away. It may creak a bit, but Blogshares is the best act in town of its type. Yep I'll renew and hope it keeps on going.
Well, I'm glad I'm not going to be the only one renewing ;o)
I'm impressed that this hasn't descended into flaming, and there have been some good points made. Whereas I do agree that some people need to learn a bit of Diploma-C (;)) I prefer to look on the optimistic side and see where we are now as compared to later on last year.
The game has improved no end since Seyed era - Rob, C and others (assuming that they've had a bit of help from a few little helpers) have done wonders with the code. Sure, there have been a few little hiccups that have accidently created huge wealth, but on the whole I think that the game is so much more playable now than it was 6 months ago.
Rob has spent no end of time making Blogshares better for everyone, and whereas not everyone will agree whether the gameplay changes are for the better there have been changes, and these have been led by the community. He's done what you wanted and tried to make the game better. On the whole, he has. Man, that hug is still available if you want it ;o)
I do hope, though, that some of this constructive criticism is taken on board. I know that it appears that everyone's having a go at you, but that's not the case. There are many players that care about this game, so please don't be disheartened and see what they are saying.
This game (and it's community) can go places, and perhaps there is some bad medicine to be had in order to make it happen, but whatever happens I'm not going anywhere. You can count on my $15.
Cheers, Rutty: I realize that credit has to be given (which I hereby gladly do) for what has been done so far with the code. From a technical point of view, things seem pretty ok. At least, to a technical nitwit like me.
I still stand, however, by the criticism given in my earlier post, even after a lenghty debate in #blogshares.
I am not going to repeat my arguments, they are already stated in the mentioned earlier post. I just wanted to acknowledge the fact that there have also been some benefits to the game as a result of the takeover.
>Su... I have tried again and again to explain things to you, only to get a response back that indicates that you just want to be argumentative.
I'll say this in a very nice, smiley way then. If I disagree with you, that's an argument, right? Ok, I'll agree with you then. It's a great game, you've worked like mad to get it running, I was thrilled when it was resurrected after Sayed dropped it with little or no warning. I love the game, it's great fun and I am going to miss it like mad when my account is finally removed as per my request in the forum.
> There's a smiley right after that sentence about the pill, it's meant in jest, not trying to shove said pill down one's throat. Now I think you need to take the red pill. ;-)
Smileys don't always make a comment right.
> Anyway... it actually feels a bit funny when you're talking about MY customer base, etc - more than anything I still consider myself a 'volunteer' to the cause. While I am officially employed by B$, it isn't exactly turning a profit yet, but I'm happy to keep working on the game anyway. This does not mean that I'm exempt from paying attention to peoples' wishes or requests, far from it. Just saying that while it may not matter to the marks who paid their $15 and just want to play, this whole time I've been working on the code because I like the people and I like tha game itself. To me, that matters. Want to help? Socialize, help prioritize and then herbalize. :)
Among many others, I offered to help. I suggested valid industries and got blown off. I offered to mogul, and got ignored. I moderated industry votes, brought blogs into the game and helped friends with their problems. I was active in the forum, and got abused for being a 'whiner'.
You have a base of people out there who would help with bits of the game to get it running better. The only thing I ever wanted to do was _help_. I would have happily re-indexed every flippin' blog in the industry I offered to mogul, and could have found a dozen or more blogs instantly to fill the industry I suggested. Plus, a few more who came in because of the BlogShares logo that used to be on my blog. It may only be a small percentage of the overall blogs brought in but multiply that by the others who have spent time writing industry suggestions, artefact suggestions and offered to be moguls then you'd have more people who are sitting now and twiddling their thumbs because no one is paying attention to their willingness to be used to help the game along. Watching the stuff in the forum, the discussions show that it's one game for the 'old timers' and another for the many hundreds of people who don't make trillions, but enjoy the excitement of coming in every day and seeing their stock rise a bit or making enough to buy another share or an idea. There are a LOT of those 'smaller' players. Not everything in the world revolves around the 'big' players. Like any pyramid, they would't be on the top without all the rest below them. Don't play Yertle the Turtle, because all it may take is one small 'yop' from someone down below to make it all collapse.
>Su - It would please me greatly if you would visit #blogshares sometime, and if I'm not there to chat, ask people about SubWolf (except for C, he lies). You may find I'm not the bastard you think I am. Then again...
And I'm neither the whiney bitch or a stupid cow that people think I am. I have a lot of love for this game, its the only one I've ever liked enough online to play regularly. I just don't like being told I'm stupid and also watching the offers of people who would willingly volunteer being ignored. You lose a LOT by only allowing the chosen few to click a few buttons. What would it hurt? How much damage can a mogul do? And on the other hand, how much good can a few people do if they want to help out.
You're not Atlas, and it's unnecessary for one or a few people to shoulder all the burdens of a game that you claim is pretty much a volunteer set-up. Open the door, let a few of them in.
Final thought - Three major priorities on my mind are:
1) Getting these bad blogs handled properly.
2) Rewards for karma.
3) Fixing the ideas market.
Which one is more important?
If the blogs are the clot in the system, getting them done is important but do they make any more of a difference to the game than before?
Karma can wait, it's not been a feature of any importance so far, so get the existing structure repaired before plugging in something new.
Idea markets are the place where people get their fun and the rush of trying to get ideas or sell bonds for big or little bucks. I'd get it fixed before I bothered with Karma, because it's something that players already rely on heavily.
I hope you do find some people to help out, they are out there and who knows? You might find a few gems in the lot, who have time, interest and the right skills to help the game along. I know of at least one, don't waste the chances being offered. And no, that one isn't me. I'm just marking time till my account is shut down.
Let's back off of Rob entirely. He's busy making a living as well as helping out tons in this game attempting to make it better for all people playing the game; not just the "top players" but also the non-premium members too.
Su, I've offered to help too many times over. I even pleaded to C regarding helping the BSEC in an official capacity as was declined. Am I upset about that. Not really. It's their choice and I respect that even though I may disagree.
There are aspects of this game and community I don't like that much. There are also aspects of this same thing I do like.
Rob is working steadily on different priorities (many are equal in comparison in the big picture of things) of the game to help all players.
We just need to wait. Let's be patient and more enocouraging and we will see better attitudes and more productivity.
Why? As games change, even when we don't like the changes, we as players need to adapt. With the present changes taking place, I have found a way to adapt. Even when it meant swallowing some of my own selfish interests in how I wanted the game serve me. The community here is good. Thanks Rob for disagreeing with me at times. Even in disagreement there is respect. I am here out of respect for the game, the good and bad. As Rob would say, "Cheers."
It's priced FAR to low IMHO. This game could easily outpace the traffic/indexing of Yahoo/DMOZ. Please do not sell it for less than Hotmail sold for. If you want some suggestions as to how you could make more (real) $ with this site, hit me up on AIM/Yahoo "yesiliveinaustin"
The first thing to do is mirror all the useful indexing information on other domains: (industry).blogsharelinks.com or some such formula. Use all the "karma" information and compete direct with DMOZ and Yahoo (and sell results to Google and the others). Using this model--of COURSE you will win for many reasons. 1. The concept is genius--I can see the referrer stats of sites that I don't own! 2. You ask for recip links, unlike (the fools!) DMOZ and Yahoo. 3. Blogshares is simply fun, unlike Yahoo and DMOZ 4. There's a community and I'd say you will have a better reputation than Yahoo. DMOZ was supposed to be "open" but power corrupts and the moderators over there can't be trusted to maintain a quality resource. 5. Don't just stop at blogs. You can use this same system to evaluate anything! 6. There's much more that I could say here--but I'm planning a book about blogshares for $
Comments
Sounds like someone, or some people are having a tempertantrum. My suggestion: Charge everyone for playing, those who don't want to play because they don't like it will have two choices, pay or leave. Since nobody wants to pay for what they don't like you get rid of the whiners.
That is my two blogshare cents.
Subskipper
Posted by: Bernard | May 8, 2004 05:20 PM
Sounds like someone, or some people are having a tempertantrum. My suggestion: Charge everyone for playing, those who don't want to play because they don't like it will have two choices, pay or leave. Since nobody wants to pay for what they don't like you get rid of the whiners.
That is my two blogshare cents.
Subskipper
Posted by: Bernard | May 8, 2004 05:20 PM
Charging everyone for playing wouldn't leave BS out of whinners. On the contrary. Most of the whinners are active players that feel that their expectations about the game were frustrated. I spent §45 dollars here, and regret every cent. It will be interesting to see if the first BS premium members, whose membership is about to expire, are going to renew or not.
If other premium sites were run like BS you would see the same sort of reactions. To say the BS whinners are part of the problem is the same as saying that someone buying a defective product is responsible for the defect and not the company's fault. Not saying the current owners didn't do their best. They have the merit of trying.
My advice to future owners, if any: Learn with the errors of current management. To insist in "more of the same" is the fastest way to long term disaster. Hint: The techinical problems weren't the main problem. Lack of communication was.
Posted by: Afonso | May 8, 2004 06:17 PM
Afonso, perhaps you're right.
... but we did try.
Posted by: Suburban Wolf | May 9, 2004 01:14 AM
No one ever thought that your trying was wrong, it was the response of management to the players that was the main issue.
I asked a simple thing, to make sure that the ideas were dropped on an even basis, and the result was my being called a whiner, told to deal with it and resultant messages still refer to me obliquely when time schedules are mentioned. I paid for my membership almost immediately on starting to play this game, and I think it has a LOT to offer. What I think it lacks is some consideration for the people who pay to play it, and some willingness to listen to them without slapping them down for making a comment. As Afonso said, communication is important. Not listening to people and dismissing them or attacking them for something isn't communication and can be the biggest problem with this game.
As it is, I still enjoy playing, I just don't see any point in conversing with anyone in the forum, where I'll just be attacked again.
Posted by: Su | May 9, 2004 01:40 AM
Although this "is a joke", the placement of the link on the B$ front page admin section indicates that it is clearly meant to be read. I hope that the 'joke' part isn't meant to be a means to respond to reactions by saying "have you no sense of humour?".
It is a reasonable observation that there are two broad sets of opinion regarding the systemic nature of the game. On the one hand there are those who favour what I have come to call a 'token' game and on the other there are those who favour a realistic game (this is the opinion that I subscribe to).
I liken it to the difference between Chess and WarGames. Both are representative of battle. Chess is a game of formalised tokens, whereas WarGames is far more realistic.
Clearly both approaches have validity. The reason why I favour a realistic game is essentially that markets need to be driven by human behaviour in order to be balanced and self-sustaining.
The downside of basing the game on tokens is that the game will consistently require a large amount of administration. This has been proven to be true both by the time that the game was with Seyed and with the current team.
It is highly unlikely that I am going to change my opinions on these matters. I have given them deep thought and have discussed them in depth with the admin team and others in #blogshares and the forums.
My question is this: am I to understand from the detail of the eBay auction text that my opinions are not welcome and that I should depart?
BTW: If I had $75k to spend, I would spend it a writing a game that more closely corresponded to my conceptual vision rather than buy Blogshares.
Posted by: Alan Dean | May 9, 2004 01:59 AM
@ Rob, if there's someone that tried it's you. Or at least I see in you the most visible face of someone that worked hard to correct the game technical problems. That's why I wanted to come back. If someone deserves some recognition it surely is you. But the lack of communication and clear objectives for the game created an hostile environment. Will give you an example that you may understand. Imagine that you buy a hosting package for your site of 100MB of space, 5 GB of bandwidth, unlimited subdomains, etc. In the 1st month everything goes fine. In the 2nd month you notice that the rules changed. You now have 50MB of space, 1 GB , and 10 domains. In the 3th month the guys decide to change it again. This time to 200 MB, 10 GB, and unlimited domains. They also decide to give you a free month as a compensation. All this mixed up with lack of communication from the hosting company. Every time you contact them, they call you an ass because you know nothing about managing a webhosting company. Later you found out that a few clients were given extra space because they're friends of the owners. This is how I ever saw BS.
I never runned or intend to run a company, but every manager knows there should be some clear rules for others to follow. You can't change rules everytime someone whins, or to soften rules everytime a friend takes advantage of a game bug. In that Seyed was a good manager. He had a plan and followed it liked we or not. Lack of communication yes, but I remember he never changed his attitude about the use of API's and tried to create a friendly environment for developers. He had a strong will and didn't change the rules according to the wind. He also didn't favored his friends, for what I remember.
BTW, like Alan, if all of a sudden I had all that money to spend I would also prefer to start from scratch.
Posted by: Afonso | May 9, 2004 07:43 AM
Well, one thing that can be said, is that at least this piece of information is very clear. What I read is basically: suck up or shut up. Might sound funny to some but it's not my kind of humour.
As often has been said, this game is no democracy. While in the past I was under the impression input from the community was valued (although perhaps I should already have had doubts, seen the use of words like STFU and BOOHOO), at least now it's very clear that only a certain type of input is actually valued. It's okay to praise, it's not okay to criticise.
It might be a tradition to build upon screwed things (as this tradition was already set by previous ownership, with each major change to the game having unexpected side effects and no effective corrections being made), and it might be nice to feel superior and display signs of arrogance or whimsicality, make fun of people etc., in my humble opinion it's not the road to success.
Afonso mentions favouritism and I don't think this game has ever been free from favouritism. Not when Seyed still owned the game, and not now either.
The argument that ownership has spent thousands of dollars, isn't impressing me much. It shouldn't be an excuse for bad management. The argument the plug can be pulled any moment, isn't impressing either. If it's too expensive, if not enough gratitude is expressed, then do pull the plug.
I'm a longtime player and I used to be a very active member of the community. My premium membership would have expired, if it wasn't for the free two months that I probably should be thankful for, for the rest of my life. This doesn't change the fact that it is highly unlikely I'll be renewing my premium membership.
Here is some reading material: http://www.site-reference.com/General/Don-t-Forget-Your-Existing-Clients.php (Don't forget you existing clients), http://marketing.about.com/library/weekly/aa070203a.htm (Customer relationships are key to your marketing strategy), http://www.bath.ac.uk/imp/pdf/47_EriksonVaghult.pdf (Effects on new customer acquisition by retained customers in professional services [pdf file]) and an amusing story about customer support: http://ecommerce.internet.com/how/customers/article/0,3371,10363_1568881,00.html
I just did a quick Google, and there might be better sources. Not everything might be applicable but I'm pretty sure you might learn a thing or two.
I've been silent about things that already bothered me for a longer time, because I also spent lots and lots of time at #blogshares, and considered some to be online friends. I was told there was no need for me to add to the bitching, I've gotten sarcastic comments and I've been called a spoilsport. To me friendship isn't about agreeing with each other all the time though. So, as you might have noticed, I've decided to speak up. Not only behind the scenes as I've tried, but in public as well.
I appreciate the amount of time dedicated to BlogShares by e.g. Rob and Áine, even when at least Áine mentioned on the forum she is employed by BlogShares (as I wonder how many hours she spends and how much she gets paid). I'm sure they would have liked things to be different. Unfortunately things are what they are and I see what I see.
Want to throw me out of the BSEC for that reason? Be my guest. Want to ban me? Once again, be my guest. At least I will have spoken my mind.
M.
Posted by: Morgaine | May 9, 2004 09:51 AM
WOW, I am impressed. Morgaine, finally decides to speak up. Now, doesn't it feel good? To speak up, whatever the consequences are? Doesn't if feel really good? No sarcasm. Really. Just shocked. Congratulations. You probably whon a place in the BS Hall of Whiners. But, personally, who I really would like to see speaking up is Aine. If that day ever comes I will eat my hat (as if I have one).
Posted by: Afonso | May 9, 2004 10:35 AM
Afonso, I am enjoying your much calmer method of dissent. I think you are becoming more effective at conveying your message.
Alan, Bingo. Even at US$150/her, twice the product in half the time. I have the experience to know that is not a bogus estimate but based on actual experience. The eBay auction would be construed as a joke even at 1/10th the price.
Morgaine, I have a much greater appreciation of your opinions. Lately I've noticed you speaking up and every instance seemed balanced, fair, and poised very legitimate concerns. I apologize for not giving your opinion more respect in the past, but that was mostly cause you rarely aired it. I wish you had aired your opinions more.
To current management, The whole problem can be summed up simply. You insisted on treating this like a private little toy, but became surprised when others had different expectations. Not knowing all problems traced back to that is the problem. All other actions seemed to stem from that fundamental misunderstanding.
Posted by: MLT | May 9, 2004 03:01 PM
MLT, thanks, but it's not my merit. It's easier to be relaxed when you don't get a STFU as an answer to your arguments.
BTW, just my opinion, but I really don't think it's a good idea to extend premium memberships for the 2nd time. That way people won't give proper value for that fact. It's the same as saying I love you to everybody. The word looses its special meaning. It would be more fair to extend memberships according to players karma. 100 karma gets one free month, 200 karma, 3 months, etc...That way the subliminar message would be: If you actively contribute to the game you will be rewarded. To reward all premium members at this time just means you're afraid they don't renew. But, using an american expression, or whatever...that's just my 2 cents.
Posted by: Afonso | May 9, 2004 04:53 PM
Also, as every marketing professional will tell you, a company shouldn't give away something that the consumers don't see as a bonus or improvement. Why the hell you think that when you buy some package with extra size as a bonus they paint it of another color? So you can notice the difference in size! Even net companies have a special page about the improvements from previous software versions! They don't do it because it's cool. They do it for us to say: ahhhh, these guys are so cool. How to achieve that effect in BS? Use a diferent color in the profile of the lucky players whose membership was extended.
I will make mine M's words. Do some reading about management practices. You may learn a few things...some of them are pure common sense applied to managing a business. It's not rocket science. Your children case you have them can teach you a few things as well.
Posted by: Afonso | May 9, 2004 05:09 PM
I've been around pretty much since the beginning with this game. I've worked my way up into the top 10 players list. I've seen my own ups and downs in this game. I've had co-op play (of which I do not now by choice of my wife and friend). I've gifted shares to many folks. I've helped other out via bonds, etc. I've seen my networth valued at over 202 Trillion B$ at one point recently.
Yes, I am rambling. I say these things to support my commitment to this game and community of players. I've got my share of those who don't like me too. We all do. If you are one of the top players you have a target on your back. MLT knows this firsthand as well as a few others.
I'll be a target now too. I'm a premium member who feels like non-renewing when the time comes. Yep, non-renewal.
Why you ask? No offense to Rob for he is trying the best he can. I appreciate his contributions and chats in #blogshares regarding code changes and tweaks. I'm considering this because the game itself doesn't have much substance at present, more specifically, the ideas market. Above that I feel the premium members are not being taken care of. We are the main folks who have supported this site. Non-premium folks have the free ride. We at least paid for our participation.
In any business, you take care of the paying customers. Period. You also want to make yourself marketable to new customers to buy your service.
Will I be branded a whiner? Of course. I'm not worried about it. You know what. I can gripe, I'm a paying customer. Well.. at least until it's time to renew. Then I get to consider, "Do I want to continue to play a game of which offers very little risk and minimal enjoyment at present" or will I consider, "Wow, I've seen some changes and strides here that have improved gameplay, I think I will give them a chance."
I haven't seen the improvements overall. I've seen moments of hope through Rob's tweaking, but not enough to for me to consider staying on as a premium member.
I know I am not the only one who feels this way. I believe many, many more premium members are not getting their "dues worth."
My B$ worth for ya'll. Thanks for the time. Rob, thanks for your hard work. Aine, you too Evil Queen.
Posted by: Just James | May 10, 2004 07:25 AM
Question: Going on the thought about Seyed sticking to his guns, should I further modify the ideas market algorithm to relax it's restrictions and adjustments, so that things where the way they were before - with the same problems?
... or should I say "It's still gameable, learn how"?
Posted by: Suburban Wolf | May 10, 2004 09:16 AM
Why does it have to be all-or-nothing? Why not listen to the constructive comments rather than attacking everyone?
If you give everyone a Monopoly board and then throw a bunch of Parchesi pieces at them with a rulebook from Cluedo how can they make sense of the game.
As it stands, the ideas aren't being released with anything resembling the frequency stated in the previous 'press release'. It's better to fix one thing at a time than try to strip down the entire machine. And the first thing to be repaired would be customer confidence. I'm another considering not renewing my Premium membership.
Posted by: Su | May 10, 2004 11:32 AM
Uhm, Su, how about you take a chill pill? ;-) I was simply putting Afonso's words about Seyed in mind, and asking everyone for an opinion regarding what should be done regarding the ideas market. This may need to go to the forums at this rate, but there's a few small holes in your argument, most likely not because of ignorance, but because these things are not generally known...
At 00, 15, 30 and 45 minutes past the hour, a script is run to produce ideas. The first thing this script does is... go to sleep, for up to another 15 minutes. The timer is randomly factored for each generation, this method has been proven to prevent anyone getting the upper hand by knowing in advance when ideas will be produced, even the admins don't know. With this timing scheme, ideas are still produced on average every 15 minutes, you see. Idea production is absolutely dependant on one thing, and that is the spiders. At the time of writing this, they have checked 515,174 blogs in the last twenty-four hours, about 80% of the entire stock index. On each production run, all of the blogs checked since the last run are factored in - tallies of industries, total values, links, etc, there's anywhere from 2,000 - 15,000 blogs included each time.
There are a few factors against idea generation:
1. If none of the blogs checked are in any industries, no ideas.
2. The "dead forest" - currently about 70,000 blogs that are not parseable for one reason or another, previously at 140K before a bunch of 404 blogs were removed. It still takes the spiders a few *hours* to get through these, during which time virtually no ideas will be produced. Code is slowly being formulated to automatically stop parsing these blogs after a certain number of failed attempts, after which point it can be manually re-activated, or will be checked at a much lower frequency. Until then, each time the spiders complete a run, they start from the top again, every blog, every time.
3. The spiders suffer from a lack of garbage collection, and possibly a few memory leaks. Over time they slow, and need restarting every few days. Usually that's always happened, but can be a factor.
4. If the spiders are stopped for a period of time, which usually does not happen unless circumstances absolutely require it, no ideas will be produced.
I promise you, idea production is scheduled at the frequency I posted on the front page, and so far, in response to feedback in #blogshares and the forums, I've been tweaking the algorithm. It's effects vary, but I think some will be happier so far.... oh, and I also believe in fixing one thing at a time, wish it were always that easy.
Posted by: Suburban Wolf | May 10, 2004 12:46 PM
As the game currently stands, it faces a fundamental dichotomy: either the game resorts to being a money-printing machine, or the game faces certain sclerosis as the top ranking richest player list becomes fixed in stone.
I know that the choice seems stark, but that is because it is.
At the end of last week, I undertook a simple analysis of the top ten richest players and their holdings. The results of this analysis make for interesting reading.
Currently, there are two types of top ten player: 'old' and 'new'. The 'old' are those who earnt their ranking over the lifetime of the game. Examples include MLT, Morgaine, and myself. The 'new' are those who took windfall gains from the changes (crash, followed by real hyper-inflation of ideas prices). Examples include Demonsurfer and David Rutt. A couple of players are effectively hybrid - having initially earnt a top ten place as 'old' player, but who currently have a balance which looks like a 'new' player: mars/iris and Just James are examples.
* The ideas holdings of 'old' players are typified by flat holdings counts across industries with low peak holdings, and a large industry count.
* The ideas holdings of 'new' players are typified by very large spikes of idea counts in a limited number of industries, along with a small industry count.
* Hybrids have a holdings curve like an 'old' player across many industries, with a small number of significant peaks overlaid.
What are the figures behind these patterns. Let's have a look at some players:
MLT: (old player)
10m ideas held in 798 industries, with 3m ideas held in the largest ten industries by holdings.
mars/iris Securities: (hybrid player)
338m ideas held in 722 industries, with 262m ideas held in the largest ten industries by holdings.
demonsurfer: (new player)
482m ideas held in 37 industries, with 472m ideas held in the largest ten industries by holdings.
Note that these are simply chosen to be indicative.
We can start to see the shape of the problem that faces Blogshares here. The 'new' player type has gained massive ideas holdings that currently underwater, representing unrealised gains.
I did some further analysis to discover a bookable value for these unrealised gains. I asked Rob what the 'normal' ceiling price of ideas is currently. The answer: B$100k. Now this only represents a 'normal' ceiling and prices are actually able to rise above this ceiling under certain circumstances. It is therefore reasonable to assume that players will not dispose of ideas unless this nominal ceiling is reached - therefore we can use this to quantify the bookable unrealised gains. The numbers are astonishing:
mars/iris Securities: B$26 trillion
demonsurfer: B$47 trillion
Just James: B$55 trillion
Remember, this assumes that players do not dispose of ideas at 'extraordinary' prices.
At this point in time, it worth reiterating that a large number of 'excess' ideas have been removed from the public market, and that code has been implemented to prevent the aggregation of ideas in future in the public market. This means that a) these players hold the vast balance of all issued ideas, and b) when they dispose of these ideas nobody else will be able to have holdings such as these, let alone at the purchase terms that these players were permitted.
The dichotomy is now laid bare - either these players are permitted to reap their rewards and let ideas resume their 'traditional' pattern to enable other players a chance to compete, or lock down ideas pricing with restrictions to prevent such a massive increase in money supply to the game and accept that no other player will move into the highest ranking of richest players.
What is the way out? To me, it seems that the only alternative is to reset the game, or directly reset individual players to remove the aberrant effect of recent changes.
Nasty choices. I discussed all this in depth with Rob in #blogshares, so I can't be accused of pulling in on the blindside with this analysis. It seems that the choice of Admin has been to ignore this information.
Posted by: Alan Dean | May 10, 2004 02:11 PM
Ummm, Wolf, how about taking a pill yourself. One that makes you listen to the entire section here of people NOT just me pointing out that customer relations are the thing that keep a company going. And this IS a company, isn't it?
I've watched the idea falls off and on over a few days, and sometimes not a single fall in an hour. If you get so het up about what I say, why bother replying to me. After all, if I was at a customer service window making the same comments, certainly your first comment to me wouldn't be 'take a chill pill'. It's a shame you haven't taken a look at Morgaine's comments or MLT's about being responsive to your customer base. You really do seem to have a problem with anything I say, no matter what it is. As it stands, I was correct, here or in a forum my comments aren't welcome. So be it. I'll just keep playing till the game collapses or dies from lack of paying customers.
Posted by: Su | May 10, 2004 02:14 PM
At the risk of repeating others that have posted here before me, I hereby post a message that has been on the shelf for some weeks now. The tone of voice may be unusually harsh compared to my usual one, but I think it is time to stop treating a fatal disease with just band-aids. Or, as we say in Holland (freely translated), soft healers make stinking wounds.
I agree on calling the main problem one of poor communication, poor customer support and poor management.
Regarding the changes in the ideas market (that are in themselves fine), for instance, players should have been properly warned before they were implemented. You don't change calculating factors in the game if they can render a lot of work/time worthless (values of portfolio's have been greatly decreased) and then announce these changes after the fact (when the harm is already done).
This manner of conduct shows us that we are nothing more than pawns in some VERY misplaced megalomaniac ego trip of inconsistent ppl who obviously do not take players that have supported this game, whether financially (by becoming premium members) or just by playing and sticking around through shitty times, seriously.
A flagrant disregard for what creating a community is all about is becoming core value here. The increasingly defensive tone of voice from the people in charge is a sign that they have no control over this thing whatsoever. Which almost certainly means that most suggestions we all may (have) offer(ed) will not be taken into consideration.
As an inevitable consequence, I hereby announce that I will not be renewing my premium membership. I may or may not resign from the game entirely by that time, depending on how the current owners respond to the well-deserved criticism posted in this thread.
On a personal note: hats off to ya Rob (and others that have worked like devils to keep this thing afloat, despite current ownership), but I strongly urge you to stop trying to please everone and to start using your common sense. Spend the time you have available on things that are worth it.
To the owners: I agree with people who imply that the best course of action would be to break B$ down and to start over instead of trying to fix the unfixable. A word of advice: in doing so, keep it simple and make sure it works properly. Then, and ONLY then, incrementally enrich the gameplay experience by adding well-tested functionalities to the game, after extensive market research.
And it might be a good start in trying to repair your massively damaged image to apologize to the entire community. You have been behaving like spoilt little kids that over-confidently went on an endeavor that has proven to be WAY out of their league (or in other words: that miserably failed at succesfully dealing with the challenges that came along with taking over B$) and that now stubbornly refuse to acknowledge it.
But I also realize that having said all this, from your point of view anyway, I have made it impossible for you to do so without seriously losing face.
A classic Dilemma 695 that is easily resolved by letting go of your own point of view for a minute. That is all I ask for. Funny how it seems so little to some and so much to others...
Posted by: Dodo | May 10, 2004 03:00 PM
Too late for me, I just dumped my ideas I've worked on for months, and put in a request to cancel my account and remove my 4 blogs from play.
Sad, really, I loved playing. I'm just waiting till my artefacts disappear into the wind.
Posted by: Su | May 10, 2004 03:40 PM
Rob, the answer is in Dodo's words. You seem to be a talented guy, but you're not a fireman are you? For what I understood a few days ago the current owners don't even recognized your work.
But that doen't look strange to me, looking at the way I was banned and re-banned, and at the way players that I have always seen as strong supporters of this site were treated. No need to list the names, 'cause they know who they are. I guess that them as me only come back to check BS because we remember of how funny and lively it used to be during Summer last year. At least that's what makes me check back. Hopefull that one day the sell sign is not a joke and that someone WHO REALLY LIKES THIS GAME, tries to make it a place where bloggers from around the world can meet and have some healthy fun. I do respect your effort, patience, and above all the time spent here, but I DO NOT RESPECT kamikaze owners who think that running a site is just putting some money into it and expect it to grow for itself. Of course the result would be disastrous. It's the same as having a kid, give him some toys, and come back a few years later wondering why the hell he shows no love or afection to you.
Hope is the last to die, but at this stage I think it would be better to slowly change my visit rates. Maybe in a month or two it changes ownership, or the new owners change their attitude, or maybe not and it all stays the same.
Take Dodo's advice Rob. People should be where they are valued and respected, unless you're like those captains who are the last ones to leave the ship.
Posted by: Afonso | May 10, 2004 03:54 PM
Sad to see you leave Su. For this short period you seemed like a very nice player.
I forget to say. In the remotely chance that things really change here and that you decide that portuguese language blogs deserve a decent place here (after all there's more portuguese language blogs than farsi), and in the remotely chance that you think that portuguese language bloggers would be very welcome and deserve a decent manual, you know where to find me. Adeus.
Posted by: Afonso | May 10, 2004 04:04 PM
Su... I have tried again and again to explain things to you, only to get a response back that indicates that you just want to be argumentative. There's a smiley right after that sentence about the pill, it's meant in jest, not trying to shove said pill down one's throat. Now I think you need to take the red pill. ;-)
I bother replying to you simply because I do care about what people in this game want. Sure, I'm not that way every single moment, partly from differing conditions, partly because I'm sub-human. If I didn't care, prices on a variety of industries would not have risen to the points they have now (not at previous rates, but 3x higher than they were before), or for a better non-directly related example - the artefact completion tool wouldn't have been written.
There will ocasionally be periods of hours when no ideas will be produced, the alternatives are that I finish up code to handle such 'bad' blogs, a couple of hours worth of coding at the most, or watch for then the queue ends and manually delete out the first 50K or so - which I've done twice recently. In fact, the spiders are slogging through the bad ones right now.
---snip---
2004-05-10 16:16:55,776 : INFO Thread-5 LinkParser - Worker 1 finished 50 urls in 1068secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:18:06,199 : INFO Thread-18 LinkParser - Worker 14 finished 50 urls in 6147secs (1 successful)
2004-05-10 16:18:23,926 : INFO Thread-25 LinkParser - Worker 21 finished 50 urls in 1783secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:18:31,837 : INFO Thread-9 LinkParser - Worker 5 finished 50 urls in 1220secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:20:52,723 : INFO Thread-23 LinkParser - Worker 19 finished 50 urls in 986secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:23:13,197 : INFO Thread-27 LinkParser - Worker 23 finished 50 urls in 1364secs (0 successful)
2004-05-10 16:26:24,487 : INFO Thread-6 LinkParser - Worker 2 finished 50 urls in 2323secs (1 successful)
2004-05-10 16:26:48,027 : INFO Thread-24 LinkParser - Worker 20 finished 50 urls in 1718secs (0 successful)
---snip---
See those times? And either none or one out of those 50 checked actually succeeded. Here's what it looks like when all is well...
---snip---
2004-05-10 12:41:53,833 : INFO Thread-28 LinkParser - Worker 24 finished 50 urls in 132secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:41:59,795 : INFO Thread-24 LinkParser - Worker 20 finished 50 urls in 152secs (49 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:02,934 : INFO Thread-16 LinkParser - Worker 12 finished 50 urls in 136secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:07,384 : INFO Thread-25 LinkParser - Worker 21 finished 50 urls in 156secs (49 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:09,009 : INFO Thread-19 LinkParser - Worker 15 finished 50 urls in 148secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:11,753 : INFO Thread-29 LinkParser - Worker 25 finished 50 urls in 134secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:12,540 : INFO Thread-12 LinkParser - Worker 8 finished 50 urls in 153secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:12,553 : INFO Thread-15 LinkParser - Worker 11 finished 50 urls in 199secs (50 successful)
2004-05-10 12:42:16,463 : INFO Thread-10 LinkParser - Worker 6 finished 50 urls in 133secs (50 successful)
---snip---
See not only the difference in success rates, but the difference in the time taken? THIS is why at times no ideas will be produced, and unless I sit down and figure the code out, or babysit the queue once a day, it's going to happen again and again. A few days ago I worked extensively on the indexing errors tool, which is tied to delisting, to try to clear some of the mess up. Put about 2 hours into it, and it still needs a bit more before it can really go to town without delisting PB and Blogger.com in the process - yeah, several of the Top 100 are 'bad', but I can see the uproar if they get delisted. Blogs come and go, it's not a problem that will cease of it's own accord, the bad urls will build just as the index itself does.
Anyway... it actually feels a bit funny when you're talking about MY customer base, etc - more than anything I still consider myself a 'volunteer' to the cause. While I am officially employed by B$, it isn't exactly turning a profit yet, but I'm happy to keep working on the game anyway. This does not mean that I'm exempt from paying attention to peoples' wishes or requests, far from it. Just saying that while it may not matter to the marks who paid their $15 and just want to play, this whole time I've been working on the code because I like the people and I like tha game itself. To me, that matters. Want to help? Socialize, help prioritize and then herbalize. :)
Su - It would please me greatly if you would visit #blogshares sometime, and if I'm not there to chat, ask people about SubWolf (except for C, he lies). You may find I'm not the bastard you think I am. Then again...
Final thought - Three major priorities on my mind are:
1) Getting these bad blogs handled properly.
2) Rewards for karma.
3) Fixing the ideas market.
Which one is more important?
Posted by: Suburban Wolf | May 10, 2004 05:01 PM
Afonso - it's not like I've had thousands of dollars thrown at me already in return for my work, it's appreciation from the game players that matters to me most. Of course, there's the downside that one receives negativity also, but in many cases it's worth it.
... and yes, I wouldn't be first to jump ship if we struck an iceberg... but perhaps I wouldn't be last, either. ;-)
Posted by: Suburban Wolf | May 10, 2004 05:09 PM
Update: Creamed 50K blogs from the top of the spider queue when I got home, wasn't enough to get them clear out of it, but don't really want to prevent those that are accessible denied a look.
Also: Delisted 3,659 blogs a few minutes ago that had never been indexed, generated an error at least three times, and were absolutely not in the Top 1000 blogs. Will be utilizing other queries to safely remove as much as possible.
Posted by: Suburban Wolf | May 10, 2004 07:28 PM
woo!
flush that trash!
Posted by: AB Investments, Ltd. | May 10, 2004 07:51 PM
Oh gosh, I'm easily amused but I'm having a heck of a good time by watching all the techno folks run around and all the aspiring gazzilionaires running around here.
I'm mostly having fun finding those quirky blogs to fill the voids in the content of the offerings and I've read some pretty good blogs whilst exploring. I've learned a lot of stuff I didn't know before and some I wish I didn't now know.
I've been involved in online groups ever since the early days of CompuServe. Anyone here remember trading message using ASCII and then DOSCim? I was a volunteer staff member on the old CompuServe fibercrafts forum and wore out a few pairs of asbestos knickers doing that job. Volunteers in charge never do much of anything right - it goes with the territory. It will be nice when someone has time to slot in a few more artefacts and some moguls to work on the content.
Thanks to those who make my hanging on the phones easier by letting me play the time away. It may creak a bit, but Blogshares is the best act in town of its type. Yep I'll renew and hope it keeps on going.
Posted by: Embroideress | May 10, 2004 09:18 PM
Well, I'm glad I'm not going to be the only one renewing ;o)
I'm impressed that this hasn't descended into flaming, and there have been some good points made. Whereas I do agree that some people need to learn a bit of Diploma-C (;)) I prefer to look on the optimistic side and see where we are now as compared to later on last year.
The game has improved no end since Seyed era - Rob, C and others (assuming that they've had a bit of help from a few little helpers) have done wonders with the code. Sure, there have been a few little hiccups that have accidently created huge wealth, but on the whole I think that the game is so much more playable now than it was 6 months ago.
Rob has spent no end of time making Blogshares better for everyone, and whereas not everyone will agree whether the gameplay changes are for the better there have been changes, and these have been led by the community. He's done what you wanted and tried to make the game better. On the whole, he has. Man, that hug is still available if you want it ;o)
I do hope, though, that some of this constructive criticism is taken on board. I know that it appears that everyone's having a go at you, but that's not the case. There are many players that care about this game, so please don't be disheartened and see what they are saying.
This game (and it's community) can go places, and perhaps there is some bad medicine to be had in order to make it happen, but whatever happens I'm not going anywhere. You can count on my $15.
I just love you guys, and not in a gay way ;o)
Posted by: rutty | May 11, 2004 12:48 AM
Cheers, Rutty: I realize that credit has to be given (which I hereby gladly do) for what has been done so far with the code. From a technical point of view, things seem pretty ok. At least, to a technical nitwit like me.
I still stand, however, by the criticism given in my earlier post, even after a lenghty debate in #blogshares.
I am not going to repeat my arguments, they are already stated in the mentioned earlier post. I just wanted to acknowledge the fact that there have also been some benefits to the game as a result of the takeover.
Posted by: Dodo | May 11, 2004 01:42 AM
>Su... I have tried again and again to explain things to you, only to get a response back that indicates that you just want to be argumentative.
I'll say this in a very nice, smiley way then. If I disagree with you, that's an argument, right? Ok, I'll agree with you then. It's a great game, you've worked like mad to get it running, I was thrilled when it was resurrected after Sayed dropped it with little or no warning. I love the game, it's great fun and I am going to miss it like mad when my account is finally removed as per my request in the forum.
> There's a smiley right after that sentence about the pill, it's meant in jest, not trying to shove said pill down one's throat. Now I think you need to take the red pill. ;-)
Smileys don't always make a comment right.
> Anyway... it actually feels a bit funny when you're talking about MY customer base, etc - more than anything I still consider myself a 'volunteer' to the cause. While I am officially employed by B$, it isn't exactly turning a profit yet, but I'm happy to keep working on the game anyway. This does not mean that I'm exempt from paying attention to peoples' wishes or requests, far from it. Just saying that while it may not matter to the marks who paid their $15 and just want to play, this whole time I've been working on the code because I like the people and I like tha game itself. To me, that matters. Want to help? Socialize, help prioritize and then herbalize. :)
Among many others, I offered to help. I suggested valid industries and got blown off. I offered to mogul, and got ignored. I moderated industry votes, brought blogs into the game and helped friends with their problems. I was active in the forum, and got abused for being a 'whiner'.
You have a base of people out there who would help with bits of the game to get it running better. The only thing I ever wanted to do was _help_. I would have happily re-indexed every flippin' blog in the industry I offered to mogul, and could have found a dozen or more blogs instantly to fill the industry I suggested. Plus, a few more who came in because of the BlogShares logo that used to be on my blog. It may only be a small percentage of the overall blogs brought in but multiply that by the others who have spent time writing industry suggestions, artefact suggestions and offered to be moguls then you'd have more people who are sitting now and twiddling their thumbs because no one is paying attention to their willingness to be used to help the game along. Watching the stuff in the forum, the discussions show that it's one game for the 'old timers' and another for the many hundreds of people who don't make trillions, but enjoy the excitement of coming in every day and seeing their stock rise a bit or making enough to buy another share or an idea. There are a LOT of those 'smaller' players. Not everything in the world revolves around the 'big' players. Like any pyramid, they would't be on the top without all the rest below them. Don't play Yertle the Turtle, because all it may take is one small 'yop' from someone down below to make it all collapse.
>Su - It would please me greatly if you would visit #blogshares sometime, and if I'm not there to chat, ask people about SubWolf (except for C, he lies). You may find I'm not the bastard you think I am. Then again...
And I'm neither the whiney bitch or a stupid cow that people think I am. I have a lot of love for this game, its the only one I've ever liked enough online to play regularly. I just don't like being told I'm stupid and also watching the offers of people who would willingly volunteer being ignored. You lose a LOT by only allowing the chosen few to click a few buttons. What would it hurt? How much damage can a mogul do? And on the other hand, how much good can a few people do if they want to help out.
You're not Atlas, and it's unnecessary for one or a few people to shoulder all the burdens of a game that you claim is pretty much a volunteer set-up. Open the door, let a few of them in.
Final thought - Three major priorities on my mind are:
1) Getting these bad blogs handled properly.
2) Rewards for karma.
3) Fixing the ideas market.
Which one is more important?
If the blogs are the clot in the system, getting them done is important but do they make any more of a difference to the game than before?
Karma can wait, it's not been a feature of any importance so far, so get the existing structure repaired before plugging in something new.
Idea markets are the place where people get their fun and the rush of trying to get ideas or sell bonds for big or little bucks. I'd get it fixed before I bothered with Karma, because it's something that players already rely on heavily.
I hope you do find some people to help out, they are out there and who knows? You might find a few gems in the lot, who have time, interest and the right skills to help the game along. I know of at least one, don't waste the chances being offered. And no, that one isn't me. I'm just marking time till my account is shut down.
Posted by: Su | May 11, 2004 03:22 AM
Let's back off of Rob entirely. He's busy making a living as well as helping out tons in this game attempting to make it better for all people playing the game; not just the "top players" but also the non-premium members too.
Su, I've offered to help too many times over. I even pleaded to C regarding helping the BSEC in an official capacity as was declined. Am I upset about that. Not really. It's their choice and I respect that even though I may disagree.
There are aspects of this game and community I don't like that much. There are also aspects of this same thing I do like.
Rob is working steadily on different priorities (many are equal in comparison in the big picture of things) of the game to help all players.
We just need to wait. Let's be patient and more enocouraging and we will see better attitudes and more productivity.
Posted by: Just James | May 12, 2004 07:24 AM
Oh, I will be renewing my membership here.
Why? As games change, even when we don't like the changes, we as players need to adapt. With the present changes taking place, I have found a way to adapt. Even when it meant swallowing some of my own selfish interests in how I wanted the game serve me. The community here is good. Thanks Rob for disagreeing with me at times. Even in disagreement there is respect. I am here out of respect for the game, the good and bad. As Rob would say, "Cheers."
Posted by: Just James | May 12, 2004 07:43 AM
It's priced FAR to low IMHO. This game could easily outpace the traffic/indexing of Yahoo/DMOZ. Please do not sell it for less than Hotmail sold for. If you want some suggestions as to how you could make more (real) $ with this site, hit me up on AIM/Yahoo "yesiliveinaustin"
Posted by: Peter James | May 30, 2004 05:11 PM
The first thing to do is mirror all the useful indexing information on other domains: (industry).blogsharelinks.com or some such formula. Use all the "karma" information and compete direct with DMOZ and Yahoo (and sell results to Google and the others). Using this model--of COURSE you will win for many reasons. 1. The concept is genius--I can see the referrer stats of sites that I don't own! 2. You ask for recip links, unlike (the fools!) DMOZ and Yahoo. 3. Blogshares is simply fun, unlike Yahoo and DMOZ 4. There's a community and I'd say you will have a better reputation than Yahoo. DMOZ was supposed to be "open" but power corrupts and the moderators over there can't be trusted to maintain a quality resource. 5. Don't just stop at blogs. You can use this same system to evaluate anything! 6. There's much more that I could say here--but I'm planning a book about blogshares for $
Feel free to talk to me about this...
Posted by: Peter James | May 30, 2004 05:27 PM