Soylent Green is people!!!

Originally posted by incandenza
huckleberryhound, I hate to say it, but it seems to me you're a bit biased. It's not surprising that you're in favor of a system that has afforded you a nice "prestigious" position as the leader of one of the larger clubs. I wonder if your excitement about your new role is hindering your ability to see both sides of the argument.

You were asking luct d, other than the fact that this provides a temporarily amusing novelty to some people.

I'll answer you first, because you seem not to be a moron.

huckleberryhound, I hate to say it, but it seems to me you're a bit biased.


So, if i run a club, i am biased...phew, there's an easy answer to take down anyone who likes the idea of a new feature. "You're using it, so your opinion doesn't count". I could easily say to you "You've only been on the site a wet weekend, how can you know what is good for the site"....but i wont.


It's not surprising that you're in favor of a system that has afforded you a nice "prestigious" position as the leader of one of the larger clubs


Do you think i was awarded this position ? As a member of the Masons, i was given the club in a secret meeting. I could tell you more, but then i'd have to shoot you.

That was me being sarcastic. I embraced the system, and put the work in to canvas for members. I created the club, and got the support of a lot of good site members who also would like to see where this is going before they make a decision either way. I have still not seen any concrete argument against the club system, and nay-saying for the sake of it, doesn't wash one little bit.
I already explained in detail why i started a club, i have no intentions of running round in circles for anyone, please read my other posts if you want to know why.

I wonder if your excitement about your new role is hindering your ability to see both sides of the argument.

I'm so excited, i could poo.

I wonder if you even know what you are arguing against. This is a virgin feature, and may not even get off the ground. I not only have a big club, i was the second to get the club to rating level, purely so russ could have the drive to add features, so we can see what benafits the club system will have....I am reserving judgement on their posative/negative effect on the site. I wonder how you can make such a judgement without possession of the facts, you're a better man than i, obviously.

You were asking luctruc and not me, but speaking for myself: yes, you are right, I don't need to participate in the club system. I can choose to entirely ignore it, and maybe I can minimize its impact on my experience of the site

Thank you, apology accepted.

But what I'm trying to do in this forum, which is what Russ asked everyone to do, is to consider whether this is going to be an overall positive or negative change to the site. I believe there could be some definite negative outcomes from this, and I think it's important they be discussed up front.

As is your right, but you're slightly wrong.

Russ created a consultation "Thread". It's the other one we've shared words in, not this one.

Luctruc created this thread, to insult and question those who have joined the Club system, so excuse me if i call him out on his stupidity....which is exactly what it is.

Bottom line...The clubs system is a new feature that you can join if you want....or you can start an inane thread debasing it. Bereft of any proper facts however, any thread like this is going to end the same way....looking like the ramblings of someone who has no idea what they're on about.

Furthermore, I can't see that the positive aspects have been sufficiently demonstrated, other than the fact that this provides a temporarily amusing novelty to some people

And i have yet to see a negative, except maybe the impact on the Clan forum....and i'm sure a quick name change of the Science forum could fix that in a minute.

End of the day, i don't expect you to suddenly switch opinion, but i would like to see any facts you have that this is going to be a negative thing for you personally....or me for that matter.
I am a normal, intelligent guy (fairly, anyway), and would be swayed by any intelligent argument.....i am so far unswayed.

Well, let's see here. In his last post HH refuses to run in circles and refers us to his other posts to see why he started a club. Let's broaden the challenge and see what three of the club idea's champions have said in the course of defending it. Rather than risk being accused of cherrypicking posts to quote from, I'll try to summarize what seem to be the arguments and invite anyone who cares to make the effort to go back over recent posts by these three and see if I've missed anything. We'll start with Phlabibit, who has been most forthcoming.

Phlabibit

1) Clubs will give people a chance to run clubs the way they want to. Yes. Yes, they will. And clans give people a chance to run clans the way they want to. And if you buy a NASCAR team, you'll be able to run a NASCAR team the way you want to. And in all cases your bliss-following behavior has no bearing at all on whether clubs will be a good thing for RHP; unless, of course, it's better for the site to keep the people who start clubs busy with their "mini-sites" instead of with larger site concerns, which may well be the case.

2) If enough members are "upset" with another member, they can ask the admin to remove the upsetting member. True, but is this a reason for starting a club -- being able to kick people? This is Teen Girl Squad stuff. Is it really so hard to avoid users who upset you that special upset-free zones are indicated?


3) Clubs will not kill clans This may or may not be true (see below), but even if it is true, it is not, by itself, an argument for clubs. A gin rummy microsite will not kill clans. A Singles Forum will not kill clans. Are they therefore good ideas for new RHP features?

4) No one is forcing you to join a club If clubs are a bad idea, I suppose that not requiring membership makes them a less bad idea, but it certainly doesn't make them a good idea. Interestingly, though, after repeatedly emphasizing the non-requirement, Phlabibit says: "The only way clubs will take away from RHP is if they get very popular. At that point, you'll need to join one if you feel they are taking away from the the public aspect of RHP." Maybe he envisions a comprehensive club system -- everyone in the clubs, no one outside the clubs, no one against the clubs.

5) "Any nasty fighting about decisions will be removed from public forums I would hope ..." This would be nice, but it won't happen. The nastiest fighting has to do with cheating accusations or with bannings, and these fights will be multiplied when every club admin is his own little cheatfinder general, and the fights will spill over, already at a rolling boil, onto the site boards.

6) There is no problem with giving an idea a try Well, yes, there is. Giving clubs a really fair trial will risk doing the damage I discuss below, as well as getting people invested in and accustomed to a bad way of doing things. But even if there weren't serious problems with a trial run, spending time and effort on an idea in favor of which no arguments can be marshaled is dumb.

So that's all I can come up with, folks. Most of Phlabibit's points are immaterial, and the one point that actually bears on the argument (fights will be taken outside) isn't true.

adramforall

1) Time will tell if the clubs will work. Strictly, yes. Time will also tell if driving with your eyes closed will work. This assertion crops up a lot, with the implication that we can't say anything at all about clubs until clubs have been tried. It's nonsense, of course, and, happily, Russ has invited us to dump on the proposal in the expectation that certain blindfold-driving-type mistakes will be avoided.

2) "Anything that gets more people involved can only be good ..." No, involving more people is not always and everywhere a good thing for a game site. Other things equal, adding a club feature and making it available to non-subs will increase the number of non-subs on the site. Whether it would increase the number of subscribers is not clear. adramforall's expectation is that participating in a quasi-clan would make people more willing to subscribe, in order to participate in the real clans; but it may also be that quasi-clans are enough for people who would otherwise have subscribed and so will decrease the demand for subscriptions.

3) Since the clubs will be able to catch engine users, engine users will avoid the clubs. Well, since most of us, including the club admins, have no idea how to catch cheats reliably, engine users won't mind at all having a run at the clubs. The players most likely to avoid the clubs, I suspect, will be the most talented of the honest players, since a high enough rating is always suspect and there seems already to be something like a lynching mentality developing in the clubs.

So, a couple more substantial arguments from adramforall -- that more people will subscribe under the club deal and that clubs will drive out cheaters from their midst -- but my hunch is that both scenarios are pretty unlikely (see below).

huckleberryhound

And then we come to the Hound on Poo Corner his own self. And, it turns out that he needn't have worried about running in circles after all. If you go back through HH's posts, the only thing he can say in favor of his club is that it's another place for him to hang with people he likes to hang with. Oh, and: "There is such a mix of clan members in the clubs (in general), that rivalries should be a thing of the past.....Anyone who tries to tread the old Clan war line will quickly be left behind. This is also a good thing IMHO." We all know what an irenic personality HH is, so no one can doubt his sincere pleasure at this harmonious prospect. Other than that

"i have no idea what i as club leader will do."

"I have no plans to become a Games moderator for my club."

"I'm hoping to pick Russ's brains about what he has planned for these things, when i go over to London for the meet"

"The end format for them is still unkown, and for those of us happy to embrace a new feature it is a welcome sideline in an already enjoyable passtime."

I guess HH is a trusting soul, as well as pacific. Que sera sera. But not exactly a detailed defense of the clubs proposal here, is there.
.
Incidentally, it appears from his last post that someone has been telling HH that he is "a normal, intelligent guy." I call this cruel and irresponsible behavior, and I call on whomever is doing it to stop.

Now, we've seen that the arguments in favor of the new deal range from medium suckful to very suckful. What are the arguments against the new deal?

1) It threatens to reduce the rate of new subscriptions, as non-subs can now enjoy that in-crowd feeling and that sociable give and take (sometimes truly educational, chess-wise) that, until now, has required clan membership.

2) It will threaten the clan system more directly. When a clan member elects to join clubs (remember, as many as you like), with their own club forums and likely their own internal competitions, do you think he will spend more time or less time on his clan forum, more time or less time participating in clan challenges, more time or less time on his clan league games?

3) It encourages cheat-hunting, whether or not it was intended to. People are already keeping their little lists and promising cheat-free environments for their members. This will make for the same kind of agonizing that we've seen in l'affaire cludi , but in spades, and there is no way to confine the feuds to the club forums.

4) It may even encourage cheating. If the club deal is somehow linked to a less vigilant or less severe site regime (we don't know the big plan, but I smell finesse), engine users will have an incentive to play lots of club games in lots of different clubs, knowing that boobs are in charge of oversight.


5) It will, despite weakening the clans, increase clannishness. For instance, a multiple member who is popular in The Vigilantes may be a source of upset in the Blue Noses, so that when the Blues kick him, he decides to poison their relations with the Vigilantes. I can imagine other scenarios, more likely as the clubs become more social and less chess-oriented.

6) It will encourage organized mediocrity. Clans have an incentive to recruit strong players. Since strong players will want to avoid the clubs, with their sure-fire home-made anti-cheating devices, the clubs could become sloughs of mediocrity. Where's the fun in that?

7) We have no idea what Russ is up to here. Now, I've only been a regular on RHP for a few months, but I've liked most of what I've seen, so my default inclination is to trust the site's owners. But I am constitutionally more suspicious than dingleberry, and I know that the game mod situation is a big headache for Russ and Chris. People with really bad headaches sometimes do unwise things in seeking relief. Why the parallel ratings? Why the multiple memberships? How will the big plan we've seen in only vaguest outline keep everyone happy about the site's cheating situation? Information, please.

So, anyhow, while I've seen no good arguments in favor of clubs, and several purported arguments that aren't really arguments at all, I can quickly think of a bunch of problems. Questions? Comments? Anyone? Not HH, but anyone else?

I'll leave you to your delusions....enjoy.

Originally posted by luctruc
Well, let's see here. In his last post HH refuses to run in circles and refers us to his other posts to see why he started a club. Let's broaden the challenge and see what three of the club idea's champions have said in the course of defending it. Rather than risk being accused of cherrypicking posts to quote from, I'll try to summarize what seem to be t ...[text shortened]... s? Anyone? Not HH, but anyone else?

I'm starting to think you may not like clubs. That's ok, but don't invest too much time like you just did. There are perhaps 8 users who want it destroyed, while hundreds are willing to give it a chance.

It's not going to vanish until it fails.

Guess what... lots of people didn't like clans either. "It's going to rip RHP apart!"

They are still here, and a lot more people were against them. "Why have a team of chess players?!"

P-

... hundreds are willing to give it a chance.

And some of those willing hundreds are actually being counted more than once, since they belong to more than one club. "Club whores," I believe HH calls them. Since there are over 20,000 active users at RHP, your club turnout isn't real braggable.

Please let us know when you've got your club forums. Once the forums are working, the site will have given the non-subscribing cluboids something for nothing, and it will be much harder for management to back up.

Originally posted by luctruc
[b]... hundreds are willing to give it a chance.

And some of those willing hundreds are actually being counted more than once, since they belong to more than one club. "Club whores," I believe HH calls them. Since there are over 20,000 active users at RHP, your club turnout isn't real braggable.

Please let us know when you've got your club forum ...[text shortened]... ribing cluboids something for nothing, and it will be much harder for management to back up.[/b]

I don't remember bragging about how many are in my club, and you don't know how many I've denied. There are club sluts, both who join... or take anyone in. Club leaders manage every aspect of their club, that's why clubs are here. If they don't want a user, they will kick them. There is no need to call management.

You could also put your sour grapes to better use, mash them, mix some sugar and place them on your favorite ice cream or pastry.

P-

Originally posted by luctruc
Well, let's see here. In his last post HH refuses to run in circles and refers us to his other posts to see why he started a club. Let's broaden the challenge and see what three of the club idea's champions have said in the course of defending it. Rather than risk being accused of cherrypicking posts to quote from, I'll try to summarize what seem to be t ...[text shortened]... s? Anyone? Not HH, but anyone else?

What's NASCAR?

Originally posted by luctruc
Well, let's see here. In his last post HH refuses to run in circles and refers us to his other posts to see why he started a club. Let's broaden the challenge and see what three of the club idea's champions have said in the course of defending it. Rather than risk being accused of cherrypicking posts to quote from, I'll try to summarize what seem to be t ...[text shortened]... s? Anyone? Not HH, but anyone else?

Cliff notes?

Originally posted by Crowley
What's NASCAR?

Today, you're my hero.

Originally posted by luctruc
[b]... hundreds are willing to give it a chance.

And some of those willing hundreds are actually being counted more than once, since they belong to more than one club. "Club whores," I believe HH calls them. Since there are over 20,000 active users at RHP, your club turnout isn't real braggable.

Please let us know when you've got your club forum ...[text shortened]... ribing cluboids something for nothing, and it will be much harder for management to back up.[/b]

Dude, you've made like 1500 moves in 4 years....How exactly would any new feature impact on your playing on the site ? A one month shut down would hardly impact on your playing on the site.

I dub thee Alf Garnet 😛

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
Dude, you've made like 1500 moves in 4 years....How exactly would any new feature impact on your playing on the site ? A one month shut down would hardly impact on your playing on the site.

I dub thee Alf Garnet 😛

Consider all those moves made in the past 5 months, luctruc took a break from the site years ago and are back playing no slower than I do.

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
I don't remember bragging about how many are in my club, and you don't know how many I've denied. There are club sluts, both who join... or take anyone in. Club leaders manage every aspect of their club, that's why clubs are here. If they don't want a user, they will kick them. There is no need to call management.

You could also put your sour grape ...[text shortened]... mash them, mix some sugar and place them on your favorite ice cream or [b]pastry.

P-[/b]

Sorry, by "club turnout," I meant the turnout for all the clubs. It's been over a week, and club formation seems to be petering out with only a few clubs meeting the 50-member criterion.

Originally posted by luctruc
Sorry, by "club turnout," I meant the turnout for all the clubs. It's been over a week, and club formation seems to be petering out with only a few clubs meeting the 50-member criterion.

I had clan 9 originally, and it took me a few weeks to get 5 or so members. I renamed it "Chess Lords" and had 20 members in a couple days.

Clans were new once, there were more users against those than there are against clubs at the time.

I still don't understand why users are so afraid of what clubs might do, perhaps they'll do nothing at all and even vanish. Time will tell, but I don't see how they can ruin everything.

If it gets to a point where users keep telling you they only play club games, you might consider joining one. If they get that popular, clubs were successful and most everyone likes them.

If they don't become popular, you have nothing to fear.

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
I had clan 9 originally, and it took me a few weeks to get 5 or so members. I renamed it "Chess Lords" and had 20 members in a couple days.

Clans were new once, there were more users against those than there are against clubs at the time.

I still don't understand why users are so afraid of what clubs might do, perhaps they'll do nothing at all and e ...[text shortened]... most everyone likes them.

If they don't become popular, you have nothing to fear.

P-

Some well made points on this thread for and against clubs. As stated by several on the site, If you do not want to join a club, then do not.

That being Said The PFCFC Popyeye the Sailor Clan... I guess is a precursor to the new "Clubs" but on a larger scale.. I guess that is good as well as bad.