BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't know how much your word means to you. I thought you said you'd stay away from the discussion. If I say something like that, I do it.

The above went like this:
1. Someone who does not usually use the forums wrote a post with a sensible suggestion about how to promote the game. This is RELEVANT to this thread. This is spot on on TOPIC. This is CONSTRUCTIVE.
2. God forbid. You came out right away and asked why he couldn't do it himself? This is NOT constructive. Note that you did NOT discuss whether the suggestion itself had merit, you were only out to get someone who dared to suggest that the management should consider an idea
3. Knecht weighed in and said users don't have any meaningful incentive by the game to do things like this on their own. At this point you had already reached your objective since you successfully managed to derail the conversation from "this is a good idea" to "why don't you do things like this on your own"
4. You say that increasing users is a big enough reward. Nobody really challenged the underlying assumption that working for free would produce results, but that's fine
5. Knecht explained it won't make a difference in his country even if he dedicated himself to promote the game for free
6. At this point I had enough of you acting as some kind of Mother Theresa and I pointed out that, logically, if you really believe what you are asking others to do is worthwhile, you can surely show everyone you have done in the past or tell us what exactly you're planning to do to promote BB for free, which is exactly what you are asking others to do.

Note that I CHOSE not to comment after number 2 and I did only after you insisted. The same way I gave hrudey the benefit of the doubt in the FA thread before commenting. And the same way I refrained from posting further there after I collected 5 threads worth of comments from 7-8 years ago regarding the issue.

You missed a little bit of it. A more accurate timeline is:

1. Someone who isn't active in the global forums as much as the local forums did have a sensible suggestion.
2. Knecht responded to it with "Whats the incentive to do so? 4 weeks supporter? Yeehaaaaa.."
3. Manon answered knecht: more users in the game".
4. a couple of posts on an earlier discussion from O Bear and justme.
5. Knecht says that users need to be rewarded for doing the work of promoting the game.
6. Manon says "if you don't want new users, I don't know what to say."
and so on.

Now, your assertion is that coachlambini made a suggestion, and Manon immediately came out and asked why he couldn't do it himself. That is absolutely, undeniably false - coachlambini made his post, knecht immediately dismissed it, and Manon engaged Knecht. I'm sure that was an honest mistake and that you'll appreciate the correction.

highly unlikely to make me consider the rest of the words you throw out alongside them as having any value.

See point about shutting down conversations. It appears the mafia can discuss the merit of a specific point but others can't. So, if person A points out person B inconsistencies, you're not even trying to make the case that that person B is actually reasonable, you prefer to just attack person A or dismiss his entire point because of something completely unrelated to it and perhaps your own personal animosity with person A. So, I ask you, whose opinion has more value, the guy who wants to discuss the merit of an opinion or they guy who wants to avoid discussing it? Again so we're on the same page: I'm A, Manon is B and you're the guy who's trying to help B, not on merit, but by attacking A. If you really wanted to discuss the merit of my assertions you would explain to us why it's not hypocritical to behave like Man

A few quick notes, as I have many other things I need to be doing today and I'm not at all intent on going into everything you typed now or possibly ever.

First, whatever opinions I choose to express or not are my own choices. The fact that A and B are disagreeing on something doesn't mean that I have to specifically take a side on that or address that - or else I'd spend my entire life posting in every forum thread in which there's any hint of disagreement. A could post something I entirely disagree with but don't feel strongly enough to comment on, B can post something I agree with but in a way that I disagree with, and I can choose to discuss the part that I feel like discussing.

Second, Manon has already disputed your statement that he's suggesting users should be responsible for recruiting. If that was the point you were hoping to make, it appears we're in universal agreement.

Third, if your post had been something like "Hey, Manon, I don't think that mafia comment was helpful. I don't think we should expect users to recruit" then it would have been clear that you were trying to make a point, and that a reasonable expectation would be that Manon would (as he had) clarified his remarks, maybe some other people would have agreed with you, and we'd all be done with that.

But that wasn't at all what you posted. Not one sentence in your post was at all like that; the only reference at all to the topic of recruiting users began with "If you had any honesty at all". And your insistence that my post was to help Manon's point in this A/B nonsense is nonsense - I'm not defending what he said, or what you claim he said. Nor was your post on that topic at all. The post I responded to was nothing but taking an opportunity to react to one negative comment by pissing all over Manon in specific and the staff in general - and *that* is what I was responding to.

Read post 179 again, and tell me honestly if you think the point you are trying to make was: "Hey, Manon, I don't think that mafia comment was helpful. I don't think we should expect users to recruit" or if it was instead an attack on the staff to the point that there was not a single sentence that was primarily intended for anything other than to denigrate the staff.

If you're going to call out the idea of attacking the messenger rather than the topic, read post 179 again. Read my response again. Ask yourself why you have this notion that I should be discussing a topic that you yourself didn't feel worth the effort of making an honest attempt at.

I haven't been following forums lately, and don't have the energy to read through all of this, but something else has been bugging me.

Where exactly is the money going? There was plenty from Utopia, and community was hoping it would be invested into game development.

Since we know current active BBs are employees, and Mark owns the game, I'm starting to think Mark fills his pockets, while Marin,Patrick,Ryan do all the work. This would be really bad.

I apologize if it's against the rules to write about this kind of stuff, delete it if it is. But in that case, an ownership change would be the most important thing this game needs. Let the people who work get the rewards, and they will naturally try to improve their business.

Hey guys, I found on old article on the origins of BB. Some of you might find it interesting .http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/mass-high-tech/200...