Dan
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Don't be nosy
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As I'm sure nothing can really be done about this I just wanted to vent about a situation that has happened to me. One of those things that, just when you thought you've seen how curious some human beings can be, someone pops up and makes you realize that you ain't seen nothin' yet.

As some may know, I'm the creator of theHeart Tokens accessory for Love Letter which was the #1 rated accessory on BGG. The majority of people who purchased my tokens rated them a 10 and up until a few days ago, 10 was the only rating they've received.

A few days ago I log in to post up another batch for sale and notice that my accessory rank has dropped from 1 to 6. So after investigating, it seems the last rating was a 5 from user PzVIE. Okay, no problem. I can accept that someone might not have liked my accessory but something didn't rub me right. Namely, the username didn't ring any bells.

Sure enough, I checked my sales list and PzVIE never purchased a set of my tokens! Obviously now I'm curious as to exactly what sort of mental gymnastics were employed to justify and compel this guy to give a rating on a product he doesn't own and has never seen. SO I decide to ask! Following is his reply:

PzVIE wrote:
sansdeity wrote:
Hello! I am the creator of the Love Letter Heart Tokens.

I was curious why you rated my accessory a 5 even though you don't own a set of tokens?

-Dan

True, I own a different set of red glass hearts, acquired at my FLGS. They serve exactly the same function as the tokens described on that Accessory page and the rating of "5" is exactly how I feel about them: Nice, but not necessary. Take it or leave it.

I would have rated it the same if I have your tokens. They are just an accessory and do nothing to improve the game, except visually. If you feel offended by that rating, I can offer you to submit a separate version entry with an image of my own - different - tokens.

Cheers,
Ron


So he purchased a set of some glass tokens at his FLGS, forms an opinion on them, and then rates a completely different set of tokens based on his impression of his glass tokens? On what planet does this make any sort of sense? It's like saying that a BMW is a crappy car based on your test drive of a Yugo. It's like saying Filet Mignon tastes like crap because you ate a hamburger.

So this guys' solution is for me to create a new accessory page for the set of tokens that HE owns, which I've never seen or used, so that he can remove his rating of MY accessory and then apply it to the accessory that HE owns.

I'm utterly speechless.

I've already spoken to an admin who basically told me. "Tough. Deal with it." which is interesting considering that I pay BGG a small portion of my earnings and that allowing random users to tarnish the ratings of a product sold exclusively here is counter intuitive.

Tell me. Am I in the wrong here? Am I viewing this situation incorrectly?

EDIT: Am I misinterpreting his "offer" at the end there?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Littlemonk
United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Young Forest Warrior
badge
Samurai trained to die with honor. Ninja trained to kill others. Shao-Lin trained to live forever!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't know exactly how these accessory pages work, but...

Does he have somewhere else to post his poor rating for what he purchased or is he correct that all the accessories of this particular type of product are lumped into one entry?

And it doesn't appear that he has an issue with the quality. It sounds like a function issue. He is free to have his opinion on such a thing.

Sounds like he's willing to make a separate entry for the tokens that he purchased. If that removes the rating from your accessory, then perhaps take him up on that offer?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryan Thunkd
United States
Florence
MA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It's unfortunate... but more than likely if he played with your version, he would still rate them a 5. When you get enough ratings his rating will be averaged out as an aberration. Until then you are stuck with it.

The best you could do is ask him politely to please not rate your item based on his opinion on someone else's item, but you have no way to compel him to do so.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph
United States
Ewing
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Christmas Card Exchange: 2009 - 2014
badge
I play at EPGS on the 1st and 3rd Saturday of the month and if you live in Eastern PA, Western NJ or Northern DE ... you should too!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I understand why you're frustrated, but I disagree with your belief that the admin should have done something about the rating because they get a small cut of each sale.

That is a precedent I would strongly object to. I'm sure there are game companies that spend way more on advertising with BGG, I don't want them being able to have ratings that they don't like pulled because the person doesn't own the game, or whatever other reason they come up with.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jacovis
United States
Las Vegas
Nevada
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ron is a regular here on BGG and has been for quite some time. He is also a very helpful and nice guy, and I doubt he meant any intentional harm. As it turns out, he has since deleted his rating, it seems, but the skewing that occurs when an item had only a few ratings is entirely not his fault. I wouldn't rate these a ten either for the exact same reasons Ron posited. They are neat, but don't "fix" anything in the base game, so they're maybe a 6 for me.

Your better course of action would be to encourage more of your buyers to post ratings and comments rather than getting upset at the guy for being honest about the product, whether yours or a similar one (BGG is definitely not perfect when it comes to categories, for sure).

As mentioned, the rating will even out over time.

Good luck with your product.

Cheers,

Jacob


Edit: you could have done this entirely without mentioning someone by name, by the way. The witch hunt was a bit uncalled for.
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mousey
Netherlands
Je suis Paris
flag msg tools
ESSEN The Game: SPIEL '13 Featuring Jonah
badge
RIP Jonah Lomu 1975-2015
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Restricting the ability to rate something to someone who owns it?

I think that part of the question should be answered with a NO.
I could have played that game or accessory at a friends place or a convention and have an opinion about it.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Debije
Netherlands
Eindhoven
The Netherlands
flag msg tools
I would also say " tough, deal with it." You have no right to tell someone how they should or should not respond to your items. Had they rated them a 10, sight unseen, you would not be complaining about it. It is a public forum and people can rate as they see fit, even if it does not match your perceived criteria. And naming people to try and publicly shame them is not cool.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
“It's all in the mind.” ― George Harrison
badge
Devoted Follower of the Most Holy Church of the Evil Bob. Possessed and down the road to become chaotic, evil & naughty. All hail the Evil Bob and his Stargate.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dan, thank you very much that you display my private message to you in public. I won't do the same with your's where you attributed me with some not-so-nice words.

As it is now already for everyone to see, I will happily repeat my answer here:

THESE TOKENS (metal, glass, rubber or organic made from the rotting bodies of dead flies) ADD NOTHING TO THE GAME, BUT OFFER A VISIUAL IMPROVEMENT. I RATE THEM A "5" ON THE BGG SCALE: AVERAGE GAME, SLIGHTLY BORING, TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT".

That is my opinion. Take it or leave it.
And please, stop whining!
32 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Liam
Scotland
flag msg tools
admin
badge
I am BGG's official honey trap
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Calling other users out in the forums is never the right response. Instead please take potential problems to an admin and let us deal with it.

Remember - if you see something you want to react negatively to, flag it and forget it.


In this case; users are free to use the rating system how they please provided they don't do so in a way that violates the community rules or terms and conditions. Users don't need to own something in order to rate it - all they need is an opinion.

Personally, I generally avoid rating things I haven't used, although with items like* this I have included the odd rating or comment (*Eg Games that are clones and accessories thats function is generic).
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave, or "Phineas" or "Tolstoy" or,
United States
Mount Holly
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
PzVIE wrote:
Dan, thank you very much that you display my private message to you in public. I won't do the same with your's where you attributed me with some not-so-nice words.

As it is now already for everyone to see, I will happily repeat my answer here:

THESE TOKENS (metal, glass, rubber or organic made from the rotting bodies of dead flies) ADD NOTHING TO THE GAME, BUT OFFER A VISIUAL IMPROVEMENT. I RATE THEM A "5" ON THE BGG SCALE: AVERAGE GAME, SLIGHTLY BORING, TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT".

That is my opinion. Take it or leave it.
And please, stop whining!

Hmmm. If I were the OP, I would now be thinking, "umm, oops.blush"

By the way OP, please don't delete your first post, if you are thinking about doing that. It will not make the thread go away, but it will make it (and possibly you?) look a little funny.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of rating something you've not directly used/played/experienced, the idea that you should only be allowed to rate things you own seems a horrible proposal which would remove a huge number of useful valid ratings.

Half of my own ratings are for games which I don't own, but which I've played, and a lot of ratings from other people whose ratings I trust are for games which they don't own.

If one wanted to make some such rule, it would make far more sense to me to say that you can't rate a game unless you've logged a play of it. I trust someone's opinion a lot more if I know they've actually played the game than if I know that they merely own the game (but may or may not have played it yet).

(But to be clear: I think it would be a mistake to force people log plays or to mark games as owned in order to be able to rate/comment. On the whole, ratings/comments are useful and good, so I see no reason to make a barrier to people who might want to do them.)



And someone might have owned it but no longer owns it. Why should their rating no longer be permitted?

And some people simply aren't interested in using BGG to track what games they own, so they don't mark any games owned, yet they are still interested in leaving ratings and comments about games to help other users.



In any case, people could trivially get around such a rule by simply falsely marking that they own the item in question (or by falsely logging a play of the game in question.) So it's a proposal which wouldn't prevent people from doing rating unowned or unplayed games, but which creates pointless extra busy work for users who don't care about tracking their owned games or logged plays.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
“It's all in the mind.” ― George Harrison
badge
Devoted Follower of the Most Holy Church of the Evil Bob. Possessed and down the road to become chaotic, evil & naughty. All hail the Evil Bob and his Stargate.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sansdeity wrote:

EDIT: Am I misinterpreting his "offer" at the end there?

No. Usually I mean what I say. The offer still stands. Just say the magic word meeple
3 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Bolton
England
Devizes
Wiltshire
flag msg tools
nothing to see here, move along
badge
.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Abracadabra!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Don't be nosy
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
the_bummer wrote:
I don't know exactly how these accessory pages work, but...

Does he have somewhere else to post his poor rating for what he purchased or is he correct that all the accessories of this particular type of product are lumped into one entry?


No and yes. Currently, no. However all he would have to do is create a new page for his glass tokens. Kind of like I did by creating a page for my tokens. My page was not intended to be a "catch-all" for every heart token every made by anyone. It was specifically a product page for my tokens which are currently only sold through BGG.

Quote:
And it doesn't appear that he has an issue with the quality. It sounds like a function issue. He is free to have his opinion on such a thing.


I totally agree! All I'm saying is leave that opinion on a page for the actual product you own. As I said before, that's like rating a BMW based on your experiences with a Yugo and justifying it just because "they're both cars".

Quote:
Sounds like he's willing to make a separate entry for the tokens that he purchased. If that removes the rating from your accessory, then perhaps take him up on that offer?


I completely misunderstood his offer. The wording initially made it seem as if he wanted me to make a page for his tokens.

Thunkd wrote:
It's unfortunate... but more than likely if he played with your version, he would still rate them a 5. When you get enough ratings his rating will be averaged out as an aberration. Until then you are stuck with it.

The best you could do is ask him politely to please not rate your item based on his opinion on someone else's item, but you have no way to compel him to do so.


I have no problem with someone who actually purchases my item rating it a 5. They've had the opportunity to actually use it and get firsthand experience with it.

ElCid91 wrote:
I understand why you're frustrated, but I disagree with your belief that the admin should have done something about the rating because they get a small cut of each sale.

That is a precedent I would strongly object to. I'm sure there are game companies that spend way more on advertising with BGG, I don't want them being able to have ratings that they don't like pulled because the person doesn't own the game, or whatever other reason they come up with.


It's not about pulling ratings you don't like. It's about pulling ratings by people who don't actually own the product. On the flip side, everyone on this site could rate my product a 1. How is that fair or logical in any respect? What is preventing people from doing that? It invites the malicious or lazy to rate a product low regardless of whether or not they've actually seen it with their own eyes. And if that precedent is set, then how reliable are reviews on BGG?

mi_de wrote:
I would also say " tough, deal with it." You have no right to tell someone how they should or should not respond to your items. Had they rated them a 10, sight unseen, you would not be complaining about it. It is a public forum and people can rate as they see fit, even if it does not match your perceived criteria. And naming people to try and publicly shame them is not cool.


I agree. I have no right to tell someone how to rate my product. But does someone have a right to rate my product if they don't even own it or have never seen it? And I'm positive he's never actually seen them unless he's left Austria recently on a gaming trip because I've never sold them to anyone in Austria.

Hoya wrote:
By the way OP, please don't delete your first post, if you are thinking about doing that. It will not make the thread go away, but it will make it (and possibly you?) look a little funny.


I would never do that. It's something I feel strongly about, being the result of my hard work. It is a small source of income for me and my family. I've actually been approached by a few gaming companies to create limited edition tokens, one of which should be up on Kickstarter relatively soon. So the end game here is not a few sales on BGG. It's parlaying this into something a bigger. Why shouldn't I feel strongly about this?

If nothing else comes from this specific situation at least it was fostered discussion of the ratings system and gotten people to think about ratings of products by people who have never even seen said product.

monkeyhandz wrote:
r{Calling other users out in the forums is never the right response. Instead please take potential problems to an admin and let us deal with it.


That was wrong of me. I was completely frustrated regarding this situation I feel strongly about. I actually designed, created, programmed, polished, packaged, and mailed each of these sets of tokens and I take pride in my creation and hard work.

monkeyhandz wrote:
In this case; users are free to use the rating system how they please provided they don't do so in a way that violates the community rules or terms and conditions. Users don't need to own something in order to rate it - all they need is an opinion.

Personally, I generally avoid rating things I haven't used, although with items like* this I have included the odd rating or comment (*Eg Games that are clones and accessories thats function is generic).


It's obviously something I just need to accept despite it contrasting with my personal ethics. I own a stainless steel coffee travel mug. Does that mean I can accurately rate every coffee travel mug ever made just because they're both travel mugs? It honestly makes zero sense to me.

russ wrote:
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of rating something you've not directly used/played/experienced, the idea that you should only be allowed to rate things you own seems a horrible proposal which would remove a huge number of useful valid ratings.

Half of my own ratings are for games which I don't own, but which I've played, and a lot of ratings from other people whose ratings I trust are for games which they don't own.


Apparently, despite not owning something or having experienced it first hand, those opinions are just as valid as someone who owns the item. So when you say "valid" rating, on BGG that means any rating by any person for any reason whether or not they've actually used or seen the item.

How that falls under the definition of valid escapes me.

PzVIE wrote:
sansdeity wrote:

EDIT: Am I misinterpreting his "offer" at the end there?

No. Usually I mean what I say. The offer still stands. Just say the magic word meeple


I apologize to you, Ron, for bringing your name out into the open. That was wrong of me.

Based on your last private message I'm fairly sure you've rescinded the offer to create a page for your glass tokens and rate them based on your experience with them. In fact, this has become a case where, according to your private message, I should just be happy with the 5 before you lower it down to a 1 just for spite. Which of course would prove my point about this whole thing.

I would prefer it if you would create a page for your glass tokens where you can rate them based on your experience with them. However if you want to keep your rating of my product based on your experience with a different product, as I've been repeatedly told, I'll just have to "deal with it". Likewise if you wish to spitefully lower your rating to a 1.






3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
“It's all in the mind.” ― George Harrison
badge
Devoted Follower of the Most Holy Church of the Evil Bob. Possessed and down the road to become chaotic, evil & naughty. All hail the Evil Bob and his Stargate.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sansdeity wrote:
However all he would have to do is create a new page for his glass tokens. Kind of like I did by creating a page for my tokens. My page was not intended to be a "catch-all" for every heart token every made by anyone. It was specifically a product page for my tokens which are currently only sold through BGG.

You seem to misunderstand an important concept here: THIS IS NOT YOUR PAGE! It's ours and every registered user is allowed to use it within the rules for this site, as it is owned by BGG meeple

If you want your own page, get a domain and set one up. BGG even allows you to advertise for it in the Press Release forum! But here you have to accept different people with different views.

sansdeity wrote:
And I'm positive he's never actually seen them unless he's left Austria recently on a gaming trip because I've never sold them to anyone in Austria.

So maybe I left my little country and actually saw your tokens ... maybe even played with them ... who knows for sure? meeple
However, I know what stainless steel is and how it feels - this stuff is available in Austria too, you know - and I'm able to see the image you uploaded. cool

sansdeity wrote:
I would prefer it if you would create a page for your glass tokens where you can rate them based on your experience with them. However if you want to keep your rating of my product based on your experience with a different product, as I've been repeatedly told, I'll just have to "deal with it". Likewise if you wish to spitefully lower your rating to a 1.

Yes please, deal with it and let go.

Note beside: I wouldn't rate it a "1" just because of some stupid revenge or something; I think I'm above such infantile behavior. I rate it "5" because I think it adds nothing to the game; it's just a visual add-on. It doesn't make the game better, or easier to handle, it just pimps it. That's my opinion and my rating. But I think I explained that already.

And as a final note: I have never driven a a Yugo, (although I drove a BMW once), but from the images alone, I hereby rate a Yugo a "2". whistle
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
“It's all in the mind.” ― George Harrison
badge
Devoted Follower of the Most Holy Church of the Evil Bob. Possessed and down the road to become chaotic, evil & naughty. All hail the Evil Bob and his Stargate.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sansdeity wrote:
I apologize to you, Ron, for bringing your name out into the open. That was wrong of me.

Apology accepted meeple

So, do you want me to submit a different version now or not? I already uploaded an image of my tokens (still in Geekmod), so that people can clearly see that there's more than one version of tokens for this game.

I cannot submit a separate game page, as my cheap tokens serve exactly the same function as your steel tokens. But you can convince an admin to split the entries after the version is uploaded.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph
United States
Ewing
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Christmas Card Exchange: 2009 - 2014
badge
I play at EPGS on the 1st and 3rd Saturday of the month and if you live in Eastern PA, Western NJ or Northern DE ... you should too!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb


PzVIE wrote:
sansdeity wrote:
I apologize to you, Ron, for bringing your name out into the open. That was wrong of me.

Apology accepted meeple

So, do you want me to submit a different version now or not? I already uploaded an image of my tokens (still in Geekmod), so that people can clearly see that there's more than one version of tokens for this game.

I cannot submit a separate game page, as my cheap tokens serve exactly the same function as your steel tokens. But you can convince an admin to split the entries after the version is uploaded.


I've never posted any of the accessories I've created for my games. If I want to post the hearts I made for love letter, they go on the same page as the metal ones?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kenny VenOsdel
United States
Saint Paul
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have no problem with people rating something on their expected rating if that is what they want to do (I typically would not). If you want to change someone's mind you need to convince them to do that with your product. Perhaps send Ron a set for free so he can see how much better yours are? The onus is on you to promote your product, not on your customers.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
sansdeity wrote:
russ wrote:
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of rating something you've not directly used/played/experienced, the idea that you should only be allowed to rate things you own seems a horrible proposal which would remove a huge number of useful valid ratings.

Half of my own ratings are for games which I don't own, but which I've played, and a lot of ratings from other people whose ratings I trust are for games which they don't own.


Apparently, despite not owning something or having experienced it first hand, those opinions are just as valid as someone who owns the item. So when you say "valid" rating, on BGG that means any rating by any person for any reason whether or not they've actually used or seen the item.

How that falls under the definition of valid escapes me.


I am boggled at your amazing misrepresentation of what I wrote.

Nowhere did I say that a rating based on no experience is valid.

Do you seriously not understand that someone can have valid experience with a game without actually owning it?

Do YOU own every game which you have played?

Do you really think you yourself should not be allowed to rate games which you have played but don't own because you have no valid opinion on games which you don't own?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryan Thunkd
United States
Florence
MA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
russ wrote:
sansdeity wrote:
russ wrote:
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of rating something you've not directly used/played/experienced, the idea that you should only be allowed to rate things you own seems a horrible proposal which would remove a huge number of useful valid ratings.

Half of my own ratings are for games which I don't own, but which I've played, and a lot of ratings from other people whose ratings I trust are for games which they don't own.


Apparently, despite not owning something or having experienced it first hand, those opinions are just as valid as someone who owns the item. So when you say "valid" rating, on BGG that means any rating by any person for any reason whether or not they've actually used or seen the item.

How that falls under the definition of valid escapes me.


I am boggled at your amazing misrepresentation of what I wrote.

Nowhere did I say that a rating based on no experience is valid.

Do you seriously not understand that someone can have valid experience with a game without actually owning it?

Do YOU own every game which you have played?

Do you really think you yourself should not be allowed to rate games which you have played but don't own because you have no valid opinion on games which you don't own?


Russ,
Maybe I can explain his thought process better. So let's imagine that you didn't actually own a Go set. Despite the fact that you've logged over 550 plays, someone who actually owns the set, even if they've never actually gotten to play it, would have a better understanding of the game than you, and therefore their rating would be more valid than yours. Make sense now?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Don't be nosy
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
PzVIE wrote:
So, do you want me to submit a different version now or not? I already uploaded an image of my tokens (still in Geekmod), so that people can clearly see that there's more than one version of tokens for this game.

I cannot submit a separate game page, as my cheap tokens serve exactly the same function as your steel tokens. But you can convince an admin to split the entries after the version is uploaded.


I believe you can create a new Game Accessory page for the tokens. For instance, there is more than one accessory page for Munchkin d6 dice. One for generic dice and one for rainbow colored dice. All that would need to be done is to change the name. "Love Letter: Glass Tokens" for example. In hindsight, had I foreseen this dilemma, I would have specified "Love Letter: Custom Steel Heart Tokens" in the name. I thought just putting it in the description would suffice.

russ wrote:
sansdeity wrote:
russ wrote:
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of rating something you've not directly used/played/experienced, the idea that you should only be allowed to rate things you own seems a horrible proposal which would remove a huge number of useful valid ratings.

Half of my own ratings are for games which I don't own, but which I've played, and a lot of ratings from other people whose ratings I trust are for games which they don't own.


Apparently, despite not owning something or having experienced it first hand, those opinions are just as valid as someone who owns the item. So when you say "valid" rating, on BGG that means any rating by any person for any reason whether or not they've actually used or seen the item.

How that falls under the definition of valid escapes me.


I am boggled at your amazing misrepresentation of what I wrote.

Nowhere did I say that a rating based on no experience is valid.

Do you seriously not understand that someone can have valid experience with a game without actually owning it?

Do YOU own every game which you have played?

Do you really think you yourself should not be allowed to rate games which you have played but don't own because you have no valid opinion on games which you don't own?


I think you're misunderstanding me. Apologies if I wasn't clear.

I was not arguing the possibility of having a valid opinion of something even if you don't own it. I've played numerous games and enjoyed numerous accessories which I don't own and feel that I have a valid opinion on them. I'm in complete agreement with you on that. I've already realized that restricting the ability to rate items based solely on ownership is a faulty method.

I was merely contemplating what exactly constitutes a "valid" rating when there is no requirement to post a rating and when it's been reiterated that anyone can rate something for any reason (although some personally frown on this practice).

I was more thinking out loud about the concept of a "valid" rating in a system where there is no criteria for posting a rating at all other than creating an account. Currently, I could let my 1-year old daughter click on a "1" rating for a game and it carries as much weight as someone's rating whom has hundreds of hours invested in that game. Having an open system allows for non-owners and such to rate something however it also allows for anomalies where someone might have had a bad experience and gives a low rating based on that. Also the possibility of someone posting a rating who hasn't had any experience at all and is just rating something based on an imagined experience ("Well, I really disliked Love Letter so I'll give Coup a 1 rating since it's just a little different from Love Letter"). Such anomalies will be averaged out by a large enough number of ratings however when we're talking handfuls of ratings those anomalies can have a more detrimental affect.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
sansdeity wrote:
I think you're misunderstanding me. Apologies if I wasn't clear.

OK, thanks for clarifying! Makes more sense now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Bolton
England
Devizes
Wiltshire
flag msg tools
nothing to see here, move along
badge
.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I do sympathise with the OP, it must be annoying - particularly when you have a personal stake in producing the product rated. I would probably feel the same way.

However I don't feel any crime has been committed as the ratings are not customer feedback like on ebay or etsy.

Just like game ratings anyone can leave a rating declaring these products as excellent or rubbish, owners or not. Everyone can rate a product based on their own subjective criteria. I wouldn't want a game designer geek mailing me to ask why I rated their game 2 or 3.

You are entitled to feel annoyed and express this. To a friend or someone in your house maybe but probably on a public Internet forum wasn't the best place.

It looks like everyone who actually owns your products thinks they are great and I see no reason this won't continue. Eventually the item rating will improve and larger numbers will hide the minority who don't care for the accessories.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
“It's all in the mind.” ― George Harrison
badge
Devoted Follower of the Most Holy Church of the Evil Bob. Possessed and down the road to become chaotic, evil & naughty. All hail the Evil Bob and his Stargate.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dan, after contacting an admin to inquire the correct procedure for a new accessory entry/version, I just learned that accessories have to be produced for exactly that game. Meaning if anyone produces tokens specifically for Love Letter regarding of material or looks, they will become a version of this entry. The admin in question permitted me to quote her GeekMail (see below).

admin wrote:
Hi Ron,

You're right about the version. The animeeples for Agricola would be a similar example:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgameaccessory/138404/agric...

However, accessories have to be published specifically for that game, which your heart tokens are not.

You can add custom version info for games, though it seems you can't do so for accessories.

Over time it's going to happen more and more; people are going to rate whatever tokens they have and/or more people are going to publish tokens, and the rating will get muddied. People could see that thread and rate the tokens a 1 or a 10 based solely on their reaction to it and him. Ratings aren't something that can be controlled.


As I can easily foretell that your next post will be something like "remove your set as it is not specifically made for the game", I will answer up front that I won't, because I like to track my collection with all its expansions and add-ons; the usefulness of them, their price, date of purchase, and so on. That's one reason why I spend so much time on BGG. It helps me to keep track of my stuff. meeple
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Don't be nosy
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
PzVIE wrote:
Dan, after contacting an admin to inquire the correct procedure for a new accessory entry/version, I just learned that accessories have to be produced for exactly that game. Meaning if anyone produces tokens specifically for Love Letter regarding of material or looks, they will become a version of this entry. The admin in question permitted me to quote her GeekMail (see below).

admin wrote:
Hi Ron,

You're right about the version. The animeeples for Agricola would be a similar example:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgameaccessory/138404/agric...

However, accessories have to be published specifically for that game, which your heart tokens are not.

You can add custom version info for games, though it seems you can't do so for accessories.

Over time it's going to happen more and more; people are going to rate whatever tokens they have and/or more people are going to publish tokens, and the rating will get muddied. People could see that thread and rate the tokens a 1 or a 10 based solely on their reaction to it and him. Ratings aren't something that can be controlled.


As I can easily foretell that your next post will be something like "remove your set as it is not specifically made for the game", I will answer up front that I won't, because I like to track my collection with all its expansions and add-ons; the usefulness of them, their price, date of purchase, and so on. That's one reason why I spend so much time on BGG. It helps me to keep track of my stuff. meeple


Interesting.

The thing is, I specifically made these heart tokens for use with Love Letter. Love letter was the inspiration behind making them, I promoted them within the Love Letter community, and a set was even presented to Seiji Kanai (you can see the picture on my accessory page). There is a forum thread on how to purchase a set of tokens and marketplace entries to purchase my tokens are linked through the accessory page.

It kind of boggles my mind that anyone going to that page can misconstrue it as a placeholder for any and all heart shaped tokens made in the world.

Sure, someone could use my tokens as poker chips or as a Monopoly playing piece (just as I could use a set of Munchkin dice for Yahtzee) but the game they were specifically designed for is Love Letter which is why each set contains exactly 13 tokens. I'm sure just about any other heart tokens that can be bought and used with Love Letter will be sold individually or in clumps of 10, 25, 5, etc. So I agree with the admin - your tokens were not specifically made for Love Letter. However, mine are.

This is why I object to other tokens being lumped in with mine. For example, there are several accessories which have separate entries but for all intents and purposes are the same.

+6 Bag of Munchkin Dice
+6 Bag of Munchkin Dice - Rainbow color

Same exact scenario. The only difference is color.

In fact, I'd argue that our tokens are far more different than these sets of dice. Not only are our tokens different material (glass and metal) but the design is completely different.

Then we have the various Agricola player pieces. Exactly the same except for color:
Agricola: Pink player pieces
Agricola: Turquoise player pieces
Agricola: Yellow player pieces

The list goes on. Different color cones for Don't Stop, etc.

So if separate entries can be made for Agricola player pieces where the only difference is color, and separate entries can be made for Don't Stop cones where the only difference is color, why can't my tokens, which were specifically made for Love Letter, have their own entry while there is another entry for generic heart tokens that can be bought anywhere in any quantity?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.