Ranting about the site going in the wrong direction

[RobertBr]

So in the absence of objective data, I'm forced to rely on anecdotal evidence:

No you aren't. You can refrain from judgement if you have only bad data. I don't like all the changes BGA makes, but I get why they don't engage and often refuse to 'listen' (by which entitled people always mean 'do what I say'). The loud noisy voices on the forums are often deeply unrepresentative - the example of the dice conspiracy theorists was already used, but you can also look at the vocal group who campaigned to have Elo return to no time limit games and the way in which their justifications for wanting it are internally inconsistent and they just refuse to acknowledge the problem the change was intended to solve.

The possibility that most changes are actually net positives in the right direction seems very high.

[GTSchemer]

It is borderline offensive to compare conspiracies about dice (which I as an engineer and developer am aware are false) with concrete bullet points about negative player impacts after updates (e.g. more clutter and visual noise for those of us sensitive to that, missing functions in the case of the new lobby, with other details discussed earlier.).

[maveleo]

So in the absence of objective data, I'm forced to rely on anecdotal evidence:

No you aren't. You can refrain from judgement if you have only bad data. I don't like all the changes BGA makes, but I get why they don't engage and often refuse to 'listen' (by which entitled people always mean 'do what I say'). The loud noisy voices on the forums are often deeply unrepresentative - the example of the dice conspiracy theorists was already used, but you can also look at the vocal group who campaigned to have Elo return to no time limit games and the way in which their justifications for wanting it are internally inconsistent and they just refuse to acknowledge the problem the change was intended to solve.

The possibility that most changes are actually net positives in the right direction seems very high.

I believe they don't listen and they don't want to listen to anything. Not sure if they are short staffed or short sighted but think about it, is not just the forum... If you complain about a moderation you risk your penalty to be increased, to report a bug you need to fill in a huge form and hope that some one else vote for it, the forum as usual is moderated but not really administered.
For the rest... We can all see the issues with Arena and ELO, winning streaks and misrepresentation of the values but all these voices are ending unanswered.
This is simply an amateurs platform that growth too much and the reflection of it is in every issue unanswered or voice unheard

[RobertBr]

This is simply an amatorial platform that growth too much and the reflection of it is in every issue unanswered or voice unheard

I am fairly sure you do not mean that the site is driven by a desire for passionate physical relations.

Perhaps you meant that it is driven by a desire for profit (which would be the implication of 'amoral'). If so, yes, obviously. But that would imply that most decisions were made because they increased profit - that they were not, in fact, going in the right direction.

You might want to consider how you word things as 'winning streaks and misrepresentation of the values' could easily be understood as you being a member of the conspiracy brigade - in which case you aren't really helping the OPs position.

[RobertBr]

It is borderline offensive to compare conspiracies about dice (which I as an engineer and developer am aware are false) with concrete bullet points ...

No it isn't. It might be offensive to *equate* the two, but the person who raised it was not doing that. The point is simply that we can point to something where the forum (or at least vocal users in the forum) are clearly and obviously wrong about what is in the best interests of the site and the playing community - and should be ignored. Its therefore hard to know how many other, more superficially reasonable, positions are also badly unsound.

[Phoxtrot]

It is borderline offensive to compare conspiracies about dice (which I as an engineer and developer am aware are false) with concrete bullet points ...

No it isn't. It might be offensive to *equate* the two, but the person who raised it was not doing that. The point is simply that we can point to something where the forum (or at least vocal users in the forum) are clearly and obviously wrong about what is in the best interests of the site and the playing community - and should be ignored. Its therefore hard to know how many other, more superficially reasonable, positions are also badly unsound.

I do think it is borderline offensive. There is a clear distinction between conspiracy theories and reasonable concerns even if those concerns aren't necessarily conclusive. The concerns are reasonable, not just superficially reasonable, this does not however means that they represent a majority of players or that there isn't something that compensates or more than compensates those concerns. Most people are aware of all that so yeah, the comparison to conspiracy theories feels like a cheap way to ignore those concerns.

[GTSchemer]

I do think it is borderline offensive. There is a clear distinction between conspiracy theories and reasonable concerns even if those concerns aren't necessarily conclusive. The concerns are reasonable, not just superficially reasonable, this does not however means that they represent a majority of players or that there isn't something that compensates or more than compensates those concerns. Most people are aware of all that so yeah, the comparison to conspiracy theories feels like a cheap way to ignore those concerns.

Precisely. It is even more offensive because some of us (e.g. developers like myself) have even spent significant effort to test random generation code, do math on results, and educate people about how statistical distributions work.

And yet, we are the same people who are negatively impacted by some specific cases. Things like "It is now harder to see details about my active games" are simple and concrete, not wild conspiracies about dice.

Obviously they may not affect most players, but that's how any sort of option or accessibility works. MOST people don't need wheelchair ramps. Those aren't for MOST people. They are for the people who benefit.

[ChiefPointThief]

Have you considered that maybe those changes were a big success, and only a minority of players (those who complain about it in the forums) think otherwise? If the number and vocality of negative reports was the only measure, we'd have to conclude the BGA dice are rigged

Just because everyone doesn't decide to complain about changes in the forums doesn't mean that they like them or that they think they are good. For instance every time I've mentioned the new elo changes to people outside the forums they thought it was bad.

It is borderline offensive to compare conspiracies about dice (which I as an engineer and developer am aware are false) with concrete bullet points ...

No it isn't. It might be offensive to *equate* the two, but the person who raised it was not doing that. The point is simply that we can point to something where the forum (or at least vocal users in the forum) are clearly and obviously wrong about what is in the best interests of the site and the playing community - and should be ignored. Its therefore hard to know how many other, more superficially reasonable, positions are also badly unsound.

Huh? How can you nullify "concrete bullet points" about other topics just because a different group of people think the dice are rigged ?

[Jellby]

I do think it is borderline offensive.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but the point I tried to make (and the only "comparison") is that the amount or rate of forum posts is not a reliable measure of how good or bad a given "feature" is.

The arguments and reasons in the posts? Sure. But not the number or length.

Just because everyone doesn't decide to complain about changes in the forums doesn't mean that they like them or that they think they are good.

Of course, and just because everyone doesn't decide to praise them doesn't mean they think they are bad.

Personally, I agree with the complaints and don't like the recent changes. But I don't know if the majority of the people (or the target audience for BGA) likes them or not, I usually don't agree with majorities.

[maveleo]

It is borderline offensive to compare conspiracies about dice (which I as an engineer and developer am aware are false) with concrete bullet points ...

No it isn't. It might be offensive to *equate* the two, but the person who raised it was not doing that. The point is simply that we can point to something where the forum (or at least vocal users in the forum) are clearly and obviously wrong about what is in the best interests of the site and the playing community - and should be ignored. Its therefore hard to know how many other, more superficially reasonable, positions are also badly unsound.

I do think it is borderline offensive. There is a clear distinction between conspiracy theories and reasonable concerns even if those concerns aren't necessarily conclusive. The concerns are reasonable, not just superficially reasonable, this does not however means that they represent a majority of players or that there isn't something that compensates or more than compensates those concerns. Most people are aware of all that so yeah, the comparison to conspiracy theories feels like a cheap way to ignore those concerns.

100% ! Is an easy way to tag someone's opinion without fact checking or better understand the motivation. But again...how do you talk to someone that doesn't want to listen?