Yup, I just did the same again:
Brought up Harlequin from my favourites list, where it's been for a year or more
Clicked on Middle Earth
Went somewhere
Clicked on Links, there were 2 links to Middle Earth, which I guessed might be the site for non-new players
Picked the right one luckily
Clicked on communicate with other players
Narrowly avoided accidentally subscribing to the MEPBM list Arrrgh!
Worked out which link was for the forum
Read something confusing about two parts one of which wanted no new posts
Read message about needing an account to post, which had baffled me last night - I've got an account, but this I now see is not the same as my gaming account. An account is when money is involved isn't it?
Created an account and succeed on fourth attempt after ignoring messages to e-mail Sam. It seems that there were required fields or something, but they weren't indicated.
Logged in, succeeding on the second attempt
Wrote good long reply to "Nerd filling time", chose spell check option, then clicked something which made my post vanish. Posted a test, which appeared, and confirmed that my long post was gone forever. Swore a lot. Why am I described as a "peon" and why couldn't I get the little piccy of my choice?
Wrote shorter reply to Nerd, and to game 63 thread, making sure to include plenty to make Clint uncomfortable Made mental note of thread about how fantastic the Americans think Harlequin is - without qualification apparently. Am going to the toilet now but will get back to it
How about just a single link in each of your sites that takes me straight to the MEPBM discussion forum?
> Specifically what is the problem here with the websites?
> I can look into that then.
It's just awkward having several Middle Earth & Harlequin webites
that's all. Specifically I had to trawl through a few sites before
finding the one which would lead me to the message board. Maybe a link
on the main Harlequin site?
I will agree wholeheartedly that the multiplicity of Harlequin-
related sites is bloody confusing. It takes an age simply to find out
which one has which bit of information on it.
Hi,
Sorry about that. They all have a specific function. Ideally they would all
be one website, but there are reasons why this would be bad.
www.harlequingames.com is for six different games - you shouldn't go there
unless you play in another game than ME. It gets 400 hits a week.
www.middleearthgames.com is the main site for players of ME. I try to
include there everything that you guys might look for. This is the website
to visit for articles and downloads. I post something new every two-four
weeks. Recently I added six player articles and the BoFA stuff. It gets 400
hits a week.
www.middleearth.co.uk is for newbies. It doesn't have any jargon and is
deliberately brief. Its where to send your granny when she asks what its all
about. It gets 100 hits a week.
www.pbmforum.com is for the hordes of North American players who begged for
a bulletin board (as a very broad generalisation)
No idea how many hits, but there have been 1000 threads since February.
A couple of people have suggested simple improvements to the sites, such as
'How about just a single link in each of your sites that takes me straight
to the MEPBM discussion forum?'.
The problem is that this suggestion sounds great in isolation, but I don't
believe is wise when you consider the multiple functions of the website. I
already feel that the www.middleearthgames.com website has *FAR* too much
writing on the main page, but this suggestion would have even more.
If any of you design website architecture, I'd be interested in a
discussion. *But, lets take it off the list, as its boring for most folk*
Bree does what it does. It is what it is. That's it,
that's all. It isn't, hasn't, and couldn't imagine
trying to be anything else.
Similarly, Cars drive on land, planes fly over it.
If you want to fly, fly. Go about your business and
fly! All the power to you! But some people prefer
to drive. Don't tell them they're stupid, outdated,
and no good because their car is useless, etc. You
fly, they drive. Everyone gets to where they're
going, everyone is happy.
All three methods of communicating (that I'm aware of,
Bree, mepbmlist, pbmforum.com) are different. People
may want to write emails, others require reading material
(yes, western humans still read from paper..) and others
want to spout schoolyard splutterings from behind an alias.
There is no way to combine those into one. Period.
Happy Saturday,
BradB
···
_______________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca
If the poll showed lots of votes for 2 items, some votes for 1, and almost no votes
for 2, then the last 2 would be candidates for the junk heap. Certainly germane to a
debate about how players want to deal with player communication and interaction in the
future. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Or more to the point, if most players don't
think it's broke, don't fix it.
I guess we'll simply have to disagree about what constitutes a worthy debate. I think
it should be a debate about what players currently like and what they'd like to
change, while you believe the debate should be about whether people like the idea you
came up with, (ie; a single meeting place vs. multiple meeting places), and nothing
else. So be it.
And as for Bree, the ONLY other comments besides yours have been either neutral (a
couple) or quite positive (a few). While you can point to the relative lack of actual
numbers of respondents, the fact that you have had little or NO support for your
opinion so far, (and that Clint has had LOTS of support for Bree), would seem to
indicate that you are most definitely in the minority here. I very much doubt that you
will sway popular support, (or Clint), so it would probably be best to just drop the
criticisms of Bree at this point. It only diminishes your other arguments when you
focus on one which you have obviously lost, at least as far as convincing others to
your way of thinking.
You miss the point. My proposal (for debating) was that we'd do better
with a single meeting place rather than multiple meeting places. We _know_
that Bree, the list, the board, have their existing supporters. We know
they're liked. If any opening questions was appropriate, then it should
have been one which attempted to find out if people thought _in priciple_
whether or not we were losing something by having multiple meeting
places. IF the answer was yes, the next part, "which then do we scrap?"
would have been more difficult to resolve, and may eventually have required
comparative voting.
On Saturday, October 27, 2001 9:11 AM, BradB wrote:
Bree does what it does. It is what it is. That's it,
that's all. It isn't, hasn't, and couldn't imagine
trying to be anything else.
Similarly, Cars drive on land, planes fly over it.
If you want to fly, fly. Go about your business and
fly! All the power to you! But some people prefer
to drive. Don't tell them they're stupid, outdated,
and no good because their car is useless, etc. You
fly, they drive. Everyone gets to where they're
going, everyone is happy.
All three methods of communicating (that I'm aware of,
Bree, mepbmlist, pbmforum.com) are different. People
may want to write emails, others require reading material
(yes, western humans still read from paper..) and others
want to spout schoolyard splutterings from behind an alias.
There is no way to combine those into one. Period.
So I was left thinking that if all the people who write
here, or in Bree, wrote just there, or just here, or in just Bree we'd
have
something worth reading.
That's not going to happen I think for the reasons given before. Players
like different formats. For example some of the players went to the PBM
Forum to get away from here. Bree is something which is a nice read - if
you want it- with some in depth articles and game stories. Each a different
form.
The "number of comments" supporting Bree have so far been
counted on one hand (though Harlequin have LOTS apparently), and what you
should really look at is the fact that they were "me too" postings, the
ONLY actual argument being submitted being the guy that said it was good
to
print off and read on the train. Well I can't argue with that fantastic
logic.
Hold on - I really dislike the "apparently" - they exist (or have existed).
Why should we run something that is nor popular. (Your welcome to query
that it is popular and ask me information about the result). So
"apparently" there were 10 replies to your player rating?
They exist - it does agree with your point earlier that it is not popular -
and there have been quite a few postings here. Are you saying that they do
not exist, or that you do not think that they exist or any other of a 1000
myriad (mis)uses of the word. It's not what you want but it is what others
want (or enjoy). What's to discuss?
Also I'm surprised (and deeply saddened) at how many people had voted in
your (very suspect) poll. Nearly 50 when I looked last night. And how
many contributions have we actually had to discussing the issues? People
love a poll, and I'm sure Bree will get loads of votes.
Actually there are not a lot of replies to polls mostly - as shown by your
poll of player ratings. So this is very heartening.
The .co.uk is for new players - we use it to show players what the game is
like, get them to buy a start-up and leave it to minimum reading. The .com
is one for more in-depth players and for those who have played or are
playing the game.
Harlequin is a separate company. We have split the running of MEPBM to
MEPBM Games (my baby) and Sam does Harlequin. There is minimal stuff on the
Harlequin and we're shifting it to .com where and when we can. If you have
specific comments about specific items that need to be addressed then please
do so.
Clint
···
>Specifically what is the problem here with the websites? I can look into
>that then.
I found at least 3 when I looked last night. Harlequin, MEgames.com, MEgames.co. I know you've told me before that one is for players, and one
is for explaining the game to potential new players, but it's not actually
clear which is which, and why it cant just be one site, when you're on the
pages.
The board was good, but under-subscribed, because most of the best writers
IMO are here.
Main MEPBM site - we're trying to keep the com site separate from the
Harlequin site for reasons given.
(Note we still get stuff for GSI, DGE, Allsorts etc though some of these are
years out of date).
Clint
···
Hi Clint,
> Specifically what is the problem here with the websites?
> I can look into that then.
It's just awkward having several Middle Earth & Harlequin webites
that's all. Specifically I had to trawl through a few sites before
finding the one which would lead me to the message board. Maybe a link
on the main Harlequin site?
Colin.
>
> Clint
>
> > > All I want is a SINGLE site where we can have discussion
threads,
> > > post up weekly or occasional articles, debate them and file them
> > > sensibly.
> >
> > I will agree wholeheartedly that the multiplicity of Harlequin-
> > related sites is bloody confusing. It takes an age simply to find
out
> > which one has which bit of information on it.
You're getting very touchy and over sensitive here. The _apparently_ was NOT in inverted commas, and was used strictly in its conversational sense, that is "so I've just heard". Looking at it carefully, I think that's fairly clear, so I feel I can offer no apology for my choice of words. It's you that's picked it out, stuck it in inverted commas, and read it as if it implies disbelief. I haven't accused you of dishonesty, not would I.
At 08:14 PM 28-10-01, Middle Earth PBM Games wrote:
>The "number of comments" supporting Bree have so far been
> counted on one hand (though Harlequin have LOTS apparently), and what you
> should really look at is the fact that they were "me too" postings, the
> ONLY actual argument being submitted being the guy that said it was good
to
> print off and read on the train. Well I can't argue with that fantastic
logic.
Hold on - I really dislike the "apparently" - they exist (or have existed).
Why should we run something that is nor popular. (Your welcome to query
that it is popular and ask me information about the result). So
"apparently" there were 10 replies to your player rating?
Made mental note of thread about how fantastic the Americans think Harlequin is - without qualification apparently. Am going to the toilet now but will get back to it 