Misc WizardOfVegas Forum is Dying

Earlier this week there was discussion of how many members actually visit WOV. Looks like about 200 a day and around 180 on weekends. Not sure if that's good or bad but this is a site that boasts 13,589 members right now. Why only 200 visitors? And it would be lucky if 10% of them posted.

Could it be that thousands of those members have zero or 1 or 2 posts. It's a stretch to call them members...they shouldn't even be on the books. There's also an active member number of 8,136. Really?

 

Please excuse me then for not, in 2014, reading a Forum that is completely irrelevant to me and most other people to be aware of that.

I know it is not meant to be flattering, but you have to figure that it is a sensitive topic for her. It's basically to degrade a middle-aged woman on her appearance and actively try to hurt her feelings. There's a difference between that and, "Husband of the Year," which I've actually pretty much always found amusing.

These are all more reasonable positions/opinions than attacking someone on physical appearance, yes.

I also tend to agree with you, to a limited extent, but not about BBB specifically because I really wouldn't know. I don't follow the political threads for precisely the unnecessary divisiveness I believe they cause on what is supposed to be a gambling forum. I occasionally read them if my attention is directed to them by a Member complaining of something (post and rapidly lose interest) or if I am in some way relating it to gambling, such as my Presidential Election Betting articles.

I agree that there is no reason to constantly bash the President, but that does not mean one cannot give an opinion of policy. I don't know which is happening as I do not regularly read those threads. What I do know is that there will be plenty of time to be divisive as to the Presidency starting around mid-2019, but right now, it's time to find common ground and get shit done as a country. The election happened, the result is what it is, move forward.

 

I don't have exact numbers, or anything, but I would guess that almost certainly more than 10% of logged in Members per day make at least one post.

As far as, 'Visitors,' the site has many more daily unique visitors than that, just not Member visits. I've already discussed over the last few pages why I do not think the 200, in and of itself, is really indicative of very much. I'll address specific questions on that, but see no reason to repeat myself. God knows I do that enough as it is. I can be pretty verbose and redundant, at times.

I believe the, 'Active Member,' number is any Member with at least one post. I could have sworn we talked about this. I know you don't like the way the numbers are kept, but that's the way most Forums keep those numbers.

How many of the 1,616 Members here only have zero or one posts?

Answer: It doesn't matter.

 

Perhaps if there is a conflict between the rules and a good content provider, perhaps maybe it is the rules that should change instead of removing the content provider?

 

To what point?

 

I strongly suggest that all users with a post count of zero be deleted.

 

For all Forums on Earth or just WoV? Most Forums retain all Members as Members regardless of activity level. However, I am going to entertain your suggestion respectfully and with a few practical reasons and theoretical reasons why not.

Let's start with the theoretical reasons, and I call them, 'Theoretical,' because I am not privy to how the board is programmed (wouldn't understand it if I saw it) and do not know how easy or difficult programming this kind of stuff is.

THEORETICAL:

1.) I do not know if there exists the capacity to even delete a Member, at all.

2.) If there does exist the capacity referenced in Item #1, then I do not know if there exists the capacity to delete multiple or several Members at one time pursuant to a specified criteria.

3.) If either, or both, of these capacities do not exist, then to do what you are suggesting would necessitate having to bring those capacities into being, which requires work, work that a cost/benefit analysis might argue is not worth it. There is a time cost and I do not see what possible benefit deleting all of those zero-posters might have.

PRACTICAL:

1.) As a practical matter, having more Members simply looks good. Either a person or a bot is creating a handle and signing into the Forum, so that is not something that myself or anyone else in Administration is just doing in a wonton way to falsely inflate numbers.

2.) It is against the rules to have multiple accounts, (yes, I know I did exactly that for reasons stated in my early days with the site) so Members who have an account should not have another one absent extenuating circumstances (forgot password, no access to the E-Mail with which the Member signed up initially) so we do not want Members artificially inflating the numbers, either.

3.) Some of the zero posters might actually be active visitors. If it were my choice, (it isn't) and something I actually wanted to do (I don't) the only way I would delete Members is if they have zero posts, have not visited in over six months AND have not visited other than on the day they became Members. That may seem extreme, but I wouldn't want to take the risk of deleting someone that wanted to have an account there, perhaps for a later time. Hell, maybe they looked at one thread, subscribed to it, and are just waiting for a post in that thread.

 

you are right...ts right there in black and white.

 

We often seem to agree on what it is just not what it means.

 

Really? I see people in my area playing BJ on these all the time, despite the fact they only pay 2 FOR 1 on a blackjack (aka even money), I imagine that's gotta be a gold mine for the casinos

 

Unless you are talking about Something Awful, forum posters are not customers. They are the PRODUCT.

 

This is going to be my last thought for a bit as I really do have a lot on my plate today. I may not be back for several hours and perhaps not until tomorrow:

RE: WoV

If you guys really want to know what scares the Hell out of me when it comes to the future of WoV and, on a larger scale, the entire message board medium, it's fucking Facebook. The most ironic part of it is that Facebook only monetizes, 'Social Gaming,' via Apps to which people can sign up through Facebook.

I've never signed into Facebook via any overseas IP Address, but I can say that the American version of Facebook does not seem to advertise for any, 'For money,' online casinos. The only casinos they advertise for are the ones where you buy, 'Chips,' that can win more, 'Chips,' but cannot convert back to real money at any point! I guess MyVegas is something of an exception, at least you get comps, which arguably can save a person some money.

My concern with Facebook is that it is all things to all people all at once while, at the same time, really kind of being nothing.

What I mean is that it can often be difficult to find the kind of specialized information on a topic that you are going to get on a WoO, WoV or a GF. However, gambling still is talked about throughout various Facebook groups and on a person-to-person level. While people still understand how to use Google, and we can optimize how we come up in searches, you do need to continue to have that new and specialized material that a Facebook is largely not going to provide.

However, maybe people will decide, eventually, that Facebook and the other social networking sites are basically, 'All there is,' and if nobody on your Friends list can answer the inquiry, it simply means that nobody really knows the answer. It's not that I see a future in which people would be that dumb, but more like I see a future in which people will be too apathetic to go hunting for the specialized information at all if they cannot get it through the meta-streamlined method of a Facebook.

By, 'All things to all people,' I also mean that Facebook is a venue in which many subjects can be discussed all within the course of a single, 'Page.' However, again, most of these discussions are hardly specialized (even slightly) and often consist of a bunch of pointless memes and, 'Liking,' things if you hate cancer...because obviously anyone who doesn't hit the, 'Like,' button is just enthralled with cancer.

All things to all people at all times.

Basically, a venue and method by which people can know a very little bit about everything, yet a lot about nothing.

Follow that up with things like YouTube, (which I often enjoy, arguably, too often) but then you can look at gambling videos posted by the likes of Michael Morgenstern, "Blackjack Professional." I'm not going to set about trashing Michael Morgenstern, as that is not the intent of this post, but tell me that the delivery of Blackjack information via that medium doesn't remind you of the movie, Idiocracy, and I will tell you that you are nuts. Loud, abrasive, in your face...yet entertaining, for many.

Again, I'm not questioning him or his Blackjack methods (I haven't watched enough of him to know) I am questioning how people can be so easily entertained by that style of delivering the information. I have concern that many of the people entertained by that will not seek the same information, or additional information, via a more academic or disciplined method. Whether that be visiting specialized webpages or participating at Forums with specialized areas.

When we ask if WoV is dying, I say, "No," but if you ask, "Could WoV ever die," these are the things that concern me.

I worry that people value easy answers over learning, speed over specificity, and the entirety of our publicly shared knowledge and communication will eventually, and perhaps inevitably, converge into only a handful of venues.

And, that all of those venues will be less than what would have been the sum of their parts.

 

again its obvious we agree...the site could "survive" ...........but it could produce less money, and continue to "die" . Just because something is dying does not mean that in our lifetime it will be completley dead. If all the members left tomorrow.....and patronized a different board.....zuga would make less money with the loss of all his customers. Its the extrme example but it makes the point. If X is the portion of money from the site that zuga makes from the flys attracted by the message board.........then if zuga looses a certain amount of customers.....then its possible that the money collect might be .93X......but for sure, the more customers you lose....it most likely wont go up .

Its like Walmart. If they lost all their brick and morter US customers tomorrow.....they will still make money from overseas and internet. Just not as much money. Same with Wov. If they lost all their message board customer posters.....they will still make money from articles, and game simulation visits, and parlay calculator, etc......they just wouldnt make as much money.

And for that reason.....posters are customers that fule the message board that in turn attracts the flys that click on banners.

Like I said its a yes/yes deal. P[osters donate their time and effort, and zuga provides the platorm.....he pays money to maintain thatplatform...not because he is a nice guy.....not because he feels sorry for the posters that will be turned loose.......no...he pays money to maintain the message board because it HELPs bring in money. Part of the manboys salaray is accredited to the message board...because zuga could close the board and use manboy for more articles and such. The more time manboy devotes to the message board..the less time he has for other parts of the site. So there is a real cost in maintaining the message board. And real business people would not allow it to exist if it didnt generate capital.

So if you treat the customers poorly, or they perceive they are treated poorly....they leave. Some leave quietly...and some give a reason.
Maybe some people left after seeing the owner wave a tin cup.....and then the next day sign for a multi million dollar deal.(i say the next day because the post asking for money stayed up even after the signing, so he was still asking up till the announcement and beyond)

Axiomodchoice, didnt like a major corporation having access to his info so he left....just like a dissatisfied customer will do.

 

I should have put that statement in quotes so I'll fix that right now. "I strongly suggest that all users with a post count of zero be deleted" I feel better now. That was a quote from a mod on another forum.

From the same mod: "The reason that I make this suggestion is because if one were to peruse the list of members based on total posts in ascending order, one would find that there are 216 pages of members names and it isn't until halfway down the 119th page that anyone has any posts".

And this: As a result, the forum statistics at the bottom of the index page represent this site very poorly".

The mod who made these statements on the I love Philosophy forum.....PavlovianModel146.

 

Just for you, LarryS., because I hadn't logged out yet. Though, I do suggest you read my post before this one.

This is where, again, we either need to be talking about one thing or the other thing. When we discuss whether or not WoV is, 'Dying,' the fact that Zuga has publicly stated that it is performing, 'As expected,' so far tells us that the profits are better than ever. In that sense, for all we know, WoV has only just begun...to live...white lace and promises...

Fuck me, why do I know those lyrics?

I agree with you in principle, but only to an extent. When we talk about search engine optimization, especially when it comes to specialized material, the members only add to the content that is already there and will always be there as long as the site continues to exist. In the sense of content, the site can never, 'Lose,' anything, it can only gain, which is the beauty of content. I do grant that, 'Recentness,' is an important metric when it comes to search rankings, but I'm sure you see my general point as I do yours.

And, I do see your point, you definitely want to continue to have new content and you want that content to have as much quality as possible. That's where you have Rules, then you have a cost/benefit on those Rules, and then you have some cost/benefit on how staunchly you want to apply those rules relative to the content (read: value---as I often use) generated by the presence of the Member.

In the short-term, you are almost certainly correct, assuming EVERY MEMBER. Even with that assumption, in the long-term, you would at least attempt to adapt and transform yourself into a site that gathers and disseminates its content in a different way.

Generate capital OR have the potential to generate capital, important distinction. Would you open a restaurant and then close it after one month just because you didn't meet operating costs?

It's also somewhat difficult, as I have alluded to, to completely separate WoO from WoV as visits to one often garner visits to the other, if not directly, then at least knowledge of the other. Thus, you could have WoO affiliate revenue that, in actuality, really had a WoV base which is unknown because the direct click was on WoO.

Thus, WoV could theoretically even lose money directly but overcome what it is losing directly by making money indirectly for the other operating units. Hence back-and-forth links and why you want those, but not too much, or Google doesn't like that. In the case of the symbiotic relationship of WoO/WoV, I just don't think you would pull the plug on the latter unless it was REALLY tanking.

And, again, I have no more access to the numbers than you do.

I agree that customers leave if they do not like what they are getting. Equally, companies refuse to serve customers if they do not think the customer has a positive value to them. We have agreed on this point several times.

 

you can still be a valued customer and be expect to be treated with respect if you have NO expertise.
way WAY back when obamacare came out there was a lively thread where I posted my concerns as a minoirty,and had lively conversations mostly with people who had zero expertise. Yet it could be viewed as a lively attraction to the site, that might attract lurkers who like watching a soap opera looked forward to the next days back and forth. The folks I aregued with were valuable customers.

Conversely, wheN I went on a craps thread and argued agasint the value of dice setting....I had no expertise other than playing vraps in the past. Yet it was a lively conversation.

sometimes the best exchanges comes from people with knowledge vs people without knowledge. Alot of info ends up coming out.

However we are all customers of the site donating our time and effort...and sometimes expertise. Expertise is not always a given. But time and effort is always there.

People with no pride or self worth go along with the idea that they are sitting in mikes living room.....and should bow their heads and be grateful that they are allowed to enter the hallowed grounds of wov and allowed to stay...in that they are takers, leeches, thatgive nothing in return They buy into the..dont let the door hit you in the ass if you dont like how you or your neighbors are treated. They buy into the notion .

And then there are others with self respect , who see things as they are and expect themselves and their neighbors to recieve proper customer service. And that is the job of the people in green. Althoughthe people in green see themselves as police rather than customer service reps.

 

yes the members add to the material that already there...but to use a p[harase///..THEY help keep butts in the seats. They help flys stay on the site longer, and maybe then get an itchy finger to click on the bovada banner.Maybe some flys would otherwise just go in and out quickly. bUT some may get sucked into various conversations by people donating their time effort and sometimes expertise, in exchange for using a platform that gives them joy. A yes yes deal for everyone.

And as the platform is used less and less, as the member visits dwindle,....the attraction to some flys will be lessened.

 

Only because I am polite will I answer to this before I log out.

Oh, shit, you got me. How many years ago was that? I'm sure that was my opinion, then, and on that Forum that has literally nothing on Earth to do with WoV.

My good friend, Faust, said this to me. He actually did become a friend IRL, by the way:

"Pav - you really need to read a book or do a crossword puzzle or something."

I will offer you the same advice, Freddy, you really need to read a book or do a crossword puzzle or something.

You will also see that Faust made a few points that I made in this thread, shit, maybe I actually READ something someone said and decided that I don't know everything on Earth.

___

Anyway, I think we did do something along those lines there, but not as extreme as my original suggestion. As I recollect, it was actually somewhat easy to do with the Forum Software we had and the PM's also did not have to be sent manually to alert people as to what we were doing. Carleas, as the site's primary Administrator AND Sole Owner, had the ultimate say.

Again, I return to my points on the Software, I don't even know if there is an easy way to do that. And, the points that both myself, and previously Faust, made.

 

Will you quit typing so fast?

Everyone starts with respect on WoV.

I said expertise adds value, are you seriously attempting to argue that it doesn't? If not, then what is wrong with my point?

I don't pretend to know what people think or to know what their levels of self-confidence are.

LarryS, if you're in Green, then your primary task is to enforce the rules of the Forum. I have no idea why that very fundamental fact is so difficult for you to grasp. Customer Service? That's a stretch, and if so, a distant second.