Welcoming problems?

I have seen no threads in which anyone is offering advice that there is "no money in boardgames". But to clarify, it would be best if people designed for the hobby itself - rather than focusing on remuneration. I think the best advice is to focus on designing a "real good game - if not a GREAT one." Put out a great product and let the gamers decide if they like it or not...

As far as "contributions" are concerned... Well we do get a LOT of designers that have a "finished" design and want to promote their KS campaign... So they have come to these fora at bit late in the process. And as we like to point out - MANY (not all - but MOST) do not post about anything else but their KS. And I understand the "bad" reaction that may occur with the other designers: "I'm not going to back your game - you just arrived on BGDF - and posted about your KS... I know nothing about you, your game or your background - you are a complete stranger..." And the worst part as some other designer pointed out - 21 weeks and all you manage to do is post about your KS after that time?

It's not a coincidence... Do you think this person will contribute to BGDF and it's other designers??? Odds are - probably not. He/she may post updates about their KS - it being live - but will probably not contribute towards other efforts from their fellow designers.

And maybe this is a FAULT of our "Welcome Pitch". We suggest you start with a thread explaining about yourself and what brings you to BGDF. We should follow this up with - "get involved in BGDF and share your thoughts, comments, feedback, advice, suggestions, etc. with the other designers...!"

That's personally more representative of what we should encourage new members to "get involved" with...

Cheers.

I'm new here and feel pretty welcomed.
I have had only good responses, no personal attacks, no nastiness or anything...

One downside with anything written is you can't always convey the tone in which it is written. So even compliments can be taken the wrong way if read wrong.

Hi John - I want to acknowledge your concerns, and see if they can be addressed in a way that solves a root problem.

As I am interpreting it, you're concerned that:

• Some members who (for whatever reason) don't contribute to other discussions are encouraged to contribute in order to feel part of the community.
• Since they can't/don't contribute, they feel "lesser than" the members that can/do contribute.
• This is because the welcoming comments of current - contributing - members, encourage newcomers to also contribute, and that by doing so the newcomers would be fuller, better community members.
• Since some newcomers can't contribute, they feel their situation isn't being recognised and they are discriminated against.

If I'm misrepresenting, I'm sorry - please correct me and we'll try again. Barring that, I have some thoughts on the description above.

• Negatively toned welcomes are of course not a good thing. This is likely why the above comments are wondering where the negative-bent welcomes are, because then we can action those directly. However, if the messages in question are more in the 'reality-check' category, then the effect may be disheartening but had no malignance in intent. I'd argue these types of posts are actually helpful to newcomers, in that they help set the expectations of the industry. There are a few new members I've seen with little exposure to games in general, and think the only option is Trivial Pursuit-esque success. Caveats the welcomes may give are to help the person avoid the failures of the 1970s-1990s where too many people have lost tens of thousands of dollars on failed games.
• There's a difference between those who can't/don't contribute much at all, and those who only ask for others to contribute. I think this is what the above comments are also hinting at when they say that some people are just here to post their kickstarter link and then leave. This does reduce the overall quality of the boards, as an increase in those posts on the daily feed gives the impression that discussion isn't happening as often, and BGDF is rife with adverts and shills.
• We do welcome members to post kickstarter links, and in particular links to kickstarters that they themselves are backing. However, these members can increase their click and backing rate if they've already proven they are members of the community. It's to their advantage to contribute, as I'm more likely to back you if I "know" rather than back a random new-member that posts a link and disappears until their next campaign.

I want to quote the original post a bit -

It, again to me, feels like the people who post the most see themselves as better than others who do not post a lot.

and

Laying the hammer down on new comers without even figuring out what they want goes a great way to have people not come back.

The first part of this I can't completely agree with - not because it's not true - but because it's presumptive in its own right. Naturally, we can't say what others are feeling unless they express it themselves, so I hesitate to assume that the posters "see themselves as better than others who do not post a lot." It is possible that telling people to post and contribute can create feelings of inadequacies resulting in a feeling of power imbalance, but ascribing intent to create that assumes malignance - which is often not the case. It is worth a conversation with those individuals to clear that up and restore the balance.

The second part - about the hammer - I agree with. It's almost structurally encouraged on internet forums, and something I see people struggle with in-person conversations as well.

Imagine a new-comer to a party; no one knows the person except the one friend who invited him along. That new-comer, if they're not naturally extrovert, will probably have a crappy time unless the friend and guests go out of their way to ask questions and purposefully involve the new-comer in their conversations to find common ground. That would be a welcoming group of people - but it doesn't always happen. Add in the impersonal nature of online forums, and it's compounded.

Ideally, members would go out of their way to ask all those questions and get to know the newcomers. But I also understand the reaction older members may have when the 80th newcomer comes in. It's hard to hold probing conversations with 80 people. Or sometimes, the new members that say the familiar "Hey I have an amazing game that is totally unique and going to make tons of money and I already have a patent so I don't want to share it but I wanted you all to know that it's the best and I want to know what the best way to sell it is can you all help me."

Solutions?

I'd like to change the structure of BGDF - from as simple as changing the welcome text to incentivising contributions in other ways (like BGG thumbs and coins, with a BGDF spin).

I think leaving the advice there is enough. It's difficult to balance specific "stop this, do this" advice against only targeting symptoms. I'll add some text to the welcome message, but as with all text reminders I don't expect the behavioural impact to be high.

Thank you, John, for the thoughtful input.