The LTB Network Forum

Status Update

Back to The Writing Room

Comments

CrimsonRoze

Offline
Posts: 295
Location: Göteborg, Sweden

Hi. I would like to let it be known that some month ago I wrote several articles and have since been asked several times in their respective forum threads when they will be released. For one of these articles I recieved negative feedback early on from content moderation, it was removed from ready-to-publish status, edited according to the feedback and then put back to being ready.

The articles in question:

"453: Gaming and decentralized markets."

"510: How bitcoin empowers renting and lending."

While there may be perfectly valid reason for things to have been standing still all this time the result of this has been that I have personally moved on to other things and are just checking in every now and then to see if things happened to have changed since last time.

I find it particulary odd that the article about gaming that I recieved feedback on, and changed, have not had any progress at all, as it includes views on token use from gaming company perspectives that in the recent LTB podcast on the subject was completely missed altogether: the value of market retention.

Posted on October 7, 2014 at 11:01 PM

2 likes

• Cryptonaut

  

  Offline
  Posts: 1944
  Location: Canada

  @adam @rotalumis @cherapple ?

  Posted on October 8, 2014 at 8:46 AM
  Last Edited: October 8, 2014 at 8:51 AM
  Permalink
  1 like
• rotalumis

  

  Offline
  Posts: 285

  Hi @crimsonrose

  I've just checked my notes regarding article 453, which was originally called "Gaming, Markets and the Blockchain" and I had told you:

  The article you have submitted titled "Gaming, Markets and the Blockchain" is not of sufficient quality to be published on LTB and reads more like partial draft notes for a proper article. You also don't talk much about the markets/blockchain part, which would be the whole point of using tokens in the first place. The number of typos and other errors in the document confirm my suspicion that this is a halfhearted effort, written in a rush.

  I am seeing a lot of low-quality posts coming in now that they are earning LTBcoin, which I think is disrespectful. I generally don't have time to respond in such cases -- I just wish I could get back the time I spent reading. However, since you've shown a strong interest in the LTB community, I thought I'd reach out this time and ask you to put in a proper effort in the future.

  I remember being surprised at how quickly you resubmitted and you said:

  I removed the reference to the blockchain from the title (since the blockchain itself is irrelevant to the context) and have made changes to the article to make it less inconsistent.

  That was quite the easy way out, especially when I specifically told you to focus more on the markets and blockchain aspects and after reading your article, I didn't feel you had put in enough effort even though you did mention trading a bit more. I'm sure you know that the whole point of using tokens in games is the market and the blockchain, particularly the markets on the blockchain (decentralized exchanges) that make it possible for players to trade tokens even if your game is not big enough to get listed on a centralized exchange. I don't know why you passed on my advice to improve your article, but your apparent lack of interest in your own work is why I didn't get back to you.

  Re article 510 "How bitcoin empowers renting and lending", @cherapple says that at the time you had submitted several "how Bitcoin empowers" articles that were repetitive and not very interesting and that when she wrote to you about this, you replied defensively with "that's just what I want to write about."

  In the end, another article of yours submitted the same day and titled "An Overview of Applications that Could Be Empowered by Bitcoin" was published instead.

  Now that time has passed, I've added 510 to Trello and we'll be considering it. You are also welcome to rewrite and resubmit 453, but if you do so, please make it worthwhile. If you have any questions about the editorial advice you were given, please ask. We're here to help you, but you need to take the initiative yourself.

  Posted on October 8, 2014 at 12:12 PM
  Last Edited: October 8, 2014 at 12:12 PM
  Permalink
  1 like
• CrimsonRoze

  

  Offline
  Posts: 295
  Location: Göteborg, Sweden

  @rotalumis Hi @crimsonrose

  I've just checked my notes regarding article 453, which was originally called "Gaming, Markets and the Blockchain" and I had told you:

  The article you have submitted titled "Gaming, Markets and the Blockchain" is not of sufficient quality to be published on LTB and reads more like partial draft notes for a proper article. You also don't talk much about the markets/blockchain part, which would be the whole point of using tokens in the first place. The number of typos and other errors in the document confirm my suspicion that this is a halfhearted effort, written in a rush.

  I am seeing a lot of low-quality posts coming in now that they are earning LTBcoin, which I think is disrespectful. I generally don't have time to respond in such cases -- I just wish I could get back the time I spent reading. However, since you've shown a strong interest in the LTB community, I thought I'd reach out this time and ask you to put in a proper effort in the future.

  I remember being surprised at how quickly you resubmitted and you said:

  I removed the reference to the blockchain from the title (since the blockchain itself is irrelevant to the context) and have made changes to the article to make it less inconsistent.

  That was quite the easy way out, especially when I specifically told you to focus more on the markets and blockchain aspects and after reading your article, I didn't feel you had put in enough effort even though you did mention trading a bit more. I'm sure you know that the whole point of using tokens in games is the market and the blockchain, particularly the markets on the blockchain (decentralized exchanges) that make it possible for players to trade tokens even if your game is not big enough to get listed on a centralized exchange. I don't know why you passed on my advice to improve your article, but your apparent lack of interest in your own work is why I didn't get back to you.

  So I had picked a title which didn't end up being reflective of the content as I rewrote the article in several iterations before marking it as ready the first time. Upon getting your remark about it I changed the title as it was then no longer suitable for the content and I rewrote the parts that I thougth you were referring to when calling it draft notes rather than an article.

  The articles content is focused on how tokens change the playing field in relation to marketeting and customer retention as that is the view that I, as a game developer, happened to see as interesting - a viewpoint I've yet to see others talk about.

  Anyway, the purpose of ths thread was just ot make you aware that the lack of feedback is discouraging and that I most likely have put the pen aside and moved on to other things.

  Posted on October 9, 2014 at 6:37 AM
  Permalink
  1 like
• rotalumis

  

  Offline
  Posts: 285

  @crimsonrose

  I still have a copy of your original article and can share it here or privately if that will help jog your memory as to what you submitted. As I told you in the comment above, the article was very incomplete and I give you some direction about how to improve it and fix the issues.

  Upon getting your remark about it I changed the title as it was then no longer suitable for the content and I rewrote the parts that I thougth you were referring to when calling it draft notes rather than an article.

  I made it clear that markets/blockchain was the whole point of using tokens but, instead of putting in an effort to talk about that in some detail, you mentioned buying and selling tokens in a few places and changed the title to remove the mention of the blockchain. Your title was fine. I never asked you to change it, but that was easier than reworking the article properly.

  I wonder why you say that "the lack of feedback is discouraging" when you didn't pay any attention to the feedback you got.

  Posted on October 9, 2014 at 10:38 AM
  Permalink
  1 like
• CrimsonRoze

  

  Offline
  Posts: 295
  Location: Göteborg, Sweden

  @rotalumis @crimsonrose

  I still have a copy of your original article and can share it here or privately if that will help jog your memory as to what you submitted. As I told you in the comment above, the article was very incomplete and I give you some direction about how to improve it and fix the issues.

  Upon getting your remark about it I changed the title as it was then no longer suitable for the content and I rewrote the parts that I thougth you were referring to when calling it draft notes rather than an article.

  I made it clear that markets/blockchain was the whole point of using tokens but, [...]

  And I wrote an article on different subject and happened to have had an inappriate title (that was appropiate as to what I intended to write in the first place, but needed changing as I made iterations of the article and focused more on other aspects than the commonly known and often debated idea of tokens representing in-game items or value). Telling me that the article and the title wasn't in sync was good, and was addressed by changing the title.

  [..] instead of putting in an effort to talk about that in some detail, you mentioned buying and selling tokens in a few places and changed the title to remove the mention of the blockchain. Your title was fine. I never asked you to change it, but that was easier than reworking the article properly.

  I paid attention to the feedback I got, changed the title and updated the article with the intent of addressing the quality issue you mentioned.

  I wonder why you say that "the lack of feedback is discouraging" when you didn't pay any attention to the feedback you got.

  After updating the article things turned dead silent for week after week. This silence is the main reason I lost interest.

  Posted on October 9, 2014 at 12:15 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• rotalumis

  

  Offline
  Posts: 285

  Telling me that the article and the title wasn't in sync was good, and was addressed by changing the title.

  Please re-read my original feedback, quoted above. I never told you that the article and title weren't in sync. What I did was point out the areas where you needed to expand the article, which as it happens were mentioned in your title, meaning you were aware of them in the first place. Also, I already explained above why I didn't get back to you at the time.

  This sort of dead-end back and forth and misquoting what we say is where we give up and get back to the other work that's waiting for us.

  Posted on October 9, 2014 at 1:38 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes

Post Reply