hanekomu wrote:... If you're going to thinly veiled personal attacks, then you should at least have the decency or courage to name &&&&&&
He omitted the name, presumably based on the opinion that a particular name would violate the TOS. If so, I agree with him. Let's discuss policies, not people. JB [/admin]
Robert, it's not simply an issue of whether you're right, justified, within the rules, or otherwise.
There's evidence that a reasonable proportion of people simply don't like the way you're promoting your books recently. Not everyone, but not just a few either.
Aren't you worried about alienating potential customers? Even if you don't care about that, others do. For example, I discussed this very issue with Younggil and Jing, with respect to whether we should stock your books, just a few days ago.
Selling Go books is marginal at best. I'm worried that you're making things even harder for yourself and anyone who tries to help you.
For what it's worth, I think the content of your books is good and my main criticism would be that the English doesn't flow as well as it could. That's a minor thing and it's not that important in the overall context. I don't think it's fair for people to disparage your books without having read them, but it's not surprising in some ways that that's starting to happen.
No matter how good your books are, some people are going to conflate their frustration with some of your posts with their perception of you and your work.
You can't control that and, even if you think it's illogical, you can't change their minds with logical arguments - trying to do so would just make them even more annoyed.
What you can control is your own style and behaviour. Take the criticism as feedback that your current approach is not as effective as it could be, and look for ways to improve. That's what you would do if this were a game of Go. You're not the only person who cops criticism on this forum and you won't be the last. And while not all criticism is reasonable, some is.
I think most people here are happy to hear about Go related products that might help them (from time to time) but nobody likes having things forced upon them.
You have a lot of interesting ideas about Go and I think it would be a loss to the community if you couldn't share some of them here.
So, just as an experiment, why not try changing your approach slightly? Put some links to your books in your signature (it's only one line of vertical space - you and I both use much more than that with our formatting and writing styles). Try to write in a more constructive and less adversarial way. Resist the urge to: respond to every criticism, explicitly promote your books at every opportunity and refute everything you disagree with.
Just as in Go, choose your battles more carefully and let some balls go through to the keeper.
I think that a change like that would be well accepted and would also be in your own long term interest. But, instead of taking my word for it, how about trying it for a few months and seeing for yourself?
Signatures: I do not like them, also because I perceive them to be what some seem to dislike in messages: they repetitively force themselves on readers.
Resisting response to every criticism: There are different types of criticism such as:
1) Stupid short remarks without detail and reason. I can try to ignore them.
2) Short correct remarks (e.g. pronunciation of haengma): IMO, admitting and agreeing to mistakes is better than ignoring them.
3) Fundamental criticism of the usefulness of my books' theory: It would be counter-productive to remain silent. I am known to be somebody who can defend his factual position. Not doing so would be perceived by some as inability to defend. Even more fundamentally, go theory should be improved, I want to do that by my books, so new theory must be explained and defended in order to support its promotion.
There are more types, but you can get the idea: there is both criticism that I can try to ignore and criticism that profits from my answers.
Advertisements or what some perceive as such: there are different types such as:
1) Announcements of books or teaching: I use this infrequently and mostly when a new book appears. IIRC, I have not advertised for my teaching in an announcement style here for years (so for actually a too long time).
2) Mentioning when users ask specifically for appropriate recommendations: I can reconsider whether I reply too frequently. OTOH, people keep asking for similar recommendations too frequently. Maybe they can also inform themselves better by looking at recent recommendations? The much greater consideration is: L19 users have a tendency to be selective about what they recommend: old books are recommended more because more users have already read them. This leads to under-representative mentioning also of books with more / better contents on a topic. Those seeking the best recommendations are then not informed properly. IMO, informing them is better than not informing them, even if it means mentioning my own books. If, on average, L19 users would be more open-minded in their recommendations, then I would feel much less of a need to mention my own books.
3) Mentioning when reference to my book's contents offers further hints for reading for those already having my books: Of course, such hints are very useful. Don't you think so?!
Derailed threads: Less provocation is as important as trying to be tempted to answer less frequently.
Your shop politics: Why would you not simply offer every available go book? I think that can be much better for your shop than offering an only seemingly arbitrary selection. Have as few copies per book in stock as necessary to keep every book available and just as many as necessary to keep postage for getting new supply within reasonable balance. Such a broad supply of every book lets you be independent of remote forum discussions or whatever. It is why Schaak en Go Winkel, Hebsacker, Kiseido etc. are successful: they offer everything, people can pretty much choose what they want and so order multiple books to save postage more easily. As a side effect, you would also better promote go because more people get access to a greater variety of books.
Regarding the shop, we need to at least break even. If we don't think we can sell a book, we don't stock it. If the publisher doesn't want to sell it, we don't stock it. We're different from those other shops you mention in that we haven't been around for as long and we're shipping from three global locations. At the moment, we're much more concerned about providing a selection of good books at low shipping costs than we are about stocking every Go related book under the sun. That may change, but it will take some time. It's not politics, it's business. Think about the costs involved and you'll understand.
It is true that the OP talked about self-promotion, and also pointed the finger at one person, so that others have jumped on the bandwagon either to talk about advertising in general or about Robert in particular.
However, the OP also said, "So many threads ruined and derailed by this obnoxious behavior. " I got the impression (from "so many") that it was this derailment that was the OP's real cause of concern. I think that this is indeed L19's biggest (but far from only) problem.
The original meaning of forum is "market place", so the idea of offering wares should not be ruled out, but it should be at the very least a place where ideas can be traded. L19 is often not. For too many, it is a bearpit. When I announced some time ago that I would not be posting regularly any more because I was not seeing the kind of discussion I had hoped for, I was even attacked for announcing that, and misrepresented that I was "leaving". You can't help people who don't want to listen.
Not having quite learnt my lesson, in recent times, as a way of channelling the froth about Robert's ideas, I started a couple of threads that hoped to start a discussion of them. Robert cooperated, but I believe the threads attracted no replies, apart from his. I infer from that that few people want to discuss his ideas (can't be bothered to read his books?), even though they are happy to discuss his character, and mine, without actually knowing us. Or is it that they want us to be bulldog and bear while they enjoy being bloodthirsty spectators?
Nevertheless, as it's a lovely sunny morning which always brings a dollop of optimism to the surface, let us assume a goodly number of people do want discussions, but that they are being foiled because "so many" are derailed. What causes derailments?
Yes, Robert's posts probably do. I know that a good part of the reason I stopped is that I found his interruptions tiresome. To make that factual, in the thread about "brilliant" western/Japanese literature, there were 208 threads and Robert posted 72 (35%). Furthermore, his replies were generally much longer than others. I find that kind of swamping inimical to discussion, and my own reaction is just to leave the scene.
But there are many more things that derail threads. This is entirely subjective, of course, but one of the biggest irritants for me is the kind of person who inserts silly one-liners or wisecracks (or, worse, posts images). The ones that come armed with a brace of smileys are the worst. Don't get me wrong - they may even be funny, even occasionally useful (pricking pomposity and all that), though most often I see a little boy in short pants sniggering in the corner, hoping others will join in the sniggering. But even if you like them, they do derail discussions.
I find heavy-handed intrusions by admins, especially pre-emptive strikes, are a guaranteed way to take a discussion off the rails.
I find constant supplementary questions instead of discussing what is on the table annoying. You go to a lot of effort to cook the turkey and when you present it, some twit pipes up "What's for dessert?" Of course, questions can be the lifeblood of a hearty discussion, but eat the main course first, do your own research first, ask at the right time and, above all, indicate why you are asking. Just asking because you are curious is not a good way to get a meaty reply.
A well known gripe of mine is anonymous posting. It's not the anonymity per se that's annoying, but I do believe that if you choose to be anonymous, you should forego at least some of the right to be obnoxious. I find that too many of the anonymous crowd indulge in what I call "sniping" - taking potshots without exposing themselves to return fire.
A further but less obvious way a discussion collapses is because of lurking. If the silent majority will not speak up, then the swampers, sniggerers and snipers will prevail.
Obviously, that is just a personal list. We all have different irritants and different tolerance levels, and we all have a different vision of an ideal L19. Some might like to see as if meeting friends at a go club, others as if it was a jokey night at the pub, others treat it just as a notice board, etc. etc. My own ideal would be that it is also a place for significant discussion. I think Robert shared my ideal and has not given up on it, and it's just sad that I just can't share his mode of discussion. Still, I would ask readers to look at all the other categories of people who spoil discussions, including some not mentioned, and consider whether RJ is just being made a scapegoat.
From my point of view, as long as self-promotion doesn't become spamming. The mods shouldn't go out of their way to outlaw it.
For those who worry about RJ derailing threads... you guys do realize that it's mostly because folks disagree with his opinion and engage him on what are rather deeply thought-out ideas (Even if I don't always agree with them, I can't say that he hasn't put a lot of energy into them).
RJ doesn't tire, he will respond, regardless. Most of the derailing comes from folks who dislike the apparent lack of humility (There are some self-aggrandizing comments there that grate a bit), and so try their best to "Put RJ in his place".
But he's not posting 20 responses to a thread trying to derail discussion. His initial posts are pretty much never off-topic. And the fact that he mentions his books is indicative that he has his opinion in writing on a number of these topics. (Doesn't make much sense to keep writing the book over and over again)
I do think that he is overdoing it a bit as far as his books are concerned. But I think that's a marketing issue, not a forum issue.
As far as JF's tirade against levity, Mod?
EDIT: I think JF comes at this forum from a very different perspective than most. For him, go is his livelihood. For most of the rest of us, go is a game that we relax with. So a forum devoted to it ought to be a bit light-hearted at times. And sometimes we're going to balk when people take it too seriously.
Last edited by shapenaji on Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
John Fairbairn wrote:in the thread about "brilliant" western/Japanese literature, there were 208 threads and Robert posted 72 (35%). Furthermore, his replies were generally much longer than others.
There are reasons for that, and one is: I have been asked a lot of interesting questions.
one of the biggest irritants for me is the kind of person who inserts silly one-liners or wisecracks (or, worse, posts images).[...]
A well known gripe of mine is anonymous posting.[...]
My own ideal would be that it is also a place for significant discussion.
to elaborate on myself, I don't agree with dictating what form discussion takes here. Robert should be absolutely free to express himself anyway he wants to as should everyone else within the TOS IMO. Perhaps there should be an option somewhere (here perhaps or elsewhere) to have serious study threads where posts have to be approved by the OP before being posted but that is not how L19 is setup (or most forums in general that I've seen).
I don't think I would go so far as to make a policy against self-promotion.
Personally, I find self-promotion extremely arrogant. Even if you consider your own ideas to be "backed by facts", saying as such is a real turnoff to me (eg. instead of making a thread about how "brilliant" your work is, why not make a thread that simply discusses your work's content, and let the readers decide? You provide more facts this way, and dissing others' work is also unnecessary.).
Because of this, I wouldn't say that such arrogance should necessarily be banned, but I have absolutely no sympathy when people (in my opinion rightly) express their annoyance toward such arrogant behavior.
I, for one, am happy when people express their anger toward these arrogant individuals - not because I care if their points are valid, but because the original displayed arrogance is so annoying to me. The ability to relentlessly respond to ideas contrary to your own does not equate to being correct.
This is probably why I get annoyed a lot less often with posters who, in my opinion, often offer a more humble attitude, even when they are correct.
Also, forum threads as they are right now seem very similar to meetings without a chairperson. Divergence is almost mathematically certain, rather than reflecting the commitments of the posters
I agree that it's not self-promotion that is at issue, but threads getting derailed.
I'd venture to say that most people agree with that first part.
As for threads getting derailed, I think the fault is rather shared, as others have pointed out. My own view is that the question of what good go theory looks like is fascinating, but we'd do it justice better if we could avoid rehashing it in so many different threads.
I don't see what's the problem with derailing posts, it's just the natural flow. Sometimes your initial post gets pincered and the flow changes, and even though it changes its direction, the flow remains natural...
