Are Games Killing Groups?

 

Sensual Art said, 1729526700

Gothic Image I wouldn't suggest that changing the games groups will necessarily encourage discussions in any other groups, but I would suggest that I would unsubscribe entirely from the "post your own" group and only remain subscribed to the "from the previous poster" group, as I find those games more enjoyable, and more engaging.

Sensual Art said, 1729527123

MidgePhoto said

Does anyone recall which the first games were?  Are they still here? 

Yes.  The first ones were of the Your favourite photo from the previous posters port ilk.  That was brought over from previous modelling sites, where I believe the first one was "Let's play a little game", initiated on net-model by a model - Jodine - during a particularly destructive period in the forums there, as a way to encourage more constructive interactions, as it sought to get people to look at each other's portfolios and appreciate them.  That has been lost by the "post your own" format, which now dominates the Games group to the point that I consider it spam.

I hide the "post your own" posts, and have bookmarked a number of the "from the previous poster" posts, to return to periodically.  I would love to see the two formats separated, so I could follow one and ignore the other.

Simon Pole said, 1729530112

Sensual Art said

Simon Pole said

I just hide the ones I don't want to see, it takes a second and I never see them again, I don't want to hide all games, just the ones I'm not interested in. 

How would you categorise the ones you're interested in vs the ones you're not?


I hover over the tread title and click "Hide", I'm using a desktop and full browser, so I don't know if this also works on a mobile/tablet, etc. 

Sensual Art said, 1729530265

Simon Pole said

Sensual Art said

Simon Pole said

I just hide the ones I don't want to see, it takes a second and I never see them again, I don't want to hide all games, just the ones I'm not interested in. 

How would you categorise the ones you're interested in vs the ones you're not?

I hover over the tread title and click "Hide", I'm using a desktop and full browser, so I don't know if this also works on a mobile/tablet, etc. 

It doesn't - you have to open the thread to hide it - but that's not what I was asking.

How would you describe the ones you're typically interested in, as a collection?
And how would you describe the ones you're typically not interested in, as a collection?

BigBaldTone said, 1729530297

Spammers in the games are killing them

Lenswonder said, 1729531186

You don't have to shut down people to kill a group , you just have to post non topic posts.

For example people posting about how they don't want to take part in the group's discussion or a different topic altogether. With this ruling those people won't be able to get criticised or shut down but it doesn't matter since what those people are doing will shut down the discussion already.

Some of the post your own photo groups are probably a reaction to FPI's and people wanting their work recognised.

ClickMore 📷 said, 1729532890

People hiding posts does not help the PP community in general. I would like to see much more general discussion rather than the Games where people post their own images which is very insular as is the constant chase for FPIs. Photography should be an appreciation of others' work whether photographer, model, MUA. Yes, we all like a bit of praise and encouragement but not to the extent some people seek it here and on IG; until it becomes compulsive, which is what some Games do. I have also been sucked in by this. I used to regularly message other members to chat off topic but it rarely happens these days, there are not enough interesting Group Posts to get that interaction these days.

MidgePhoto said, 1729540450

ClickMore 📷

Threaded - branching - fora are vastly superior for serious use.

As an example from long ago, although fan.pratchett was massively divergent, being massively nested kept it nice. Silly, but nice.

/. managed to be somewhat effective. Reading it at +2 tended to make it look as if one conversation had stuck on topic.

Technology affects use, affect and outcomes. IIRC Charles Arthur's book Social Warming discusses one area of effects.

Dinner party conversation is another example, diverging and recombining, and opening new topics. The food helps, of course.

Lots of Primate behaviour to observe.

I must do something else now.

Edited by MidgePhoto

Margo Jost said, 1729540030

Nah, the only thing destroying the groups is people acting like dicks making people not want to join in and participate.

It appalls me that people can discuss every single issue on the planet on Reddit and in the main do it with politeness and humility with a rarity of it descending into point scoring yet people can't do it on here.

I'm on alot of social media forums and honestly the "dick" quota on here is the largest of any forum I use.

Admin shouldn't have to tell people on almost every thread to stop acting like children 😏

Edited by Margo Jost

MidgePhoto said, 1729540405

ClickMore 📷

You might consider what features you want to add, what actions you want required of the initiator of a new game - a thread in Games.

One could imagine a required checkbox or list "invites own image posting"/"demands selection of a different user's image to post".

Correspondingly you could set your reading experience to include threads with one, both, or potentially neither, of those values set.

One of the occasionally recurrent arguments of and from outrage concerns metadata and classification, which this would be, as in simply adding tags to images as you upload them.

It is of course against the (British) Constitution, natural law and the Word of the only true single[2] gods to suggest this should be required or encouraged.

A variation on that row might be amusing.

[2] as in triple, I suspect

TheFuntographer said, 1729541509

Didn't know there were any games on here!

Russ Freeman (staff) said, 1729541559

As per Betteridge's law of headlines; No.

Simon Pole said, 1729554569

Sensual Art said

Simon Pole said

Sensual Art said

Simon Pole said

I just hide the ones I don't want to see, it takes a second and I never see them again, I don't want to hide all games, just the ones I'm not interested in. 

How would you categorise the ones you're interested in vs the ones you're not?

I hover over the tread title and click "Hide", I'm using a desktop and full browser, so I don't know if this also works on a mobile/tablet, etc. 

It doesn't - you have to open the thread to hide it - but that's not what I was asking.

How would you describe the ones you're typically interested in, as a collection?
And how would you describe the ones you're typically not interested in, as a collection?


I hover over the title, click Hide, and it disappears, so I'll have to disagree... 

I don't particularly categorise them, just what I consider irrelevant to my being here, for example, I have hidden the song title game and word association game/s, they have no relevance to why I'm here, I have not hidden any image games yet, as I occasionally play, I do see the point, though, sometimes the first ten or more threads can be games, so hiding some may work for some people. 

JME Studios said, 1729557036

All forums, in the traditional sense, are dying. All the ones I visit are significantly quieter than they were a decade ago.

If they've not closed entirely.

It's a relatively old fashioned way of discussing stuff. Social media has replaced much of the role forums had 15 to 20 years ago.

Sensual Art said, 1729565724

Simon Pole you said that you hover over the title. You said that you didn't know whether that worked on a mobile. I said it didn't. There is no "hover" on a mobile.