Meet Yahtzee at PAX, Get Stuff
- Thread starter Susan Arendt
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That's very interesting, thank you. I find it somewhat distressing that it should be so difficult to find an online method of securing donations for good causes.Archon said:
The bunch of people I helped to send to PAX previously (Crabcat Industries) had a simple PayPal donation button - but I wonder, were those donations subject to tax? There's clearly a lot more to these issues than appears on the surface for casual donors such as myself.
But you evade my question as to whether anyone would actually pay $50 for a poster if you weren't promising something extra, such as an event. (No need to add "I don't think that's hard to understand"; the fact that I don't have the same opinion as you does not mean that I don't understand what you're saying.)Archon said:
Having flown distances like those myself at the cheapest available fares without being worse for the wear afterwards, I personally disagree. However, I suppose those business fares exist for a reason: businesses are willing to pay them, and businessmen and -women all around the world expect to receive such comforts as a normal part of their travel-life. To refrain from paying such a fare would, presumably, be a slap in the face for Yahtzee and not the kind of business interaction to which he is accustomed with you. It's not a position I can sympathise with, but, again, I am not forced to pay for it. No one is. You are simply asking for donations. Fair enough. Now that you've explained why this part of the endeavour is so expensive, I think your obligations on this front are at an end. People are free to give, or not give, knowing exactly how the money is being used.Archon said:
So, for the PAX pick-ups (obtained by donating $20 or $40 and at a $5 cost, not subject to shipping), you get a profit of $15 per unsigned poster or $35 per signed poster (minus whatever Yahtzee's fee for signing them is). For shipped posters (obtained by donating $50 or $75 and subject to $9-17 in costs), you get a profit of $33-41 (unsigned) or $58-66 (minus Yahtzee's signing fee). Hopefully I did the math right on that. I understand that a large amount of this will go to offsetting the expenses for PAX, but, again, I don't think it's fair of you to present the alternative as simply pocketing all the profits and spending it seedily, since I don't think people would actually pay that amount for that merchandise if you weren't also promising to spend some proceeds on PAX. However, again, thank you for the transparency in explaining the breakdown of costs.Archon said:
That sounds delightful! And delicious. Here's where I think your initial presentation fell down a bit. You've done a good job of clarifying it in this thread, but at first the meet-up wasn't described as including food and drink, which make expenses such as those you've quoted more understandable.Archon said:
Incidentally, I haven't hosted corporate events, but I have helped to host game conventions and academic conventions at which food and drink was served (lovely stuff, at nothing near your cost). If one is to compare business class flights to the kind of flights the average gamer, such as myself, would be taking, then I think these sorts of conventions would be better points of comparison. ;-) Of course, if you want to take the approach of spending so much, that's your prerogative. I'm sure you have lots of experience in the matter and many good reasons for taking this approach. I'm sure it'll all be lovely and people will enjoy it! But, personally, I know that a lot of gamers are just fine with having a bigger group at the cost of, shall we say, food and drink that's cheap and cheerful. ;-)
So wait... If you only get $10,000, then people who have paid $100 to meet Yahtzee won't meet him at all?Archon said:
Okay: at this point, you can consider me as politely signing out of this conversation. You answered my question about RocketHub satisfactorily, which was my main reason for posting initially. Since I'm not personally donating or going to PAX, it's impertinent of me to expect you to spend your time intereacting with me further. What business of mine is it whether or not Yahtzee will appear to those who have paid to see him if I'm not going to be one of those people?
Thank you for your time and your answers. Sincere best wishes with your business.
It would be funnier if he didn't know it and the price money was to hire thugs to kidnap him and throw him into the back of a cargo plane from AU to seatac. Then more thugs to take him from the cargo plane to pax, then pull off the smelly bag over his head and everyone yells SURPRISE!
Im ok with the Rockethub and everything now, non charity etc etc.. moving on.
But less than a month from PAX? Id love to attend a panel of Yahtzee or do a meet and greet, but a hundred bucks is a sharp hit to my budget, specially when most of my financials were done and set for PAX (including swag spending) a decent bit of time ago. Wish I had a bit more notice on this but sei la vie...
(minor rant over)
Good luck on the campaign for this and hopefully your crew will be there.
But less than a month from PAX? Id love to attend a panel of Yahtzee or do a meet and greet, but a hundred bucks is a sharp hit to my budget, specially when most of my financials were done and set for PAX (including swag spending) a decent bit of time ago. Wish I had a bit more notice on this but sei la vie...
(minor rant over)
Good luck on the campaign for this and hopefully your crew will be there.
Thanks for your note.Estelindis said:
Just to clarify one point - RocketHub does not collect any money from contributors unless the minimum threshold is met. Therefore, if we don't hit $20,000, no one will pay anything or receive anything. The project doesn't happen, and all contributions are returned unspent. This is part of the benefit of using the RocketHub infrastructure - contributors can be assured that they won't find themselves in the position of having donated when no one else did, and thereby having lost out on because the project didn't happen.
That is good to know. What an excellent donation infrastructure!Archon said:
Thank you for explaining this in such depth and at such length. I cannot fault the time and attention you have given to clarifying this matter with the community. I'm glad we understand this better now.
Damnnit, I come here expecting to have some moral fury about something I was never going to give money to because I'm cheap as hell for the sake of just having a chance to get riled up, and you distract me with talk of shoes!Susan Arendt said:
That's terrible.
I think I prefer my boots though.
Oh my, are those fabulous. I miss being at uni and being able to wear them all day.
The only problem now is that anyone getting in to this thread will have to make it 2 or 3 pages in to get past the outrage.
I think the way the two sides worked through the confusion was a great example of company/customer relations! Much better than many other companies may have done. (For example...)
I think the way the two sides worked through the confusion was a great example of company/customer relations! Much better than many other companies may have done. (For example...)
If pictures involved I have $300 just waitingArchon said:
Anyway, I think that people just didn't get what you are trying to do. You are doing business, not asking for handouts. The real problem is that most people aren't able to go to PAX, and therefor doesn't really care about this event.
Also, you are doing an awesome job right now talking to the community. Keep up the good work and hopefully you and the staff will have a great time at PAX!
I guess this means that Yahtzee is the Christian Louboutin* of the gaming world. ;-)Susan Arendt said:
* Yes, I had to look that up too.
The purpose of the donation drive was to raise money for Allison's surgery. However, fans gave much more money than was actually needed. Accordingly, Extra Credits are using the surplus funds to further innovation in gaming. Given that anyone who watches Extra Credits does so because of interest in that topic, there's absolutely nothing to which one could legitimately object.GreatTeacherCAW said:
The EC guys, in response to the huge support, decided after the fact to do something that seemed like a good use of the money. If anyone objected, I'm sure they would give them refunds. The whole thing in this thread really is a semantic whine fest, because people are just so damn critical sometimes.GreatTeacherCAW said:
So reflecting on the whole discussion, a few things stand out to me.
#1: The Psychology of the Contributor/Fueler
I've noticed a big psychological divorce in the mind of the customer/contributor between being sold a product, such as a poster, for $50 and then the profits being used to a specific project, and being asked to contribute $50 for a project and receiving a poster as an incentive to contribute.
I mean, I felt, in writing the above paragraph, that I needed two separate words:
*A customer, in my mind, buys a discreet product, and enters a business one to one arrangement with a vendor, where the price offered is presumed to be directly reflective of the product.
*A contributor on the other hand offers up as much money as they deem fit for a more nebulous whole--the price is based purely on the willingness of the contributor to give more, and while contributors can be incentivized to give more by offering enticing rewards, this is different then selling a product to a customer. A contributor works with a network of other contributors to support a large project.
#2: The Inescapable Implications of Asking People to Give You Money
People don't want to contribute anything if they don't think it's necessary. Just reading the criticism, it's taken the form of either, "The Escapist makes enough money that they don't need my help," or "Yahtzee makes enough money that he doesn't need my help." These people cannot be encouraged to contribute simply by treating them like a customer instead of a contributor. My initial reaction was, "$20,000--For What??!!"
You aren't selling that unwilling person a poster. You're asking that unwilling person to give you money for something you want to do, and offering a poster in exchange for that.
It has been argued that there's a difference between charity and Kickstarter/RocketHub, but I don't know if that's strictly the case. If you give a street musician money, is it an act of charity, or is it investment in a service? Can you be said to be buying a product? Or is it something between the two? In any sense, street performers seem like an apt comparison to kickstarter projects, to me at least.
Finally, this isn't to say that these projects need to charitable in the sense that Habitat for Humanity is charitable. I think people give for charitable reasons to things which are completely selfish simply because they're interesting in seeing those things done and they derive a sense of accomplishment in helping that thing happen.
For instance, I didn't contribute to Minecraft: The Story of Mojang because it would make the world a better place. But at the same time, I did have a sense of contributing merely because I wanted to see such a thing exist, but not necessarily because I wanted that product for my own personal consumption -- though there is that too. I think the larger driving for is wanting to see cool stuff happen, while also being partially responsible for that cool stuff happening.
#3: From Where the Money Seems Likely to Come
Contributors for this specific idea are really only likely to come from three places:
1). People who will be attending PAX.
2). People who will donate specifically to receive the promised incentives, but aren't necessarily attending PAX.
3). People who recognize that the Escapist could use the help to pull this off.
The first group, IMHO, could probably be both the largest group in terms of actual contributors and also the smallest group in terms of potential contributors; the largest actual group because as far as I can see they gain the most benefit from the currently offered incentives; the smallest potential group because the minority of people who see this event and could potentially choose to fuel it will actually be attending Pax.
The second group... I don't have faith for the second group giving a lot. I don't particularly find the pricing for whats offered attractive. For instance, I'm pretty cash strapped, and though I'm interested in giving $5-$20 for this, I'm not sure it's worth it for what I'm receiving. I'm not going to Pax so I can't pick up a poster, so I have no incentive to give more than $10. Right now, there's a cap on only the first 50 people who donate $10 receiving the incentive. So the $5 incentive might be my only choice if I'm late to donate, if I'm really to be thought of as a customer and not a contributor. And if it really isn't at all a charity case, then no one should expect me to give $20 even though I won't receive a poster, or $10 even after the limit on $10 contributors is reached. Certainly I am not large enough to be a representative sample of the escapist as a demographic, but there's my anecdotal argument anyway.
In my humble and relatively uninformed opinion, it would seem that you could fund your project better by offering better rewards at lower dollar values that are not contingent on you being physically at PAX to see your name on a screen or pick up something in person. An exclusive forum badge, for instance, seems like an obvious low dollar value incentive. Maybe a temporary publishers club membership, etc.
That leaves the third group. This is the demographic which, as far as I've noticed with Kickstarter type projects donates the most. People who want to see a specific project succeed and feel some good in contributing it. The problem with the third group, is that given the initial backlash against the idea, there is no perception that, "The Escapist could use my help to pull this off," or the idea of Yahtzee being at PAX and giving the Escapist a bit more exposure might not necessarily ignite everyone's engines, so to speak.
And then there are inherent problems in running a business and also trying to appeal to people's charitable nature.
It seems to me that, as a business, you want to appear as successful or powerful or as well put together as possible. But you won't receive as many donations via kickstarter/rockethub if you don't tug on people's heartstrings a little bit.
I was totally disinclined to contribute anything until I realized the extent of the difficulty in funding this event. But to trot that fact out immediately might seem whiny, or sniveling even. I think there are probably subtle ways of hinting that a project idea is currently beyond your current budget, and it is probably best to gently pepper your project proposal on Rockethub/Kickstarter with these words or phrases.
Ultimately, in the end, regardless of the incentives offered, I don't think that people will contribute if they assume you can do it on your own.
My two cents.
I've noticed a big psychological divorce in the mind of the customer/contributor between being sold a product, such as a poster, for $50 and then the profits being used to a specific project, and being asked to contribute $50 for a project and receiving a poster as an incentive to contribute.
I mean, I felt, in writing the above paragraph, that I needed two separate words:
*A customer, in my mind, buys a discreet product, and enters a business one to one arrangement with a vendor, where the price offered is presumed to be directly reflective of the product.
*A contributor on the other hand offers up as much money as they deem fit for a more nebulous whole--the price is based purely on the willingness of the contributor to give more, and while contributors can be incentivized to give more by offering enticing rewards, this is different then selling a product to a customer. A contributor works with a network of other contributors to support a large project.
#2: The Inescapable Implications of Asking People to Give You Money
People don't want to contribute anything if they don't think it's necessary. Just reading the criticism, it's taken the form of either, "The Escapist makes enough money that they don't need my help," or "Yahtzee makes enough money that he doesn't need my help." These people cannot be encouraged to contribute simply by treating them like a customer instead of a contributor. My initial reaction was, "$20,000--For What??!!"
You aren't selling that unwilling person a poster. You're asking that unwilling person to give you money for something you want to do, and offering a poster in exchange for that.
It has been argued that there's a difference between charity and Kickstarter/RocketHub, but I don't know if that's strictly the case. If you give a street musician money, is it an act of charity, or is it investment in a service? Can you be said to be buying a product? Or is it something between the two? In any sense, street performers seem like an apt comparison to kickstarter projects, to me at least.
Finally, this isn't to say that these projects need to charitable in the sense that Habitat for Humanity is charitable. I think people give for charitable reasons to things which are completely selfish simply because they're interesting in seeing those things done and they derive a sense of accomplishment in helping that thing happen.
For instance, I didn't contribute to Minecraft: The Story of Mojang because it would make the world a better place. But at the same time, I did have a sense of contributing merely because I wanted to see such a thing exist, but not necessarily because I wanted that product for my own personal consumption -- though there is that too. I think the larger driving for is wanting to see cool stuff happen, while also being partially responsible for that cool stuff happening.
#3: From Where the Money Seems Likely to Come
Contributors for this specific idea are really only likely to come from three places:
1). People who will be attending PAX.
2). People who will donate specifically to receive the promised incentives, but aren't necessarily attending PAX.
3). People who recognize that the Escapist could use the help to pull this off.
The first group, IMHO, could probably be both the largest group in terms of actual contributors and also the smallest group in terms of potential contributors; the largest actual group because as far as I can see they gain the most benefit from the currently offered incentives; the smallest potential group because the minority of people who see this event and could potentially choose to fuel it will actually be attending Pax.
The second group... I don't have faith for the second group giving a lot. I don't particularly find the pricing for whats offered attractive. For instance, I'm pretty cash strapped, and though I'm interested in giving $5-$20 for this, I'm not sure it's worth it for what I'm receiving. I'm not going to Pax so I can't pick up a poster, so I have no incentive to give more than $10. Right now, there's a cap on only the first 50 people who donate $10 receiving the incentive. So the $5 incentive might be my only choice if I'm late to donate, if I'm really to be thought of as a customer and not a contributor. And if it really isn't at all a charity case, then no one should expect me to give $20 even though I won't receive a poster, or $10 even after the limit on $10 contributors is reached. Certainly I am not large enough to be a representative sample of the escapist as a demographic, but there's my anecdotal argument anyway.
In my humble and relatively uninformed opinion, it would seem that you could fund your project better by offering better rewards at lower dollar values that are not contingent on you being physically at PAX to see your name on a screen or pick up something in person. An exclusive forum badge, for instance, seems like an obvious low dollar value incentive. Maybe a temporary publishers club membership, etc.
That leaves the third group. This is the demographic which, as far as I've noticed with Kickstarter type projects donates the most. People who want to see a specific project succeed and feel some good in contributing it. The problem with the third group, is that given the initial backlash against the idea, there is no perception that, "The Escapist could use my help to pull this off," or the idea of Yahtzee being at PAX and giving the Escapist a bit more exposure might not necessarily ignite everyone's engines, so to speak.
And then there are inherent problems in running a business and also trying to appeal to people's charitable nature.
It seems to me that, as a business, you want to appear as successful or powerful or as well put together as possible. But you won't receive as many donations via kickstarter/rockethub if you don't tug on people's heartstrings a little bit.
I was totally disinclined to contribute anything until I realized the extent of the difficulty in funding this event. But to trot that fact out immediately might seem whiny, or sniveling even. I think there are probably subtle ways of hinting that a project idea is currently beyond your current budget, and it is probably best to gently pepper your project proposal on Rockethub/Kickstarter with these words or phrases.
Ultimately, in the end, regardless of the incentives offered, I don't think that people will contribute if they assume you can do it on your own.
My two cents.
You guys should update the "seattleorbust" page with the update on this thread and probably more.
" and then I was all D:
I was going to mention you might want to redesign the ads on the sides of the page because the lines (and even the whole style) look off and I realized I was forgetting that too, the obnoxious omnipresent ads that frame every page. Still, it could be worse, technically, and it's not the only site I've seen do it. The Escapist is, however, the only site I've ever seen where, when you click on a video, it sometimes replaces all of the rest of the window with an ad that's clickable everywhere which occasionally makes my back button not work.
I hope you know there's no way it's going to be the biggest fan meetup of all time, or even the biggest one so far, but good luck with it anyway, and good luck to you, Yahtzee, in staying (relatively) sane through it.
That's the thing, I'd like to participate, but there's no way I could-- even if I could get there (this is majorly hampering to most of the world), and even if I had a ticket, the $100 thing (which I'm assuming is true because you haven't refuted it) is majorly beyond my reach. Speaking of which, you do know tickets for this thing are sold out right? Did you guys really just get this idea yesterday? If not you should've said something much earlier, and reserved tickets-- I was excited at "oh, I might get a chance to go after all, somehow!!!1Archon said:
" and then I was all D:Maybe you should be. Sure, anyone that buys them is stupid, but does that mean they should be repeatedly ripped off en masse?Archon said:
I had almost forgotten about this, could someone explain again why this is good for anyone (especially the people paying to use part of a website)? It seems pretty pointless to me.Archon said:
I was going to mention you might want to redesign the ads on the sides of the page because the lines (and even the whole style) look off and I realized I was forgetting that too, the obnoxious omnipresent ads that frame every page. Still, it could be worse, technically, and it's not the only site I've seen do it. The Escapist is, however, the only site I've ever seen where, when you click on a video, it sometimes replaces all of the rest of the window with an ad that's clickable everywhere which occasionally makes my back button not work.
I hope you know there's no way it's going to be the biggest fan meetup of all time, or even the biggest one so far, but good luck with it anyway, and good luck to you, Yahtzee, in staying (relatively) sane through it.
General Vagueness said:You guys should update the "seattleorbust" page with the update on this thread and probably more.
That's the thing, I'd like to participate, but there's no way I could-- even if I could get there (this is majorly hampering to most of the world), and even if I had a ticket, the $100 thing (which I'm assuming is true because you haven't refuted it) is majorly beyond my reach. Speaking of which, you do know tickets for this thing are sold out right? Did you guys really just get this idea yesterday? If not you should've said something much earlier, and reserved tickets-- I was excited at "oh, I might get a chance to go after all, somehow!!!1Archon said:
Maybe you should be. Sure, anyone that buys them is stupid, but does that mean they should be repeatedly ripped off en masse?Archon said:
I had almost forgotten about this, could someone explain again why this is good for anyone (especially the people paying to use part of a website)? It seems pretty pointless to me.Archon said:
I was going to mention you might want to redesign the ads on the sides of the page because the lines (and even the whole style) look off and I realized I was forgetting that too, the obnoxious omnipresent ads that frame every page. Still, it could be worse, technically, and it's not the only site I've seen do it. The Escapist is, however, the only site I've ever seen where, when you click on a video, it sometimes replaces all of the rest of the window with an ad that's clickable everywhere which occasionally makes my back button not work.
I hope you know there's no way it's going to be the biggest fan meetup of all time, or even the biggest one so far, but good luck with it anyway, and good luck to you, Yahtzee, in staying (relatively) sane through it.
I'm part of the Pub Club. I paid because $20 isn't much to support a website that I spend a lot of time on. Also it removes ads. However, I clearly remember Yahtzee going on about his massive new 3DTV that he got from internet revenue, so from that three second phrase alone, I decided that he can pay for his own damned business class ticket to PAX.
EDIT: "Anyway, let it never be said that I'm some ignorant Loom-smashing Luddite, because I started playing Killzone 3 not only with the PlayStation Move controls but also with the 3D option on my new massive 3D TV that I bought with all my ad revenue money, much obliged Internet! The motion controls didn't last ten minutes. After calibrating (Calibrating, fuck! Starting up a game these days is like starting up a fucking cruise liner) the aim was wavery and difficult, I didn't know where they'd moved all the buttons to and my big red glowing controller was reflecting in the screen and giving people hilarious clown noses! So after getting sniped silly for a while that went out the window and I took up a nice sensible sixaxis which didn't stop the game from throwing in motion-controlled turny switches whenever it could get away with it. The 3D held out a bit longer - yeah, things in the foreground were getting all prominent and shit but everything from the middle distance on looked like a big flat matte backdrop like the game was taking place in a puppet theater. After a while I turned it off and suddenly I was astounded by the detail in a nearby wood texture now that I wasn't wearing those stupid glasses. Things ten feet away stopped popping in all the time and my dog came back to life! So fuck modern technology right in its cutting edge! Ow!"
Slightly more than three seconds, but you Get The Idea.
Okay, so, as you've established in this thread, you cannot afford to pay for your visit to PAX. Add to this, the fact that not too long ago, Extra Credits also had a fund-raiser for a charitable cause.
Then you ask us, less than a month before PAX is supposed to happen; to pay for all of your expenses, offering incentives that don't even work because nobody can buy PAX tickets any more. This isn't even mentioning the elephant in the room: it resembles corporate pandering when you offer prizes to give us more reasons to pay for your expenses. When you have to make more reasons for us to pay, then clearly something is wrong with the idea to begin with.
In addition, most users here will NOT be able to talk to Yahtzee, as this forum almost entirely consists of teenagers from the western world, who would also have to deal with massive expenses at such short notice.
Then there's the fact that if we assume a few hundred people manage to pay the necessary "donation" on time, it doesn't guarantee that when they talk to Yahtzee, he won't be just sitting in a booth signing autographs.
Why not... not go to PAX? Clearly you cannot afford it, and there's only going to be a few hundred people who would care if Yahtzee actually turned up. And if they do turn up, it would be a dreary experience for all involved, and a massive waste of money. Why do we have to pay for your expenses?
Then you ask us, less than a month before PAX is supposed to happen; to pay for all of your expenses, offering incentives that don't even work because nobody can buy PAX tickets any more. This isn't even mentioning the elephant in the room: it resembles corporate pandering when you offer prizes to give us more reasons to pay for your expenses. When you have to make more reasons for us to pay, then clearly something is wrong with the idea to begin with.
In addition, most users here will NOT be able to talk to Yahtzee, as this forum almost entirely consists of teenagers from the western world, who would also have to deal with massive expenses at such short notice.
Then there's the fact that if we assume a few hundred people manage to pay the necessary "donation" on time, it doesn't guarantee that when they talk to Yahtzee, he won't be just sitting in a booth signing autographs.
Why not... not go to PAX? Clearly you cannot afford it, and there's only going to be a few hundred people who would care if Yahtzee actually turned up. And if they do turn up, it would be a dreary experience for all involved, and a massive waste of money. Why do we have to pay for your expenses?