The Game-on Thread-Help!

[Sam]

To the Board:

This forum has operated a Game-on Thread since our inception 4+ years ago..  As many of you know, we started by running game-long contests and awarding small cash prizes to the winner at the end of each game.  In those days, we changed something like $15 a year for membership in the forum; and we used the money mostly for prizes and, on a couple of occasions, to help people out financially.  But we concluded that we were losing a lot of potential members by charging even as little as $15 a year; and the contests were usually entered by only a handful of people and didn't seem to influence additional participation in the thread.

Despite the positive intent of the Game-on Thread (basically to enhance the game viewing experience by sharing insights),  I don't have the feeling that it has really served a lot of people on a consistent basis.  Very often, we have the same small group of regulars.  It's gratifying to note that there has been slightly increased participation recently, during the absences of both Bob Heckler and myself for travel reasons.

For some time, the administrators of the board have wrestled with various ideas for encouraging greater participation in the Game-on Threads.  This post is a plea for ideas as to how to make the thread more appealing.  We won't go back to awarding prizes for contests because we are advertising the forum as free, and the accounting was a hassle anyway.  However, there's no reason we couldn't institute contests for which the prize is a sense of satisfaction in winning.

But, with all the keen minds on this board, I suspect a number of additionally interesting ideas for expanding usage of the Game-on Thread might emerge simply because we asked for them.

A couple of thoughts from this end:

• Based on the uptick in participation since Bob and I have been largely absent from the thread leads me to wonder whether he and I would create a better sense of balance and encouragement for others to post more often on the thread if he and/or I toned down our posting.  It's not necessarily true that large numbers of posts by the two of us are inducements to increased participation by others.  Typically, Bob and I can average 60-80 posts (between us) per game; and those numbers strike me as an amount that could seem overwhelming to others.  Neither of us would feel at all hurt if people were moved to suggest that he and/or I post more sporadically.

• One important note is that the insights shared on the Game-on Thread don't have to be earth-shaking, analytical insights.  Sharing is the important thing, and even a comment such as "Nice pass by Rondo" heightens the sharing experience.  I've found recently that, even if I'm only following the game on Yahoo play-by-play and boxscore, it's easy to participate in the Game-on Thread, if only by asking questions about the game that can be answered by people who are watching the game action.

Anyway, I've written more than enough.  I'd like to ask board members to suggest possible ways of encouraging greater participation in the Game-on Threads.  Once again, don't hesitate to mention something that you believe might ruffle someone's feathers, because all responses will be regarded as constructive; and they'll all get careful consideration.

Thanks for your help in this important matter; and Go Celtics!

Sam

[kdp59]

us the new chat tool instead. makes for better and quicker response during games. also easier cross talk with others in almost real time.

I used to use a similar chat at a football forum during games and it was well received. of course football has many more breaks for "chatting" than the NBA.

not sure if there is a way to archive them, since some like to review the game on threads , when they miss games it seems. If not I guess it won't meet the standards needed.

[k_j_88]

I've been in class this semester which does take away some of my free time. Luckily, I'll be done on Dec 10th for a few weeks.


KJ

[Sam]

Bump.

[gyso]

We had 23 guests on the board late in the 4th quarter. The only action at that time was the Game On! thread.

Sign up and join in on the fun!!

[NYCelt]

I do recall we've had a periodic rise or fall in Game On participation in the past.  I think it's probably just a part of everyone's personal schedule and obligations.  Technology may play a part in that too, in that so many of us have a way to watch on delayed recording, which puts us out of synch with the actual game time.  The new live chat feature may prove interesting, in that you can actually communicate about what's happening in real time.  The chatbox also lets you communicate with others you see online at any given time, which is a really nice ability to have for so many reasons.

I suspect, too, that as the season progresses, and there is less competition from the NFL or upcoming holiday related activities, participation will increase.

The return of Marcus Smart and other positive developments by the team should help generate more or new interest too. Human nature; a more competitive team draws more interest. Come on guys, develop already! (yes, that last line is supposed to be tongue-in-cheek)

[Sam]

There are certainly many reasons that could be influencing a falloff in Game-on Thread participation.  It does require a lengthy commitment when there are other priorities in a household.  But what I'm hoping to do (and I realize that it may just be an impossible task) is to make certain that, if the Game-on Thread is to play second (or third or fourth) fiddle to competing activities, at least we're presenting the best possible product in the competition.

Perhaps if I had asked why more people don't participate, it would have been more productive in providing information as to what the Game-on Thread is up against.  So I hope people won't be hesitant to reveal specific impediments to participation.

I don't know whether anyone has tried the Chat Box during games because, as far as I know, there's no way of archiving Chat Box posts.  But one of my fears about the Chat Box (although I'm generally very much in favor of it) has been that it might "pirate" people away from the main Game-on Thread.  Perhaps there's some clever technological way of blending the two, but I'll have to leave that to the amazing "teekies" on the forum.

Anyway, I don't want to imply that I'm anything but very grateful for those who do participate on a regular or semi-regular basis.  It's just that we want to make this the best possible forum in every way we can.

Sam

[gyso]

The reason that I am on the Game On! thread more this year than in the recent past is for one of the reasons NYCelt states, I had a DVR.  I used to wait for half time before starting to watch because I didn't want to spend time watching commercials.  Now without a DVR, I have to watch games live, so I don't have to worry about reading the Game On! thread out of sync.

I find that I sometimes miss some of the game by concentrating on typing a comment.  That may be a reason some folks do not participate.  It is early in the season and I am going to try to find a balance of typing posts and watching the game so that I don't miss so much.  I may take advantage of the commercial breaks to make the wordier posts.

gyso

[mrkleen09]

^^^^Same thinking

Love you guys - but I would generally rather record the game - and tune in 45 or 60 minutes later to skip the commercials, getting through an entire game in less than 90 minutes.

Big games in 2008, 2009 etc - I used to try and join the Game On threads more often....but those are few and far between for the time being.

[beat]

If my typing skills allowed. Guess I'd rather just watch the game and comment the following day. Plus many times I'm forced into the "other" room to watch.

beat

[Outside]

I am a relic of an ancient age and have a desktop computer, not a laptop, and there's no TV near my computer. That alone makes participation in the game-on thread problematic.

I did try to stream a game once through the NBA site. There wasn't any audio (which is okay), but they tried to install a blizzard of crap apps, and it wasn't a pleasant experience.

On top of everything else, I'm often doing other things and catch just portions of games. Add it all up, and I'm not a likely candidate to participate in the game-on threads.

[Sam]

I have a hunch that inability to watch the games live (whatever the cause) is a common problem.  I know there are some who resort streaming TV.  (Personally, it makes my head ache.)  And a few may follow on ESPN or Yahoo play-by-play posts.  I've been wondering whether we should encourage those are generally aware of how the game's going but have no good view of the game to join the Game-on Thread in order to ask questions of those on the thread.  I found that useful during my Florida trip.

There are usually more non-members (not bots) than members viewing the Game-on Thread, so there must be some appeal to the quality of the thread.  I wish we could bottle whatever that appeal is and send free samples to all members.

Sam

[pete]

Join me in chatbox to expand on this

[RosalieTCeltics]

The ChatBox is a quicker way to comment while watching the game. My only problem is that it is less personal,. Seems we all learn a little about each other while chatting,

But, as I said, it is faster.

Hey K.J. Missed seeing you on here, but now that I see that it is school keeping you away, keep hitting those books!!!

Rosalie

[Sam]

Pete, I'm sorry I didn't log on at the right time to see your post.  Too late now.

Sam

[hawksnestbeach]

My problem is bandwidth. Out here in the sticks in Central NY, it's hard enough to get a connection that's fast enough to watch the game. When I do, if I try going to the game on thread, too, it usually makes the game unwatchable. Hawk

[beat]

Hawk

Where in Central NY are you. Near what town?

I always figured I was the lone wolf in the sticks up on the good old Tug Hill. Where we were suppose to get upwards of 3 feet of snow but only go half that. But we are expecting another 1-2 feet tomorrow to make up for it!

beat

[Shamrock1000]

Definitely don't ask anyone to tone down the number of posts - if anything, that would make the thread seem more desolate and unappealing. I am a relatively new poster here, and have participated in a couple of game on threads that I really enjoyed.

I agree that game on threads shouldn't make the poster feel like he/she must make astute observations. I often text friends during sports games, and even the simplest most obvious texts make the experience of the game more satisfying, more like you are watching the game with friends. I would hope the game on thread can offer a similar experience.

[hawksnestbeach]

Beat, I'm in the Town of Columbus (home of Chobani's east coast plant), halfway between Utica and Binghamton. So far, all we've had is a dusting of snow, sleet and ice, but snow is in the forecast. Back on topic, I love the game-on thread, always check it when I miss a game and thank those who post. On those occasions when I get a good connection to watch the game and then try to join the game-on thread, too, everything crashes. Hawk

[RosalieTCeltics]

I thought you guys would be buried in snow the way the weather forecasters have been talking.

Beat, is Marcus loaded down with snow? The reports I saw said that Syracuse was loaded.

Shammrock, Being the only woman active on the forum, I can tell you that I enjoy the GameOn site myself. But if you do try the ChatBox, you will find your posts going in much faster. The guys have done a great job setting this site up. Wherever you chose to go, you are most welcome.

Spoken by the head of the Jeff Green fan club!!!!

Rosalie

[beat]

Rosalie

Syracuse has VIRTUALLY nothing, we were suppose to get 30+ inches over the past 2 days and got at most 15-18 total, nothing like what Buffalo got. Now they say we could get 2 feet from tomorrow early thru mid day Friday. Just too early for this and next week it's suppose to be in the 50's.

I have been trying to get Marcus to post some interesting news about him but if he doesn't I will !!

beat

[Shamrock1000]

.

Shammrock, Being the only woman active on the forum, I can tell you that I enjoy the GameOn site myself. But if you do try the ChatBox, you will find your posts going in much faster. The guys have done a great job setting this site up. Wherever you chose to go, you are most welcome.  

Spoken by the head of the Jeff Green fan club!!!!

Rosalie

Thanks Rosalie. Glad to see I'm not the only one with a soft spot for Uncle Jeff....

[bobc33]

I tried the Chat briefly during the game tonight and it works fine, and quickly. While on it though I was wondering what was going on in the Game On thread and went back to it.

Perhaps as an experiment some night GYSO can do his normal pregame Game On post, but then direct everyone to the Chat Box? That way we can all experience it and get familiar with it, and in time decide if that is where the Game On occurs.

[NYCelt]

I tried the Chat briefly during the game tonight and it works fine, and quickly.  While on it though I was wondering what was going on in the Game On thread and went back to it.

Perhaps as an experiment some night GYSO can do his normal pregame Game On post, but then direct everyone to the Chat Box?  That way we can all experience it and get familiar with it, and in time decide if that is where the Game On occurs.  

Great idea Bob!

I'm convinced that Chatbox would make the Game On experience a whole new ballgame. Simpler and faster paced. The fast break of Game On.

[pete]

Just a tip on this. I missed the game on last night., and was curious to see if anyone tried chatbox. So, if you log in, select archives, you can read previous posts. (it stores up to 195)

Be sure to shut off auto refresh because if you don't, it will keep sending you to the last thread posted. I believe this is what gyso was referring to a few days ago.

Pete

[Sponsored content]