Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

... Looking at that list, unless there's some amazingly huge gap between #3 and #4 it means not a heck of a lot.

Guys, quit propagating the negative echo chamber where the game is DOA! Duh! It's a top seller of course! This one website that is supposedly the internet retailer arm of one of the largest North American distributors totally is all the information you need! Don't question it!

Merijeek wrote:

Asterios wrote:

Stormanu go look at the list up above, most of those games I've never heard of, and yet other games that company sells I know sell a lot are not even listed, like Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh Warmachine, warhordes and so on, yet some unknown games are outselling them?

Rick, the fact that you haven't heard of the likes of "King of Toyko" is your malfunction, nobody else's. Being proud of that fact doesn't help either.

The obvious reason is that there is no such things as someone buying "War machine" or "Hordes" because there is no such product. To get on a top list like this you'd have to have an individual product like "Cryx Soul Mutilator" that managed to be one of their top 20 sellers. X-Wing will make that list (popular game, small base of models), and starter boxes will make that list (standard new player entry point), but individual models aren't going to make it.

Looking at it today, there's a bag of foam on it.

Individual models aren't going to make it but foam bags are?! Seriously? How many http://frpgames.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=14201#.VL5lRZB0aPw does the average miniature gamer need?

 Albertorius wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Individual models aren't going to make it but foam bags are?! Seriously? How many http://frpgames.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=14201#.VL5lRZB0aPw does the average miniature gamer need?

Well... I do have 7 army cases and about a dozen other separate foam trays...

Now - how many of a single model do you have?

I've got, using 40k as an example, 10 Carnifexes, 4 Hive Tyrants, over a hundred Genestealers... and I might need 2 army cases to fit them in when I transport (the rest of the models are on shelves).

They sold enough to crack the top 20? Yeah, I'm not going to put any more value on this site than it's face. A single site on the internet doesn't mean diddly squat.

Merijeek wrote:

Sining wrote:
But this is one of the latest online stores, according to Doug.

Also I still don't get the two player set being that popular for Warmachine. They gave some pretty bad models for it. Mow STs and cinerators?? Plus it's been out for 3 years now. It's how I got into wmh

If nothing else that page could very well be "crap we think we might have over ordered". Like I said, without knowing their methodology, it's pretty meaningless.

And yet when I say "... Seriously, one e-tailer doesn't tell the whole story.
Needs more data." I get slapped with "and cue the
"Top Seller Lists from one of the largest online gaming retailers (and in fact, the retail side of one of the largest gaming distributors in North America) don't mean anything, not when my perpetual feedback loop is telling me the game is DOA, unsuccessful, and terrible!""

All I said was "Needs more data." Not - "This can't be correct." or "They're fabricating numbers." or anything like that.

judgedoug, please provide more information - a link showing that this is, and I quote, the retail side of one of the largest gaming distributors in North America (unquote), some information about their methodology of picking their top 20, another webstore showing good sales... something. Anything. Please. That's all I can ask for.

A single data point that contains... shall we say "interesting" other data isn't enough to make any call on, let alone something to hang your hat on to mock other users.

 Swabby wrote:
It royally pisses me off that Mike has a personal line to PB while everyone elses input amounts to mud.

No offense Mike but had they listened to some of the more experienced wargamers early on alot more than 5 questions would have been answered.

The amount of cronyism surrounding this game is going to be a huge part in curbing its market success in my opinion.

It's PB. Cronyism is a requirement.
Yes, it's bs. I should've expected nothing less - but I had hopes that Ninja Division was going to be more than a pretty name.

 Easy E wrote:
Bit of a rant ahead. Please skip it if you want something useful about RRT.

Sometimes I read comment pages/threads on games where players say things like... "Company X should do Z, and Company Y must have know this would happen, and Why can't Comapny A get this done in B time" and I wonder.

How many people here have actually been inside of a corporation (small, medium, or large) before and tried to actually get something done? I mean simple things that everyone agrees on still take months to get to implementation. Imagine what happens when not everyone agrees on the solution or doesn't think it is a problem.

I know from personal experience, I have spent years just getting people to agree that there is a problem that needs to be resolved in the first place much less how to solve it. Corporations/Companies are slow to react to anything.

Now, I'm sure everyone will point to the few, rare examples of a nimble corporation and prove me wrong.

/rant

The smaller the company, the more nimble it is. You're probably in a large company - and likely an old, well established one. Change moves at the speed of molasses in January in places like Big Oil or Education.
In newer companies (for example, ones that survived the dotcom bubble) it's much easier to get things changed, even if they're large.

In companies small enough they have to beg for volunteers to pack and send kickstarter rewards, change is as fast as sending an email to 10 people.

 Manchu wrote:

Merijeek wrote:
You must not be used to arguing with religious fanatics or cultists. There will be no such thing that is forthcoming. Something was found that he thought validated his assertion, and therefore his assertion is right.

That's an astoundingly ironic example of ad hominem, considering you are accusing someone who actually provided evidence for a claim of being a fanatic in contrast to those who have dismissed the evidence out of hand for the sake of their predetermined opinion that RTT is a failure. This the worst thread I have ever seen on Dakka Dakka. I thought we had hit rock bottom at "PB is singling me out" but this is a new low.

I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that a single example was considered evidence.
And please explain where it was dismissed out of hand? The first response was "more data needed" and that response was mocked for no reason.

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that a single example was considered evidence.

Great, then you have learned something today already.

Please respond to the rest of my post as well.

And no, a single data point isn't evidence of anything other than a single data point. It's literally exactly like me saying "No one at my FLGS has even heard of RRT." (which is a true statement) and then concluding that no one has heard of it.

 Manchu wrote:
Your argument is an example of false equivalence. An anecdote about the patrons of your LGS is not the same as a national distributor's retail arm listing a game in its top seller list.

Both are individual data points. Attributing more value to one than the other is called a "bias". Without more data points, both are equally valid.

I know there are enough data points to disprove my LGS example. I do not know (and have been mocked/rebuked when I requested them, so I'm forced to assume they don't exist) there are more data points to support frpgames' top seller list.

Anecdotal evidence isn't. And a single retialers top seller list is still anecdotal evidence.

 Manchu wrote:
Now you are trying to justify one fallacy (false equivalence) by deploying another (appeal to authority: "data point," "bias").

Um. No.

I'm trying to discuss facts here. Fact: the frpgames top seller list is a single data point. Fact: That top seller list included (for some period of time, I didn't check again after that day for various reasons) a miniature bag. Fact: It takes more than a single data point to plot a trend in either direction.

I've asked for more data points and been mocked every time. That's all I want. I'm not saying the game is failing or that it's gak. I'm saying that "frpgames top seller means it's not failing" isn't a supportable statement.

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Appeal_to_authority.html By saying "frpgames shows the game is successful therefore the game is successful" is an appeal to authority. That's explicitly not what I'm doing. I'm saying "frpgames is an interesting data point - do we have more?"

 Manchu wrote:
And now you post strawman arguments ... are you just working your way through all the fallacies?

What strawman? Are you just naming fallacies that don't apply to appear smart?

This is really quite simple. The fact that RTT is on FRP's top seller list is evidence undermining the notion (itself unsupported by evidence so far) that RTT is a flop. The inability to acknowledge even this would be stunning absent the pages and pages of committed negativity. The argument that the person who brought this evidence to light is a fanatic, however, did surprise me.

I never said that RTT is a flop (now who's strawmaning?) I said, and I'll quote so it's not confusing:

rigeld2 wrote:
There's another echo chamber?

... Seriously, one e-tailer doesn't tell the whole story.
Needs more data.

Which is a fact. One etailer doesn't tell the whole story, regardless of who that etailer is. Saying that "frpgames is the distribution arm of Warpath (which is actually Golden now) and therefore is absolute fact" is an appeal to authority. Saying that we don't need data beyond that is an appeal to authority.

I welcome actual debate and discussion. Which is why I originally posted what I did. Instead, I was met with:

 judgedoug wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

... Seriously, one e-tailer doesn't tell the whole story.
Needs more data.

and cue the
"Top Seller Lists from one of the largest online gaming retailers (and in fact, the retail side of one of the largest gaming distributors in North America) don't mean anything, not when my perpetual feedback loop is telling me the game is DOA, unsuccessful, and terrible!"

The very definition of appeal to authority. And yet *I'm* the one that's called out and mocked? Really? How do you expect me to respond?

 Manchu wrote:
Maybe we ought to focus on what we can agree on? For example, I bet we can agree that one top seller list does not tell the whole story. We can also agree that nothing else posted ITT tells the whole story, either, correct?

Correct.
Which is what I pointed out. And was mocked for.

 Manchu wrote:
I am willing to bet a good amount of dollars that you were actually mocked for requesting more evidence regarding the proposition that RTT is not a failure in contrast to no one ITT asking for any evidence that RTT is a failure. That is, it was not so much a personal matter as a threadwide matter (hence initially mentioning an echochamber). But judgedoug can speak for himself in that regard.

Considering he quoted my statement, and the tone of his statement, I tend to disagree with that. But since he hasn't further responded to me directly, instead choosing to mock the thread in general, I suppose we'll never have an answer. His word choice was rather rude, however.

In any case, I wonder if we can also agree on this point: The fact that RTT is on FRP's top seller list is evidence undermining the notion (itself unsupported by evidence so far) that RTT is a flop.

No, I don't agree with that. Sure, there's no evidence to support that RTT is a flop (no direct evidence anyway - the 3 LGS I've been to having a total of 4 people knowing it exists, one of them being me is anecdotal still) but FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.
Since, as I said, there was a mini bag on there at one point - and seriously, how much volume of bags do they have? If it's low, then it doesn't take much to get on the top sellers list. If it's high - WTF?! I just seriously don't believe there is that much movement on a single specific bag.

Ignoring the fact that nothing on here http://frpgames.com/cart.php?m=search&s=fate+reforged is on the best sellers list and all. The newest M:TG expansion isn't on the best sellers list the weekend it releases? And we should just take this at face value?

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things

"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?

Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.

rigeld2 wrote:
And we should just take this at face value?

Rhetoric aside, what is your actual argument on this point? Do you mean that the only explanation of Fate Reforged being absent is that the list is meaningless?

No. It's suspect and without explanation, doubly so. If you think the list should be accepted as absolute evidence that the game is selling well, explain how the top seller list is missing Fate Reforged. Did they somehow get less Fate Reforged product than RTT product?
That'd be a hell of a mistake, and not something the "retail arm of the largest NA distributor" would make. I can think of only one reason it's not on there, and that reason invalidates the list completely. I don't think it's true, which is why I'm willing to accept it as a data point.

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I can think of only one reason it's not on there

And that would be?

That the list is cooked to exclude certain items. Since the list seems to fluctuate at least daily, I can't accept that this game:

http://frpgames.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=103698#.VMkgQJB0aPw

outsold Fate Reforged.

And what, in your mind, is the difference between evidence and a "data point"?

You use data points to build evidence. The more data, the more evidence. I use them interchangeably really - or try to. If I seem to not have, it's likely a miswording by me due to meds.

It also seems like you've got a hostile tone - I'm sure you're not intending that but I wanted to let you know.
I'm inferring that based on how you're cutting up my posts and only responding to small sections instead of to the entire post.

 Forar wrote:
Evidence should be corroborated. If they presented numbers of sold units, that'd show us the scope of what their list entails.

If other sites also had it popping up the rankings, we could infer some positive things as well.

Without corroboration, it's an outlier. It's enough info to say "yup, it sure is on that list, but what that list represents objectively we cannot say".

It's subjective, at this point.

And frankly, was put forth by someone who relishes in trolling (by their own admission) against a strawman argument that few people have expressed.

Sure, tons of people have commented concerns about how well or not it might be selling, and some have mentioned local stores struggling to move product or to find actual players, but other than Rick (Hi Rick!) I can't think of many people here who have proclaimed it flat out dead/failed. I think the common sentiment seems to generally be one of concern mixed with "whelp, Adepticon/Gencon ought to be interesting".

Manchu, this. This is my overall point.

Dissect my posts however you want, but this is really what it boils down to.

 Swabby wrote:
Fact: Judgedoug and Manchu play RRT together.

Suggestion: That a more impartial mod watch this thread.

I disagree. I believe Manchu can be impartial until proven otherwise.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things

"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?

Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.

No, not exactly. I will take FRP's "single data point" based on $M sales as being far more important than your non-data from a single store based on $k sales.

Unless you are in the industry, and do business comparable in volume to FRP, you lack neither the insight nor the data to refute FRP's data, given that FRP's "single data point" represents the conglomeration of several-fold more individual transactions across a much wider footprint than what you might be aware of.

Hello there "Appeal to Authority".
I'll refute your statements with "Prove that FRP's Best Seller list isn't manipulated (because it seems to be, based on evidence) and provide actual transaction data instead of assumptions."

Taking FRP for more than what it is and assuming they're infallible is simply wrong. It's a single data point. If it's accurate, there's more out there. I haven't found any, despite actively looking for them.

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
That the list is cooked to exclude certain items.

I think that is almost certainly the case. It seems to me that the only reason to maintain such a list on a store website is to reinforce sales of popular items. I don't take it for an absolute list of FRP's monthly (or weekly? daily?) sales. Nor do I think that invalidates the list as an indication that FRP has been selling a respectable amount of RRT starters.

If the list is cooked it could mean that they sold a single box and want to sell more, or that they've sold all but one, or that they've sold none.
In other words, it means nothing except that they want it shown as a best seller. How can it be taken as a valid indicator of anything?

rigeld2 wrote:
I use them interchangeably really - or try to.

Why use them interchangably if there is a difference between them? To get down to it, we both agree that this "data point" does not prove either that RRT is a flop or that it is a success. Whether something can be considered evidence, however, is not contingent on whether it alone is sufficient to prove or disprove a proposition.

Whether something is factual or not, however, can determine if it's evidence (data) or not. Making things up isn't evidence.

rigeld2 wrote:
you're cutting up my posts and only responding to small sections instead of to the entire post

No offense meant with this practice. I do not respond to points that assume the points with which I take issue. It's my "one thing at a time" rule of thumb.

Again, I wasn't assuming anything - just wanted to let you know how it was reading. I don't mind in-line responses, but ignoring whole swaths of a post is off-putting.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
That the list is cooked to exclude certain items.

Since the list seems to fluctuate at least daily, I can't accept that Golem Arcana outsold Fate Reforged.

And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly? Do you have some internal view into FRPgames sales data, that you are able to provide to refute the listing that they provide?

The current Top 20 list shows:
1. Star Wars : Imperial Assault
2. Mice and Mystics Expansion: Downwood Tales
3. Robotech RPG Tactics
...
20. Golem Arcana
That doesn't seem unreasonable at all. SWIA is selling huge - it's super-hot on BGG. M&M is a huge seller, so no reason to expect the expansion wouldn't do well. RRT has great nostalgic value as pre-marketing. Golem Arcana barely makes the list.

What evidence do you have that Fate Reforged should be a stronger seller than Golem Arcana? You keep talking about data and evidence, but you have nothing to add here.

Golem Arcana - a game that I haven't seen advertised at all and only know about because of Kickstarter.
Fate Reforged - an expansion to a 20+ year old game, a game that singlehandedly keeps many stores in the black had a release this weekend. Release weekends are typically massive numbers - preorders, release events, etc.

For FRP to have a release weekend and move less Magic than Golem Arcana (or pre-release weekend and move more miniature bags than Magic cards) is simply unbelievable. I'm asking for evidence. Saying "Trust me" isn't enough.

 Manchu wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
And your evidence that the list is "cooked" is what, exactly?

His evidence is, Fate Reforged is missing from the list. "Cooked" in this sense means (at least) that the list does not take into account every single product FRP sells. The obvious implication, however, is that the list means nothing.

rigeld2 wrote:
If the list is cooked it could mean that they sold a single box and want to sell more, or that they've sold all but one, or that they've sold none.

You are using the phrase "cooked" here to mean that the list is either an absolute account of sales or it is totally worthless, i.e., a false dichotomy.

It's not a false dichotomy. Those really are the only two options here - either it's a non-manipulated list and can be used as a valid data point, or it's cooked and manipulated in ways that makes it useless as a data point. There isn't a grey area of "Well, it's not a good data point..."

rigeld2 wrote:
ignoring whole swaths of a post is off-putting

I hope this settles the issue: You can read whatever tone you like into my posts (as anyone could also do with yours) or you can just deal with (or ignore) the points themselves. For my part, I am not going to respond to any further tone arguments because they are no more or less than rhetorical bullying.

It's not bullying. I'm pointing it out because it seems you're getting more hostile.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
FRP's top seller list doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things

"Doesn't mean much" or "means nothing"?

Exactly what I said. It's a single data point that's no more important than any other data point.

No, not exactly. I will take FRP's "single data point" based on $M sales as being far more important than your non-data from a single store based on $k sales.

Unless you are in the industry, and do business comparable in volume to FRP, you lack neither the insight nor the data to refute FRP's data, given that FRP's "single data point" represents the conglomeration of several-fold more individual transactions across a much wider footprint than what you might be aware of.

Hello there "Appeal to Authority".
I'll refute your statements with "Prove that FRP's Best Seller list isn't manipulated (because it seems to be, based on evidence) and provide actual transaction data instead of assumptions."

Taking FRP for more than what it is and assuming they're infallible is simply wrong. It's a single data point. If it's accurate, there's more out there. I haven't found any, despite actively looking for them.

"Appeal to Authority", "Appeal to Authority" - you keep using that phrase, but ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

Are you so ignorant and bullheaded that you don't even know what "Appeal to Authority" even is?

Considering I linked to a definition earlier in the thread...

Obviously not. I'm going to educate you, so that you look less stupid and idiotic when you post. Appeal to Authority is when someone who knows nothing about something uses their position (only) as the basis for argument. It would be as if the world's most successful chicken farmer stood up and said "I know chicken, so you should believe what I say".

Um. No.
Again, https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Appeal_to_authority.html

"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative."

Let me break it down smaller for you.
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement (RTT is a best seller) is correct because the statement is made by a source (FRP) that is commonly regarded as authoritative."

Hmm. Fits perfectly.
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Yup, exactly what I've said.

Anyone agreeing with your based on your "accomplishments" and "knowledge" would be a ludicrously poor Appeal to Authority. People using FRP Games is not an Appeal to Authority, it is Expert Opinion.

It's not an expert opinion at all.

Also, your demand that I disprove a negative is yet another fallacy of argument. Manchu was completely right that you are clueless at arguing. You're embarrassing yourself working through the fallacies.

Disprove a negative? Excuse me? I've asked you to provide numbers. I've asked for supporting evidence. I've been mocked instead.

FRP's data is what it is. And it is far better than the nonsense you're spouting based on absolutely nothing but bullheadness and bad arugment.

It is what it is - questionable data and a single data point with literally zero corroboration. Which is what I said on my first post on the subject.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Those really are the only two options here - either it's a non-manipulated list and can be used as a valid data point, or it's cooked and manipulated in ways that makes it useless as a data point. There isn't a grey area of "Well, it's not a good data point..."

Not at all. If the list simply excludes CCGs, it is still a good data point for measuring RRT's comparative sales. In fact, it would arguably be stronger evidence because there is no reason to compare RRT sales with MtG sales. I think the weak spot with my argument remains, we don't actually know how the list is "cooked." But that does not automatically mean the list reflects nothing about FRP's sales.

If that's all that's been done, then sure.
But that's demonstrably not true - as I said, there was a miniature storage bag on the list at one point. How is comparing that to RTTs sales any different to comparing a CCG to RTTs sales?

I'm sure the list reflects something, but it doesn't necessarily reflect that RTT is selling well. We need more data. Which is literally what I said at the beginning of this.

 Manchu wrote:
But it is also worth asking, on what basis do they claim RRT is a failure?

The rules are shoddy (IMO).
The minis are iffy - when assembled they're okay, but not really worth the massive part count. Again, opinion.
The lack of support (despite continued assurances that they're working on it... it takes 10 minutes to put up an FAQ/Errata page).
The fact that Ninja Division is completely out of the picture now.

And the lack of good evidence to the contrary.

 Manchu wrote:
IMO, the rules are fun and the minis look nice. I'm not sure how evidence enters into these questions of personal taste. I think Settlers of Catan is gak but that doesn't stop it from selling.

True. I was offering ideas on why people think it's a failure. I disagree with you on the rules and the minis look nice once a lot of work is put into them. A lot.

And neither do PB's ongoing ineptitude communicating with players nor the shadowy falling out between them and ND necessarily have anything to do with retail sales.

This is where I really disagree. Friends I know (that aren't local and therefore not counted before in my FLGS demonstration) have refused to buy into the game exactly because of ND's "falling out" and PB's failure to communicate.
It is having an effect on retail sales. What effect that is remains to be seen, but there is an effect.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Oh? I'm going to do a little digging.

Fate Reforged had a street date of Jan. 23 (5 days ago). If FRP is using GAAP-based accounting, none of their preorder sales could count until the 23rd, when they ship.

But here's the real kicker - FRP Games does not sell MtG by the case. FRP sells Magic by retail SKUs, because FRP is a hobby seller that happens to also sell cards. If FRP were a real card seller, they would do like Star City Games and sell Boosters by the case.

Finally, it is clear that FRP tracks sales by SKU, not by family. Fate Reforged has several SKUs associated with it. It is entirely possible that no individual Fate Reforged SKU has outsold Golem Arcana on a dollar basis since the last time the list was updated, given that bulk Magic sales are not part of FRP Games core offering.

They may not record sales of boosters "by the case" but they do record sales of boosters (as it's a separate SKU). I have serious doubts that they wouldn't sell a box (or case) and record it as 36 (or more) boosters.

rigeld2 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Hello there "Appeal to Authority".

"Appeal to Authority", "Appeal to Authority" - you keep using that phrase, but ...

Spoiler:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

Considering I linked to a definition earlier in the thread...

Appeal to Authority is when someone who knows nothing about something uses their position (only) as the basis for argument. It would be as if the world's most successful chicken farmer stood up and said "I know chicken, so you should believe what I say".

Um. No.
Again, https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Appeal_to_authority.html

"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative."

Let me break it down smaller for you.
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement (RTT is a best seller) is correct because the statement is made by a source (FRP) that is commonly regarded as authoritative."

Hmm. Fits perfectly.
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Yup, exactly what I've said.

You need to work on your reading comprehension. If you actually read and understood what you copied, you would recognize that the fallacy is only when the "authoritative" person or source doesn't actually know anything about the thing in question. When Bill Nye talks about Science, he is an expert, and me quoting him is not Appeal to Authority. FRP Games is an expert in hobby sales, and me linking their Top 20 is not a false Appeal to Authority, because it's what they actually do. You linking to Chicken Man's Top 20 games sales would be an Appeal to Authority.

So you're stating that their authority is absolute?
"Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious. "
Oops.

You not accepting FRP games authority, simply because they don't say what you want does not actually negate the fact that they know far more about the hobby sales business than you ever will. In many ways, you are like an Creationist or Flat Earther, saying that Neil DeGrasse Tyson is not an authority on science and physics, because you believe that God Created a Flat Earth.

No, I'm not. I'm asking for evidence. The only evidence you've provided is that the list exists. If the only evidence for a round earth was that someone said it was round (regardless of their pedigree) I'd ask for more evidence.

Fortunately there is a lot of evidence saying it's round.

Nobody is saying that FRP is infallible. I am simply saying that FRP is a far better source for hobby sales than you are, in the same way that NDGT is a far better source for science than a Creationist Flat Earther.

Did I say I knew better than FRP? Pretty sure I didn't... I'm saying I doubt the integrity of their "Best Seller" (with no caveats) list. I've given my reasons for it. You've failed to provide evidence other than "They said so!".
And that's where we are. You are actually saying FRP is infallible when you have no doubts about their best seller list being accurate.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The RRT KS had barely 5,000 backers, of which <10% are disgruntled like rigeld2.

Please don't make assumptions without fact.
Please support your statement of "less than 10%". Please also support your statement that I'm "disgruntled". I'm satisfied with what I'm currently getting out of RTT - just the SDF-1 as I sold my original pledge.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
I consider myself a big fan of Anime in general and Giant Robot stuff in particular.

I watched a lot in the early to mid-80's, than some more in the late 90's.

I managed to completely miss Robotech and Gundam. They are both two important series that I've never been a big fan of, or seen a lot of, somehow.

Did these two series become popular in the USA in the late 80's to mid 90's?

That's when I was exposed to them, yes. Robotech more than Gundam - iirc that's a more recent Americanism.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
As for whether FRP's list is "infallible", I see no reason to doubt it at this time. There is nothing obviously wrong with it. Your objection for Golem Arcana vs Fate Reforged holds no water.

Golem Arcana had to beat out miniature storage/transport bags for the #20 spot. That's not a huge jump.

Finally, whether you admit it to yourself, or not, you are a disgruntled backer. Your behavior is evidence of that.

Thanks for telling me how I feel! I disagree with your statement, and since in this matter I actually am an expert, I can - without a doubt - inform you that you are incorrect. Indisputably at that.

And the 10% number? Are the 534+ distinct people whining here and on the Comments? No, there are not 534+ gripers. You are free to trawl the this thread and the Comments to compile the list.

You do realize that not everyone who is disgruntled actually speaks up? And that not everyone speaking is disgruntled?
Thanks for agreeing that your numbers are made up and have no basis in fact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
It is a well-known axiom of MtG that serious players buy boxes or cases rather than boosters.

Actually, serious players buy singles.

 Manchu wrote:

 Swabby wrote:
From my perspective it is weird to see a mod call out one after not being around for a while when it is leveraged against their friend and totally ignore the other when it is leveraged against someone participating in a three way argument and that person is on the opposite side of that argument.

First, I didn't call out anyone as a moderator. When I post anything as a mod, I use orange text. I do that to avoid precisely the kind of insinuation you keep making. Second, the argument I called out as ironic/miserable was that someone who posted evidence is like a religious fanatic or cultist, a person who doesn't care about evidence. There was no similar irony in the accusation that someone who has posted critically for many months now is biased against PB and the RRT as a disgruntled backer.

To be correct, I've criticized PB and how they've handled RTT, and the rules for RTT. I haven't (intended) anything more and I'm far from disgruntled at this point. I've corrected judgedoug (twice now) and I'd like to think you read those posts - do I need to correct you?
I'm not disappointed with what I'm getting out of this KS anymore. I'm completely happy - I'm essentially getting the SDF-1 for free.

Sure, I'm biased against PB but that has nothing to do with being "disgruntled" (defined as angry or dissatisfied - if you use a different definition it's not an English one).

 Forar wrote:
Hopefully it doesn't take another half a year to get 13 more, but as a vocal critic, even I think it's a reasonable start.

Agreed.

The victory points for a half dead squadron makes me laugh at how awkwardly they worded that rule. It could've been done sooooo much cleaner.