Voting Discussion Thread

D'Arcy · Post by **D'Arcy** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:55 am

Smoove_B wrote:People will be attracted to the CONTENT of the site - not the name. A name might get their immediate attention, but they won't stick around if the content isn't what they're looking for.

But if professional advertisement is any indication, immediate attention is invaluable.

In the forums I read, a website called "Penny Arcade" was mentioned quite frequently. Even if the URL was directly linked, there was never an explanation regarding its content, only comments like "look at this" or "this is funny". Since I don't care much about arcades, I wasn't clicking the links for a long, long time. When I finally did, I still looked for the arcade stuff among the comics and was frustrated when I couldn't find it.

Initially, I was also quite reluctant to visit firingsquad.com, whereas I didn't think twice about quartertothree.com.

From this anecdotal self-observation, I conclude that if the name of your website is going to be completely unrelated to the content, an abstract or neutral name is preferable to one which invokes concrete but false associations, especially if they are unpleasant.

I'm sure this branding problem is thoroughly researched by advertising psychologists.

Applying this to the choice at hand, both options are unsatisfying. But perhaps OO is slightly better, because it's so absurd and less likely to stimulate expectations that will be frustrated.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 8:10 am

Interesting points, D'Arcy, but I come to different conclusions. I concluded that *you personally* are more affected by a site's URL than many other people in the world and that you allow that to influence your decision to click a link moreso than many others.

That being said, it's very refreshing to hear from someone who experiences hyperthreading like you do, as it gives me a different perspective to consider.

And maybe I'm way off base by implying that you're in the minority and I in the majority. Hopefully we'll hear from other folks who'll let us know their opinions regarding the importance of URLs when it comes to clicking. Either way, it's good to hear about things from the perspective I don't normally employ.

~Neal

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:03 am

Hopefully we'll hear from other folks who'll let us know their opinions regarding the importance of URLs when it comes to clicking.

URLs are only important to me when I have choices. So if I am googling or someone presents a list of links for whatever reason, I look for what is cool and creative and makes sense at the same time. I also wouldn't remember if someone just told me check out something obtuse over a beer.

Ferinstance, my friend who just moved back to Virgina/DC calls and she tells me I have to see this gypsydancepunk band called gogol something or other. I totally lost the name of the band moments after our conversation because it wasn't attached to anything familiar. That same lack of frame of reference is the same thing that would keep me from clicking on a hyperlink if it were one of 4. I'd either find what I was looking for before I got the perceived non related site or I'd be done looking for having not found what I was looking for before I got there. If GG were called "excop and freinds" I never would have even checked it for release dates and would never have found you guys.

As you said though. It's probable that my lazy ass in the minority.

Guy Incognito · Post by **Guy Incognito** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:26 am

I find the URL has little effect on me unless it is a member site from aol or geocities (any of the free ones populated with popups and other annoying ads). A creative name would be more likely to pull me in over a generic name, though the summary blurb and how high it shows up on the list of results have the most impact on my decision to click.

Thin_J · Post by **Thin_J** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:39 am

D'Arcy,

Just curious, but how would you explain the popularity of a site named something as out of nowhere as "Bluesnews" ?

Judging by the website's name, that could be news for anything. And yet it's one of the more visited sources of gaming news on the net.

Honestly, I don't see either name effecting the site one way or the other as long as the content is good. I do see the potential for the OO name to become kind of an infamous sort of thing with gamers. Especially those of us that are even bigger dorks than the rest. Once Blues or one of the other bigger sites starts linking to reviews or giving the nod to OO for posting something first.. that's when people will start appearing.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:20 am

First of all, bluesnews always makes me think of "Blue's Clues" - hardly what I would think of for gaming. They don't appear to have any trouble.

But, my point is this, if I'm reading some article, and it contains "Grandy Peace, of OctopusOverlords.com, said..."

Unless Grandy's quote is a campaign for relaxing the ratings on bestiality titles, I'm clicking that link.

Why? Because the first thought through my head is "What the hell is OctopusOverlords.com?" Curiousity and all that.

If it was "Grandy Peace, of genericgameurl.net" or even brutesquad.net, there is nothing that's going to make me want to click those links.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:41 am

RM9 I suppose I am the opposite. I get the same "what the hell is that?" reactions including:

First of all, bluesnews always makes me think of "Blue's Clues" - hardly what I would think of for gaming.

However, rather than have curiosity about it, I simply shrug my shoulders and go somewhere else.

Kratz · Post by **Kratz** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:44 am

No way I'm clicking on a quote by someone named 'Grandy' - sounds like he's got a pretty high opinion of himself.

Yours truly,

Awesomey

EngineNo9 · Post by **EngineNo9** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:04 pm

You guys are silly.

I'd have to say that seeing a link to a site called Octopus Overlords is definitely going to be more likely to garner my interest than something like Brute Squad. However, if somebody is linking to something I should check out (such as the Penny Arcade example) I'd probably just check it out regardless. I think perhaps D'Arcy (are you related to Terance Trent D'Arby?) forms a far too concrete idea of what to expect without examining other facts or checking for him/herself.

Off topic a bit, but I want to see some more artist submissions in the Artist Wanted thread! I'd even go so far as to appreciate some *gasp* real art (although it will be tough to top my BS vs. OO masterpiece)

gorham09 · Post by **gorham09** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:20 pm

Well, perhaps, I am in the "D'arcy minority" but I have had almost identical experiences to those he described. I was much more willing to visit a site called "quartertothree" than "penny arcade." It may be a subconscious thing but, it is there and one name made me hesitate over another. I actually had a strange sense of deja vu when I read your post D'arcy as my thoughts fall right into line with your post.

However, you were much more articulate in explaining the reasoning for those thoughts than I could hope to be.

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:30 pm

Since we're all tossing our opinions into the hat, I'll say this: neither Brutesquad nor OctopusOverlords would even remotely inspire me to visit this site, unless I was already in on the joke.

Both names are ultimately farcical and childish (not that I think that's a bad thing; see below), and, at least for me, fail to conjure up even a shred of reason why I should come here for reliable information or intelligent discussion. Abstract, out-of-left-field humour, maybe, but definitely not either of the former.

On the other hand (this'd be the "below" mentioned in the previous paragraph), I haven't really been considering the name from the point of view of how much new traffic it will generate for us. I've been looking at it from the simple point of view of 'how much will I enjoy being associated with a site with the name X?' From the point of view of someone already on the inside, so to speak, and who knows the origins of the names, both make considerably more sense, and neither cause me any grief. I have slightly more affinity for Brutesquad, but I don't really mind either way.

So my point would be this: if the goal is to have a site name that current forum members like, then I don't think it makes much difference which you pick (go with the majority in the voting thread); whereas, if the goal is to have a site name that will attract outside interest, I think (1) that both names are rather useless, and (2) that since none of the people posting here are new, our opinions on the matter are quite irrelevant, and why are you asking us?

- Ash

Kratz · Post by **Kratz** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:39 pm

Asharak wrote: Both names are ultimately farcical and childish (not that I think that's a bad thing; see below), and, at least for me, fail to conjure up even a shred of reason why I should come here for reliable information or intelligent discussion. Abstract, out-of-left-field humour, maybe, but definitely not either of the former.

I think maybe you are taking your gaming and gaming sites too seriously. Or maybe you are just making an argument, but I find the comments from people that the proposed name is 'childish' pretty comical and indicate perhaps a bit too much... concern.

This is supposed to be fun, after all.

As has been mentioned over and over again by a wide range of folks, there is a precedent set here by sites like BluesNews and Old Man Murray... things can be fun and useful at the same time. I also think that whatever name we came up with, people would argue for it, and against it, and think it was 'too serious' or 'not serious enough' or 'lame' or 'great' or whatever... there's no pleasing everyone, so all that can be done is what has been done - give people a choice and see what the think. I think we're seeing that, by a factor of more than 2 to 1.

It is weird that people seem to get so bent over this.

slambie · Post by **slambie** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 8:21 pm

Kratz wrote: It is weird that people seem to get so bent over this.

Well Awesomey, I'm not sure what you're reading here but I don't see anyone getting "bent" over the proposed site names. I see discussion where some people like one or the other name and some people don't like either, but no one is pounding their fists on the floor in a hissy fit.

I'm not a fan of either name, but I personally couldn't care less what the final URL ends up being. It's just not something that bunches my panties or keeps me awake at night.

Slambie the Sensational-y

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:39 pm

Kratz wrote:I think maybe you are taking your gaming and gaming sites too seriously. Or maybe you are just making an argument

The latter. I refer to the following line only a few sentences further into my post: "from the point of view of someone already on the inside, so to speak, and who knows the origins of the names, both make considerably more sense, and neither cause me any grief."

But that doesn't change the fact that as long as we're going to have this discussion I think it's legitimate to raise the childish nature of the names as a concern. One of the appeals of GG was the at-times erudite nature of the discussions. Especially in what is now Religion & Politics, some very high-level discussions (for an internet site, at least) could be had. I don't think either of the names under consideration are going to prepare any new visitors to the site for that sort of discussion. Brutesquad, as it has been called repeatedly, is adolescent humour, and Octopus Overlords sounds so absurd it belongs in Monty Python.

Again, I have no problem with either of these names, but my point remains, as above, that neither will do a very good job of attracting some of the types of people that GG had. Both, I think, cater to a particular segment of our population, but not the whole of it (I doubt, honestly, that it would be possible to choose a name that would attract the full breadth of GG's former diversity).

With GG, though, the name was always an academic issue: we could never change it, so there was no point in discussing it. Here, though, we have an opportunity to shape the site from the ground up, so it's worth debating what kind of image the site's name should convey (or even if it needs to convey anything: as above - again - I'm still not certain if anyone knows whether the primary criteria for choosing the name will be to satisfy existing members, in which case the image matters little; or to attract new ones, in which case it matters a great deal). Assuming we do care what kind of impression the site's name gives to new visitors, we first have to decide what kind of visitors interest us.

I think it's relatively safe to say that neither Brutesquad nor OctopusOverlords will, through name power alone, draw myself or RM9 new debate partners for discussions of politics & morality. Brutesquad would be good at rounding up strayed GGers, while OctopusOverlords, through its sheer enjoyable lunacy would like draw the kind of generally happy-go-luck crowd that hangs around EBG.

So, assuming repetition brings clarity, I will say again that neither/any name affects me much: my perception of this site will always be primarily coloured by my past experiences with it, not the name on the door. But to anyone new, the name is the first thing they'll see, and will consequently greatly affect who gets beyond the front page.

I called the proposed names childish not as a slam against them, but as a factual statement of their nature. Brutesquad hardly screams "ivory tower"; OctopusOverlords hardly screams "computer gamer". They are both whimsical, childish names. That is not inherently a bad thing: EBG thrives on that kind of entertainment, and both of those names would likely be a long-term boon to that community.

But the bottom line is that they are names that benefit EBG, and before anyone goes so far as to actually change the URL, I think it's worth having a high-level discussion over whether or not that's the direction in which the site wants to go (versus choosing a name that draws in gamers, or political philosophers, or satanists, or bunny worshippers - or any other crowd we might wish to cater to).

- Ash

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:22 pm

I called the proposed names childish not as a slam against them, but as a factual statement of their nature

"BS & OO are childish names" isn't really a factual statement.

Kratz · Post by **Kratz** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:28 pm

slambie wrote:
Kratz wrote: It is weird that people seem to get so bent over this.
Well Awesomey, I'm not sure what you're reading here but I don't see anyone getting "bent" over the proposed site names. I see discussion where some people like one or the other name and some people don't like either, but no one is pounding their fists on the floor in a hissy fit.

Well... there is some of it. There has been a bit more... vehement... protest in IRC from a person or two. I wasn't referring directly to Asharak as to some others.

Badassedy

Eel Snave · Post by **Eel Snave** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:20 pm

I really don't care.

I didn't go to GG for a long time because I was like, "What does that MEAN?" It didn't mean anything to me early on. I visited Penny Arcade on the recommendation of other webcomics. URLs are immaterial. Your site could have the coolest name on earth, or the dumbest, and yet I would visit based on content. Don't sweat it that much.

Besides, if we're fighting this much over a name, how are we going to deal with the actual CONTENT? I think this is like ordering a pizza: at some point, you have to put your foot down and say, "This is what we're ordering." We're not going to be able to please everyone, so we should just end the voting as scheduled and move on.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:28 pm

I like it. I want to add a vote for www.carnivorespizza.com. That says it all about my gaming groups.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:30 pm

Final talley was 75-32, counting only votes from people with 5+ posts.

OO.com, a winner is you!

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:58 pm

So, then it's settled. We will be OstentatiousOverbite.com

Eel Snave · Post by **Eel Snave** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:08 pm

OverbearingOxen.com

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:46 pm

OverwhelmingOvaries.com

Eel Snave · Post by **Eel Snave** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:07 pm

OscillatingOtters

WPD · Post by **WPD** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:29 pm

Obnoxious Obstetricians?

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:33 pm

OctogenarianOrangutan is the new MondayMonkey.

~Neal

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:38 pm

Peacedog wrote:"BS & OO are childish names" isn't really a factual statement.

You consider the concept of octopuses/octopi/whatever establishing dominion over the human race to be a serious and mature idea?

- Ash

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:49 pm

Obnoxious Obstetricians?

I will not visit that site even more so than I won't wear a butt plug unless it's washable!

Biyobi · Post by **Biyobi** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:24 pm

OverandOut?

noun · Post by **noun** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 10:33 pm

Octodong Overblown?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 10:55 pm

Asharak wrote:
Peacedog wrote:"BS & OO are childish names" isn't really a factual statement.
You consider the concept of octopuses/octopi/whatever establishing dominion over the human race to be a serious and mature idea?

- Ash

You may want to catch the Discovery channel's "The Future is Wild" when it re-airs this December. Be sure to watch for the Squibbon, Megasquid and Swampus.

I'm still having nightmares.

http://animal.discovery.com/convergence ... swild.html

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:53 pm

Smoove_B wrote:You may want to catch the Discovery channel's "The Future is Wild" when it re-airs this December. Be sure to watch for the Squibbon, Megasquid and Swampus.

I'm still having nightmares.

http://animal.discovery.com/convergence ... swild.html

If I can remember, and have the chance to watch it, and am suitably impressed - I'll try to dig this thread up and apologize.

- Ash

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:57 pm

Those are a lot of conditions.

Our future masters will not put up with your weak-willed attitude.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:26 am

You consider the concept of octopuses/octopi/whatever establishing dominion over the human race to be a serious and mature idea?

Your viewing it as childish is an opinion.

As it so happens, I don't consider the idea "immature". That's also an opinion. Of course, my opinion has been colored by the works of HP Lovecraft. And presumably smart biologists (of course, it could just be a bunch of dudes who made it all up) who did theoretical studies about life on the planet millions of years from now. Neither of those things can be reasonably referred to as childish.

Bad Demographic · Post by **Bad Demographic** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:45 am

Who cares if "Octopus Overlords" or "the Brutesquad" sounds "childish" and/or "immature"? I get enough of "responsible" and/or "mature" in the rest of my life. I gotta have some place to go relax.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:53 am

I know it's way too late, but I finally had a good idea. This place is like a virtual water cooler for pc gamers. We come here every morning to talk shop, TV, what happened last night, the news, sports, etc...

As it turns out, I don't thing www.thewatercooler.com has been taken. That really does say not only something about being forum-centric, but about what kind of forums they are.

Edit: and then the initials could be WC so all the French Canadians would think we were talking about the privy.

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:50 pm

Water Cooler idea is cool, but a little too late

adumir · Post by **adumir** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 6:03 pm

Yeah...wow.. I really like the Water Cooler, LM.

Kratz · Post by **Kratz** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 6:05 pm

Bad Demographic wrote:Who cares if "Octopus Overlords" or "the Brutesquad" sounds "childish" and/or "immature"? I get enough of "responsible" and/or "mature" in the rest of my life. I gotta have some place to go relax.

Amen.

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:08 pm

watercooler sounds too much like work.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:35 pm

LordMortis wrote:I know it's way too late, but I finally had a good idea. This place is like a virtual water cooler for pc gamers. We come here every morning to talk shop, TV, what happened last night, the news, sports, etc...

As it turns out, I don't thing www.thewatercooler.com has been taken. That really does say not only something about being forum-centric, but about what kind of forums they are.

A shame this came late, LM. I won't try to pretend the rest of the community would agree (I clearly know better at this point) but I like that way better than the choices we voted on.

Sith