andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2021-05-11 12:00 pm
cmcmck: chiara (chiara)

[personal profile] cmcmck 2021-05-11 01:11 pm (UTC)(link)
The harm to cis women is obvious when you think about it.

I'm trans, but short and slight and I have fine facial features, small hands and feet.

My voice is 'normal' female pitch.

I dress in fairly 'standard' female fashion.

I have a male life partner.

No one is going to question my presence in the public loos.

Many young cis women are way taller than me (how out of date terfs are in this- average European female height is now 5'6" and that's my own height exactly).

danieldwilliam: (Default)

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2021-05-11 02:09 pm (UTC)(link)
A difficulty with Kickstarter is that you are not contractually bound to deliver anything.

It's the strength of the platform as well. It breaks up the risk of starting a new thing in to two parts. The risk that nobody wants it is dealt with through the funding / trigger model. Not enough funding then the project doesn't start. The risk of the project going wrong is definately allocated to the funders. And where that risk sits is pretty clear.

The failure state is that of serial fraudsters or incompetents repeatedly running Kickstarters that fund and then not delivering on them.

In a legal model where there is a contractual obligation this would lead to the bankruptcy of the legal entity behind the Kickstarter and eventually the stricking off as a director of the management team. Which is not good for them and might be very bad for them. But see unsavory business practices in, for example, drive way tarmacing or roof repair businesses.

So reputation becomes important. Specifically a way to communicate bad reputations.

For example Ken Whitman (about whom I know nothing other than there is an entire - badly structured - blog about his failure to deliver Kickstarters.


https://notanotherdime.blogspot.com/

danieldwilliam: (Default)

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2021-05-11 02:12 pm (UTC)(link)
I think obtaining a bank loan based on the appearance of business spending Kickstarter funding might be fraudulent.
danieldwilliam: (Default)

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2021-05-11 02:49 pm (UTC)(link)
There will be a bit of a fine line to it.

Why do you want this loan? - To build up my boardgames business.

That's an honest answer.

Why should we give you this loan? - I have a successful Kickstarter.

Also an honest answer.

Show me your projected profit and loss. - Here it is?

Still an honest answer.

The key question is perhaps - what happens to your projected profit and loss if your Kickstarter doesn't deliver? And how is delivery going?
armiphlage: (Daniel)

[personal profile] armiphlage 2021-05-12 12:58 am (UTC)(link)
I have reported projects to Kickstarter when they violate the laws of physics and cannot possibly provide a product that meets the description. Kickstarter did nothing.
danieldwilliam: (Default)

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2021-05-12 08:50 am (UTC)(link)
I think Kickstarter are a bit poor at the quality control on their platform.

I appreciate that they explicitly have as part of the business and funding model that execution risk sits with the funders but I don't think they do enough about serial deliberate failures or violations of the laws of physics.
jducoeur: (Default)

[personal profile] jducoeur 2021-05-20 05:02 pm (UTC)(link)

So reputation becomes important. Specifically a way to communicate bad reputations.

On the more positive front, it's worth noting that Kickstarter has developed a very informal but very useful "web of trust" ecosystem, with KS creators recommending stuff from other creators.

I use KS heavily (I have mixed feelings about gaining the title "super-backer", but it's true enough, especially in board games and comics), and a large fraction of the projects I back come in this way. That's helpful -- I've rarely backed a true failure-to-deliver, since the creators have a strong incentive not to mislead their own followers, and folks inside an industry tend to have at least some idea about each others' reliability.

For all the fancy modern tech, sometimes old-fashioned word-of-mouth reputation is still the most reliable mechanism...

danieldwilliam: (Default)

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2021-05-27 10:45 am (UTC)(link)
I've definately clocked the reputational exchange aspect of it.

I've seen several Kickstarters recommend other people's Kickstarter and I backed quite a lot of Dungeons and Dragons Zines this spring and I'd seen a few blog posts (from bloggers I follow) recommending a slate of them.

I've also seen a number of blogs about people with bad reputations warning people to steer clear.

I think you're right, that web of trust is pretty active if you're paying attention and looking for it and it does do a lot to close the knowledge gap.
jack: (Default)

How to make everyone in the company hate you with one email

[personal profile] jack 2021-05-11 05:56 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm worried this is trend is reinforcing itself, like some self-important IT security executive sees the headlines and is like, "oh yes, that's MEAN, that clearly establishes my position as powerful and important, we should do that here". But maybe it just happens anyway, if people focus on "what makes me look like I'm hard hitting" rather than "what would help security" :(
symbioid: (Default)

[personal profile] symbioid 2021-05-11 06:03 pm (UTC)(link)
I am wondering if the Kickstarter board game article was by a TMG employee. TMG was a huge kickstarter success with multiple games. I was a fan of some of their stuff, and playtested an expansion for Eminent Domain.

I've fallen out of board gaming for multiple reasons, so I was taken aback when I saw claims that TMG is a husk of what it was with lies to backers about product updates, and I think, as in the article, one game designed later came out before a previously backed kickstarter.

IDK if this is that common or not. I thought since they mentioned the UK it probably wasn't TMG,but realized that could be altered to conceal it.

Shame...
conuly: (Default)

[personal profile] conuly 2021-05-11 09:12 pm (UTC)(link)
By eating them, hyenas gathered 9 Neanderthal skeletons in one cave

Truly, they were doing their part for science.
anef: (Default)

[personal profile] anef 2021-05-12 01:06 pm (UTC)(link)
Only 9 neanderthals over approximately 40K years? Argues that humans were not a significant food source for hyenas. Or I suppose that there weren't many humans around.

My employer did in fact send everyone vouchers for Christmas, but the email was so badly drafted (and was from the voucher supplier, not in-house) that a significant number of people (including me) deleted them on the grounds that they were clearly spam/phishing. Fortunately my employer sent a subsequent email saying no, they are real vouchers, and deleted emails are recoverable.