Filtering the decks being posted in New & Custom

[MagikFingerz]

This deck here has as much effort as some others that have funded. It's design is as strong as some of the other super fantastic decks we've seen plopping forth lately. This one is actually better than some. It's minimalist design, sure. The color use is bright and bold, would draw attention in use. The font is, curious, but gold is what draws some folks to things.

I don't wanna be rude but Fes, but could you please please reconsider the amount of decks posted here on UC? I mainly mean to filter decks that you already know they are crap. I know that computer storage is huge these days but some decks really don't deserve mentioning and imho only create noise in UC forums.

(I'd like to point out that PM's are a great way to directly contact other members about a given something. Doesn't derail a thread and lets folks communicate directly about Not wanting to be rude rather than in the public forum. I'll respond here since it was asked here.)

I have considered the amount of decks posted here on UC. I'd wager, this place has the most playing cards post on the interwebs. Fantastic isn't it? I think so. This is a forum to discuss playing cards. So it seems fitting that so many be here. What decks are already crap, that's entirely subjective. Some folks only have taste in the mouths and some folks dine regularly on the highest form of playing card design. We all have different likes and dislikes and many decks will end up in my treasure horde that won't end up in yours. We all enjoy different things and have different taste in decks. Be it your taste, mine or anyone else right? All different perspectives from a great many angles. The curious thing about playing cards in general is there's something for everyone.

Here is my point of view based upon mine own experience. I've roasted, quite fairly and honest I might add, a few decks on here. Some jerkoff (As I saw it) decided to comment about my opinion on a deck that was absolute crap. It was some trash and I didn't think it was fit for asking for money. (I still don't) This wasn't the case for other people who saw it as honoring healthcare and other kinds of in my opinion bs. Anyway at that moment my friend, I learned that people like different things. People will support crap and absolutely do value decks that appear to have no effort put into their design. Just because that's how it appears to me doesn't mean it does to them. These are some of the things that people love! (Enough to attack another and their opinion on a forum.)

I don't have an agenda to push here. I don't own any thread. I just toss the things up so whoever wants to comment about the deck can comment about the deck. While that may just be noise, often times that's what they're here for. To see new decks, comment upon them and to read comments about decks. For decks that already have a thread it can fit in, for example the Solokid decks, I stick the new stuff in an old thread. Gives the same opportunity to be seen and commented upon if someone would like to. Don't want to spend the five seconds to load a thread and take a peek at what's there? Great! No one holds a gun to anyone's head forcing them to look, read or comment. Thank god for that. I'd hate to have to read the posts I make on occasion. (Like this one, pfft, waste of my time to read. I already know what I'm saying.)

I'm not opposed to not starting threads. (When I get busier I'll likely not create threads) If you or someone else would like to do it, then by all means have at it. If it's going to be a selective thing, I'm down for that. Who's going to be the person to decide what decks are fit for posting here if you begin to lay down criteria for such a subjective thing as "you already know is crap"? I think the Moderators here already do a ton of things so lets not ask them to choose. Maybe a Poll system where the members vote on decks with an emoji bullet something simple like Turd or Not a Turd using those little poops? I don't know, want to have a chat about it on a thread in general? That seems like a good place for a discussion it and everyone can weigh in. I think it would ultimately result in the ole "it works as it is" argument winning out but maybe not.

[MagikFingerz]

Speaking purely as a member, I have a few thoughts on this:

- As Fes points out, who would decide which decks are "worthy"? Is it even possible to create criteria for filtering that everyone on this board would agree with?

- As with other types of information I consume, like news, I want to have a full picture of what's happening (in this case, what's being created or attempted to create). I don't want to live in an information bubble like those who only get their news from the select Facebook groups they're a part of.

- Assuming we'd be able to solve the first point above, if the creator of a deck that doesn't meet the criteria we set comes and posts his or her deck, who's going to tell them they can't? I certainly wouldn't want to do that. Telling someone their work is bad is one thing, straight up preventing them from posting could set a dangerous precedent that is likely to give us a bad reputation (which isn't a very good one to begin with) deterring more artists/producers from posting and engaging.

(Sorry for double posting, but to be fair, that up there is moderator-me and this is member-me, so... )

[wingedpotato]

Thanks for starting this. I agree with all your points. I don't mind filtering through the "noise" (takes me 2 seconds to decide a deck is not for me), and I want the option to know about any and all decks coming out.

[Harvonsgard]

I'm % with aforementioned. Every deck that is on kickstarter or is released should be on here.
That's exactly the reason I'm never on kardify. There is no real news there. Here at UC almost everything gets posted and I prefer it that way. I grew out of the phase of being spoonfeed.

[Decknowledgy]

Agreed on the most part. Don't mean the forum to be filtered, but rather there are some apparently sketchy projects that one would have noticed the reg flags right away. Whether to post it or not is up to the poster's decision, just thinking that the forum has enough experienced members to know whether it's worth discussing or not. Personally, I wouldn't post those campaigns to waste time (doesn't mean others can't).

I wouldn't think that UC is a place where inexperienced card users would end up here; in fact, you can't even search for a deck on Google and be redirected here. Single threads from the forum simply doesn't show up in Google search, unless of course you add the "united cardists" keywords. That means that the UC community is mainly formed by users who already have a sublime knowledge of playing cards. For a lot of these seemingly underdeveloped campaigns, members don't spend time commenting. The ones that most likely generate talk are the ones that are well-constructed or those, conversely, with a discreetly negative track record which prompt members to remind each others of the red flags. So should every project be posted? Still up to the poster's decision, but the audience here ain't kindergarten.

As for creators posting their own campaign, that's a totally different story. Every creator has their right to post here; feedback will come later in the comment section anyways.

[MagikFingerz]

you can't even search for a deck on Google and be redirected here. Single threads from the forum simply doesn't show up in Google search.

Which is strange, because "Google [bot]" is trawling the forums constantly

[masagin303]

I just miss the "Ignore this discussion" button is all. And also I have a personal feeling that the amount of discussions where posts goes like this:

1. KS campaign paste
2. No
3. Crap
4. Some funny GIF
5. post from theCapraAegagrus
6. THE END

...is higher then it was just couple months ago and I don't really see any value in that. But if there's a single person who sees some value in that, so be it. I can live with that.

[Harvonsgard]

you can't even search for a deck on Google and be redirected here. Single threads from the forum simply doesn't show up in Google search.

Which is strange, because "Google [bot]" is trawling the forums constantly

Dunno if there are some other versions of Google...

For older decks, UC threads are almost always on the first page; at least for me.

[masagin303]

who would decide which decks are "worthy"

Not that hard to answer. Of course the person who's posting them. I would appreciate if people posted decks they consider worthy or at least honestly thinks that others would consider worthy. Just watching what's happening on KS isn't that hard and I suppose people are already doing that. I check playing card campaigns on KS sorted from the newest regularly for example.

And as Decknowledgy already mentioned, creators posting their campaign is not what I'm talking about.

[Azazaaz]

"One man's meat is another man's poison".

I'm one of the more discreet members here. Even if I have great pleasure reading through your opinions and comments, I have trouble voicing my own opinions. I don't see why anyone should care about what I think. I've tried sometimes but it always feels weird and I always come back to my silent lurking for extended periods of time. It's not the first time that this topic comes to be discussed so thank you for giving everyone a chance to participate on what may change UC forever.

I'm certain that some decks rejected by the majority are pleasant enough for some to buy. For instance I love Cthulhu decks as I DM the RPG, they're always a welcome addition to my gaming table for illustration purposes, fun to play with at the end of a session, etc... I guess I'm the only one here, most of you have fatigue of these decks after seeing countless variations on the theme and will automatically classify them as "meh", "pass" or "drek".
I love some cardistry decks although rejected as unplayable or "these are not even playing cards".
I'm not a fan of the subscription models, I'm not subscribed to Lotrek or Jackson Robinson. And that is probably a crime of the highest rate here for they are revered designers. I just can't afford buying without seeing what I'll get. It was fun to do once with Crypt but I can't financially sustain that over the whole year. I love to see pictures of what you guys get and occasionally enjoy adding one of the non limited decks to my own collection. And I probably wouldn't be aware that these decks exist if it wasn't for the work some of you do to keep everyone up to speed.

All of this mumbo jumbo to say everyone's tastes and interests are inherently different and that there is no reason in my view to value elitism (on what criterias?) over diversity. It's already a small community, the playing cards world isn't the football one. We can't have leagues, clubs, etc... That would be too divisive. That's why I was also against the division of the forums into subgenres.

And as an added note, I have way much more more pleasure reading through UC than getting the same info on Kickstarter: Posts are summarized, some photos, basic info, a link. It's enough for me to decide if I need to visit the project page or not based on what I see on the first post. Getting the same info on KS makes you scroll through walls of text about how innovative, edgy, contemporary, unique this new clip art deck is. We've all read the same ad copy dozens of times, they're necessary to build a campaign but exhausting to go through on a weekly basis just to get to the point that is "show me the damn court cards already".

That's it for me. I hope UC stays the welcoming place that it is, for every designer, every collector, every magician, every cardist out there.

[Harvonsgard]

"One man's meat is another man's poison".

...

As always an eloquent and well put post Azazaaz. I always enjoy the rare occasions you share your thoughts.

[Eric Lee]

I'm actually glad to see all the decks coming out on KS and other places posted here. Like Azazaaz says, it gives me a good summary and saves me time of going through KS and filtering even more dreck and other nonplaying card related projects. There are so many!

When I was still new to this addiction/hobby, reading all the negative and positive feedback actually forced me to be more critical before I pledge my severely strapped funds on new decks and even other KS projects. So I would say that it'll help many of the newbies or less discerning buyers to think more about just why they should or shouldn't spend their $ on that deck/dreck.

SneakrativeD said it well in the Uranium thread about the comments on UC vs other places,

Please know I am aware that the comments and feedback here are likely to hold more weight than some of the more general feedback I have received. Some of you guys have spent a lot more time evaluating and assessing playing cards over years than many others. As such, I appreciate and understand the time it takes to give this feedback and the years of experience that is conveyed through your feedback.

So the more decks posted and constructive feedback given, the more informed the UC members become.
BTW, @Azazaaz , this is another reason you should also contribute more. Many aren't cardists here, so having a cardist viewpoint on a cardistry deck really helps.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Speaking purely as a member, I have a few thoughts on this:

- As Fes points out, who would decide which decks are "worthy"? Is it even possible to create criteria for filtering that everyone on this board would agree with?

- As with other types of information I consume, like news, I want to have a full picture of what's happening (in this case, what's being created or attempted to create). I don't want to live in an information bubble like those who only get their news from the select Facebook groups they're a part of.

- Assuming we'd be able to solve the first point above, if the creator of a deck that doesn't meet the criteria we set comes and posts his or her deck, who's going to tell them they can't? I certainly wouldn't want to do that. Telling someone their work is bad is one thing, straight up preventing them from posting could set a dangerous precedent that is likely to give us a bad reputation (which isn't a very good one to begin with) deterring more artists/producers from posting and engaging.

(Sorry for double posting, but to be fair, that up there is moderator-me and this is member-me, so... )

Pretty sure the answer to this question is obvious, Tom.

If not: It's me!

[BaconWise]

I like seeing all of the projects posted as I don't always remember to search KS for new projects - especially for creators I haven't seen before.

I like to share my thoughts on a deck that has a lot of red flags as they may not be as obvious to another collector. If I share a KS project, I make sure to explain why I have shared it (whether to warn members or to encourage them to look at a worthy project). I think sharing everything is in the best interest of the community, though I don't see how filters could be achieved.

Perhaps, if a member is sharing a project that has red flags, we could have a stickied thread labeled Potential Red Flag Project and it could be moved to the New & Custom thread if the group decides to do so? That's also tough because red flags can be subjective as well...

[Adonael]

Yeah I'm not gonna read one of FES's typical rambling wall of nothing texts, holy crap they have a lot of spare time. But yeah the idea of filtering the section isn't a good one, if it's a legit new deck it should be there whether good or bad, there's always some value to be found or learnt from. Plus the having an overall picture of the industry is a good point as well.