The Universal Counting Method

[GoktimusPrime]

Here's a copy of the democratically formulated Universal Counting Method for this new board...

---------------------------------
PREAMBLE

"How many Transformers do you have?"
"What's the size of an average Transformer collection?"
These are questions that we often hear as Transformer collectors.

The Universal Counting Method was created to allow fans to:
1. Participate in collection count surveys.
2. Provide a fair way to compare collection sizes.

The definition of what should and shouldn't count as a "Transformer" in one's collection count greatly varies between individuals collectors depending on individual opinions which makes it ineffectual for individuals to compare collection sizes or effectively participate in surveys if every collector has a different method of classifying and counting Transformers.

For example, imagine 2 Transformer collectors. They both own 2 G1 Seaspray toys in their collections. That's all. Transfan A decides that doubles count whereas Transfan B decides that they don't. Thus Transfan A considers himself as owning 2 Transformers whereas Transfan B considers herself as owning 1 Transformer. Despite the fact that both of these collectors own the exact same toys in the exact same quantities, Transfan A's collection count is 100% larger than Transfan B's simply because of discrepancies in their counting method. Now imagine this discrepancy on a larger scale when comparing collectors whose collection count would number in tens, hundreds or over a thousand and you can see that the disparity exponentially increases making collection size comparisons grossly unfair and rendering any data gathered from surveys about collection sizes useless.

Due to the arbitrary nature of Transformer classification, it is not possible to formulate a single system of counting that everyone would completely agree with.

As a result, during 2006 and 2007 a series of polls were conducted over numerous Transformer forums with collectors from various countries voting on what they considered to be the "correct" way of classifying and counting Transformer toys, and thus the Universal Counting Method was born based on the results of majority votes.

It is a counting method made by the people for the people. Is it the "best" counting method? There's no real way to answer that because we all have different opinions on what is the "best" or "correct" way of classifying and counting Transformers. But considering that each Article in the Universal Counting Method is based on majority votes, I believe that it is at least the fairest method of counting Transformers for the purposes of comparing collection sizes and participating in surveys.

The Universal Counting Method has not been officially endorsed by Hasbro Inc or TakaraTOMY Co., Ltd. It has been made by fans for fans. This system is not necessarily intended to replace everyone's personal preference for classification and counting - you can count your Transformers however you want to. But if you want to compare your collection count with others or participate in a collection count survey then you need to ensure that you and others are counting by the same method to make the comparison or results fair. The Universal Counting Method exists as a pre-made method that you can choose to use for such purposes.

---------------------------------

* ARTICLE 1: What Is A Transformer?
A Transformer is legally defined as any product created under licence from Hasbro Inc. and/or Takara(Tomy) Co., Ltd under the "Transformers?" logo. As a result:
1/ Pre-Transformers do not count as Transformers. Although they may have been manufactured by Takara, they were NOT done so under the Transformers? logo.
2/ Knock-Offs/Bootlegs do not count as Transformers. They are not manufactured by Hasbro or Takara(Tomy) and they are certainly not released under licence from HasTak.
3/ Any other kind of non-Transformer transforming robot toy that's not really a Transformer does not count as a Transformer. This includes your Macross, Gobots (Machine Men), Machine Robo etc. - again, if the toy is not manufactured under HasTak licence under the "Transformers?" logo then it doesn't count. It's as easy as that.

* ARTICLE 02: Nebulans, Master Robots, Motorvator partners, Pretender/Crossformer/Dinoforce shells and Action Master partners and vehicles do not count separately. See Special Exemptions below.
e.g.:
- Triggerhappy & Blowpipe = 1 Transformer
- Landmine & his Pretender shell = 1 Transformer
- Action Master Sideswipe and Vanguard = 1 Transformer -- in total these all count as 3 Transformers.
- Any Transformer made as an accessory will also not count as separate Transformers under this article's definition. (e.g. Barricade's Frenzy, Blackout's Scorponok - the Deluxe Scorponok toy does count separately as it's not an accessory for a Blackout toy).
- Special Exemptions: Takara's Headmaster, Godmaster Warriors and Titan/Prime Masters that are sold individually do count separately.

* ARTICLE 03: Micromasters and Mini-Cons count individually. See Special Exemptions below.
e.g.:
- A complete Air Strike Patrol = 4 Transformers (Whisper, Tailwind, Stormcloud & Nightflight)
- A complete Mini-Con Air Defence Team = 3 Transformers (Sonar, Jetstorm & Runway)
- Hot Shot & Jolt = 2 Transformers
- Overload & Rollout = 2 Transformers -- in total these all count as 11 Transformers.
- Special Exemptions: Transformers Prime Arms Microns (including Ion Scythe) & Power Core Combiner Mini-Cons don't count

* ARTICLE 04: Only the component members of a Gestalt team count. e.g.:
- Devastator = 6 Transformers (6 Constructicons)
- Superion = 5 Transformers (5 Aerialbots) -- in total these all count as 11 Transformers.

* ARTICLE 05: Individual combiner robots count individually but multi-in-1 components do not. e.g.:
- A complete Constructor Squad = 6 Transformers
- Battletrap = 1 Transformer (not 2)
- Magmatron = 1 Transformer (not 3) -- in total these all count as 8 Transformers.

* ARTICLE 06: Bases do not count. e.g.:
- 1984 Optimus Prime = 1 Transformer (combat deck doesn't count separately)
- Airwave = 1 Transformer (his Micromaster Station doesn't count separately)
- BW Diver = 1 Transformer (Niagara Base doesn't count separately) -- in total these 3 Transformers are belong to us.

* ARTICLE 07: "Peripheral" Transformers, drones and pilots/drivers do not count. e.g.:
- Metroplex = 1 Transformer (Scamper, Six Gun and Slammer don't count)
- 1984 Optimus Prime = 1 Transformer (Roller doesn't count separately)
- Luke Skywalker/X-Wing Fighter = 1 Transformer (Luke Skywalker pilot doesn't count separately)
- BTA Alert = 1 Transformer (Kuruma Ai doesn't count separately) -- in total these are 4 Transformers.
- Blackout's Scorponok figurine will also not count as separate Transformers under this article's definition.

* ARTICLE 08: Decoys, Statues, busts, PVCs, meal/candy toys, kits etc. do not count. e.g.:
- Super Collection Figures don't count
- Mega Collection Figures don't count
- Mighty Muggs don't count
- Be@rbricks don't count
- Mega Bloks & Kre-Os don't count
- Model kit style Arms Microns don't count
- R.E.D. Series figures don't count

* ARTICLE 09: Variants count. e.g.:
- Red and yellow Cliffjumper = 2 Transformers.
- Original 1984, Classic reissue, Takara reissue, Ghost Starscream and TFC reissue Starscream = 5 Transformers -- in total 7 Transformers

* ARTICLE 10: Multiples count. e.g.:
- 2 Seasprays = 2 Transformers.

* ARTICLE 11: Only the transformable 15cm Titanium Series Transformers count.

* ARTICLE 12: Transformer Juniors and "non-mainline" Transformers count.
e.g. Choro-Q Transformers Revoltech Transformers, Transformers etc. count.

* ARTICLE 13: Microman Transformer humans count. e.g.: Kicker, Ga'Mede.

* ARTICLE 14: PlaySkool Transformers count.

* ARTICLE 15: Quintessons, Beastformers and Build-figures count. e.g.:
- Alpha Quintesson = 1 Transformer
- White Leo = 1 Transformer (NOTE: Battle Beasts do not count as Beastformers and thus do not count as Transformers)
- Transmutate = 1 Transformer -- in total 3 Transformers

* ARTICLE 16: Transformers Plushies count.

* ARTICLE 17: All transforming movie Transformers count (e.g.: Cyber Slammers, Fast Action Battlers) but non-transforming movie Transformers do not (e.g.: Robot Replicas, Beatmix Bumblebee).

* ARTICLE 18: Loose and sealed Transformers are counted in the same way.
e.g.: A Micromaster Combiner Squad counts as 6 Transformers regardless of being sealed or loose

* ARTICLE 19: Only Transformers in C-6 condition or above count
i.e.: junkers don't count but anything that's not a junker counts.
Most toys that you find on eBay etc are C-6. They are in reasonably fine to good condition and are mostly in tact. They are not missing any major parts and are not too heavily worn with no significant damage. Gimmicks are still operational. They may or may not come with accessories, depending on the nature of the toy. They should come with any major accessories - so a Headmaster or Targetmaster would only be considered C-6 if it has its Nebulan partner. In the case of a Maximus, it needs to have at least the "Cerebros" component, because it can still form the basic robot mode w/o "Spike."

* ARTICLE 20: Customs and kitbashes count. Remember that under ARTICLE01 only Transformers manufactured under licence from Hasbro and/or Takara(TOMY) and specifically marketed as part of the Transformers brand count, therefore only customs/kitbashes constructed entirely from legitimate TF products count.

[Gutsman Heavy]

why does Revoltech count but Mega Collection Figures don't? they are pretty much the same thing!

[GoktimusPrime]

I personally agree but the majority of voters didn't. There's little point in debating the merits of each of these articles because as the Pre-Amble states, it's all based on subjective opinions (except for Article01 which is based on a legal definition). The threads where we had these polls were the places for these debates to happen - and they did. Further polls will be created as the need arises and you can debate about future classification criteria there, but this thread isn't the place for debating the pros and cons of these individual articles. :)

[jaydisc]

Will the polls be redone yearly? If not, what interval?

[Borgeman]

* ARTICLE 19: Only Transformers in C-6 condition or above count
i.e.: junkers don't count but anything that's not a junker counts.
Most toys that you find on eBay etc are C-6. They are in reasonably fine to good condition and are mostly in tact. They are not missing any major parts and are not too heavily worn with no significant damage. Gimmicks are still operational. They may or may not come with accessories, depending on the nature of the toy. They should come with any major accessories - so a Headmaster or Targetmaster would only be considered C-6 if it has its Nebulan partner. In the case of a Maximus, it needs to have at least the "Cerebros" component, because it can still form the basic robot mode w/o "Spike."

that isnt right is it? if you own a complete trypticon whose gimmiks dont work, would that mean that it is a junker under this definition?

i certainly hope not

George

[jaydisc]

Borgeman, You're going to upset Gok :D

I think we can all find flaws in various bits of this, but I think he thinks that that isn't what this thread is for...

Hence my question, now that this is the "official" counting method and we've had some time to reflect, when do we get to go back to the polls?

[roller]

ahhhhhhhhhh too many words

someone else can count my collection for me

[GoktimusPrime]

Will the polls be redone yearly? If not, what interval?
The survey will be redone yearly but not the polls for the articles because then the rules would change every year and we wouldn't be able to compare annual trends between years.


that isnt right is it? if you own a complete trypticon whose gimmiks dont work, would that mean that it is a junker under this definition?
As I said on the thread on that poll, definitions of conditions between C-2 to C-9 are very subjective and most of that definition is based on a general description for action figures in general and not necessarily just for Transformers (remember that there are some toys that are just worthless without their gimmick operating). For the purposes of this counting method, the definition of "below C-6" is what most of us would consider a junker. So long as the toy isn't a heap of crap that's only good as a junker for spare parts, then it counts. :) So by all means count your Trypticon with busted walking gimmick. My Omega Supreme's walking gimmick is broken and I count him.

I don't count my Aquablast because the chest/bonnet is detached and more importantly, it has no head. benben2142's recently acquired Transmetal Cheetor with no arms and missing tail doesn't count either (it's really the lack of arms that count against it, I would count a TM Cheetor w/ no tail if the body was in tact - it would certainly be incomplete, but not a junker).

So yeah, the basic rule with Article19 is that junkers don't count. :)


someone else can count my collection for me

Don't you have a headless Optimal Optimus? That wouldn't count. I recall you had Cybertron Optimus Prime which was in tact. So, erm... your collection is 1. :D

[jaydisc]

The survey will be redone yearly but not the polls for the articles because then the rules would change every year and we wouldn't be able to compare annual trends between years.

I think that's a bad move. As has been demonstrated here and in virtually every place this counting method has been mentioned, people have had second thoughts once seeing the implementation in place.

If the method is truly sound, the voting results shouldn't change.

[GoktimusPrime]

People will always object to parts of the method. We cannot create a method that everyone will completely agree with - as stated in the Pre-Amble - because we all have different opinions on what should and shouldn't count, and debates over opinions just rage on forever... :/

In 2006 when I started the polls, I told everyone that this would be the only time that I would be doing this - and thus to ensure that everyone made their votes count.


If the method is truly sound, the voting results shouldn't change.
But the data would be useless for annual comparisons if the voting results changed. For example, we would not be able to compare the results of the 2007 collection count survey with the 2008 survey if the 2007 and 2008 data was gathered under different counting definitions.

Say for example in 2007 we've allowed multiples to count. Say we have two collectors - Transfan X who and Transfan Y.
Transfan X owns...
+ Seaspray
+ Seaspray
+ Laserbeak
Transfan Y owns...
+ Seaspray
+ Laserbeak
In the 2007 survey where multiples count, Transfan X owns 3 Transformers and Transfan Y owns 2 Transformers.

Now let's say for the 2008 survey, voters decide that multiples should no longer count. And let's say that over the next year Transfans X and Y acquire no more Transformers, thus their collection count remains static. But due to the new counting definition, their collection count both becomes 2.

This is obviously an extremely simple example, but you can see how in more complex cases with much larger collections numbering in tens, hundreds and thousands where a slight alteration in counting rules can drastically alter the results.

And what would happen in this example is that we would observe an overall decline in the collection size between this sample of fans despite the fact that in reality their collection size didn't alter at all.

At the end of the day, if you don't like this method, don't use it. It's a Serving Suggestion for when you want to compare your collection count with other people's. If you and the other person(s) all don't like it, feel free to sit down and agree to a common system amongst yourselves that you all might feel is gooder.

The only time this system becomes mandatory is if you choose to participate in the annual collection size survey because we want to maintain integrity in results to compare annual trends.

:)

[jaydisc]

Rubbish I say. I doth hereby refer to the so-called Universal Counting Method as "Gok's Counting Method". I will hereby participate in any counting surveys with my own system.

[Tiby]

Rubbish I say. I doth hereby refer to the so-called Universal Counting Method as "Gok's Counting Method". I will hereby participate in any counting surveys with my own system.

Many of us use a different method for counting our own collections when tracking them personally, such as merchandise etc, but statistically it makes sense to have a single method.

Having said that, it it not fair to rubbish Gok for this. He is simply keeper of the system that was voted in. That's like blaming me for the MP05 debacle because I have chosen to do something about it.

[jaydisc]

I'm simply blaming the fact that it's locked and has no ability for [democratic] review. I believe that at least ONE review AFTER having the system in place allows for greater finesse and polish.

[dirge]

Rubbish I say. I doth hereby refer to the so-called Universal Counting Method as "Gok's Counting Method". I will hereby participate in any counting surveys with my own system.

Jay, please respect the original posting asking others not to start a debate over this system.

Goktimus has gone to the trouble of creating this system so that we can make meaningful direct comparisons between collections. And he had valid reasons for surveying the fan communities to arrive at this method:

+ There are fans out there who count knockoffs
+ Some fans will count junkers than 95% wouldn't count, which distorts comparisons significantly in some cases
+ There are fans who count Devastator as seven toys (as silly as that may seem to many of us) and others who count him as one since they bought the set as a set

Personally, I think some of the criteria used in this counting method are bad (I don't believe doubles should count, for example), but with so many grey areas what with minor variations and stuff like Heroes of Cybertron, I can see the value in such a system.

I don't use this system myself when putting together a number for my own collection - which actually means I end up with a lower figures because I'm skipping variants and doubles - but if I want to do a meaningful comparison, I understand that a common system has to be used. For this reason I respect both the intention and the effort of Goktimus, and I'd ask you to do the same :)

In terms of it being locked, you need to remember that if the system is open, it will be endlessly challenged by people with different views, and no consensus will ever be reached. Goktimus is merely drawing a line in the sand, and while that line may be arbitrary, it's a necessary part of the system. Keep in mind that Goktimus _does_ revisit his polling of collection sizes, and for this to work, he needs to be able to have a fixed comparison between surveys. When new lines come out - or new grey ares (Revoltech is an example), he does go back to the community to get a democratic opinion.

[iceburn]

i think we can just treat this as a guideline and to many new fans, this might work out for them. For others, we might agree or disagree to some of the rulez but the final decision is always ours.

[STL]

Does it all really matter? Most important part is you like what you collect, yeah? Me.

[jaydisc]

I don't know why I've let myself get bothered over this. Must be childhood remnants of my lack of respect for authority. As long as the system lacks democratic review, I will be forced to use my own method. If you don't want to count my poll responses, don't. I'm not competing anyway.

[GoktimusPrime]

It only matters when you want to make a direct comparison and participate in the annual survey. Outside of that you can use whatever counting method you want.

If you want to participate in direct comparisons with other people, you need to be using a common system - whether it's the Universal Counting Method or not - you all have to agree on the same set of rules. When it comes to the annual survey, it has already been decided that we will use the Universal Counting Method. I proposed the formulation of the UCM back in 2005/6 for the express purpose of conducting annual surveys!

If you really object to using the UCM in any way, shape or form, fine... don't participate in the annual survey. Because in order to participate in the annual survey, you must follow the same counting rules as everyone else otherwise it's just plain unfair.

Suggesting that you want to participate in the annual survey but you don't want to follow the same rules as everyone else is akin to saying that you want to play a sport but you refuse to follow the rules of that sport or that you want to participate in a certain community, but you refuse to speak the common language of that community.

For example, let's face it - English is a royally messed up language. Words are often not spelt the way that they sound and for virtually every rule in this stupid language there are plenty of exceptions. e.g.:
+ English word order is supposed to be Subject-Verb-Object, such as in "I have toys"; but then you have sentences like "What toys do you have?" which is Object-Subject-Verb! Buh?
+ In the word "go" g = /g/, in "giraffe" g = /dz/, in "through" g is silent, in "cough" g = /f/ and in "genre" g = /j/ - confused yet?
+ "i before e except after c" except for beige, cleidoic, codeine, conscience, deify, deity, deign, dreidel, eider, eight, either, feign, feint, feisty, foreign, forfeit, freight, gleisation, gneiss, greige, greisen, heifer, heigh-ho, height, heinous, heir, heist, leitmotiv, neigh, neighbor, neither, peignoir, prescient, rein, science, seiche, seidel, seine, seismic, seize, sheik, society, sovereign, surfeit, teiid, veil, vein, weight, weir and weird. Good rule, eh? ;)

...but despite the cumbersome/awkward nature of English, if you choose to actively participate in an English-speaking community then you must accept the fact that you have to speak English. If you don't want to speak English, then don't actively participate in an English-speaking community! You don't have to speak the language of a community in order to function in it.

Likewise you don't have to use the Universal Counting Method as a Transformer collector. You only have to use it if you choose to participate in the annual survey, and it's recommended (but with no obligation) that you use it in other direct comparisons.

If you don't want to ever participate in the survey or make direct comparisons with other collectors - that's fine. Don't use the UCM.


As long as the system lacks democratic review, I will be forced to use my own method.

As dirge and I have explained to you, the system needs be locked in order for it to work for comparisons between surveys. If we opened it up for regular revision then it wouldn't work!


If you don't want to count my poll responses, don't. I'm not competing anyway.
That would be the best thing for you to do (or not do) if you really object to this system that strongly.

Don't like a particular sport? Don't play it. Don't like a particular language? Don't speak it. Don't like the Universal Counting Method for the annual Transformer collection count survey? Don't participate in the survey.

That's fine.

---------------------------------------------

And that is the last I will say about that.

As I said at the beginning of this thread, the rationale for this system is not open to debate. The opportunity for debating all this was available in the polls and will be available in future polls. But what has been set is set and there's nothing to be gained by any further debating about it.

This thread was made as a handy reference for the UCM rules - NOT to debate its validity.

People are welcome to ask questions about understanding the rules - such as Borgeman's question about Article19 - that's fine. You are welcome to ask questions about clarification of rules, but not to debate about its validity. We've already had those debates.

Let's all get back on topic now!

Thank you.

[roller]

lets ask hasbro how to count, surely they must have a counting system to record their past products?


why ami typing this?

[GoktimusPrime]

Hasbro's counting method is basically like a stock inventory listing. :p Great if you're a distributor or retailer, but I don't think it's all that ideal for collectors.

[SofaMan]

+ "i before e except after c" except for beige, cleidoic, codeine, conscience, deify, deity, deign, dreidel, eider, eight, either, feign, feint, feisty, foreign, forfeit, freight, gleisation, gneiss, greige, greisen, heifer, heigh-ho, height, heinous, heir, heist, leitmotiv, neigh, neighbor, neither, peignoir, prescient, rein, science, seiche, seidel, seine, seismic, seize, sheik, society, sovereign, surfeit, teiid, veil, vein, weight, weir and weird. Good rule, eh?

On a trivial off-topic note, let's not forget that at least half a dozen of those words originated in German, and one is Arabic. English is a very accepting language. :)

[Saintly]

sorry jumping in alittle late with my two cents...

isn't the votes THE democractic system for what counts in the UCM? :/

speaking of the UCM, when is the 2008 polling beginning?? :D

[GoktimusPrime]

That's the only issue I see too. Well not the only one, I'll get to that later.

Why do revoltings count and replicas don't? As far as I'm concerned, none of those should count as they don't transform.
Because that's what the majority of voters elected for. Please stop trying to derail this thread by opening debate about it.

[jaydisc]

Please stop trying to derail this thread by opening debate about it.

This is the part I find the most challenging. Why is it closed to debate? Talk is cheap and free. No one is forcing your hand to change anything or re-poll, but if people want to discuss it, why not?

[GoktimusPrime]

First of all we've already HAD the debate in 2005-2007. For every one of those Articles, there were debates! Every time a rule was added, there were polls - and on every poll thread, people debated. And not just here, the debates raged across numerous Transformer forums where fans from around the world debated over each of the merits of having a universal counting method and the individual articles over a period of 2 years.

That was the window of opportunity to submit your arguments -- once the results were collated for the 2007 Collection Survey, the debating was CLOSED. The system has now been made. There is nothing to be gained over debating over the Articles that already exist because they have been LOCKED. And as dirge explained, in order for the annual survey to work, they must be locked.

Further Articles will be added as the need arises, and everyone will be welcome to come and debate those future issues when it happens. But the window of opportunity for debating the issues covered in Articles 02-19 has already passed.

Secondly, it has NEVER been the intention of this thread to re-open debate about the issues in Articles 02-19 or to re-open debate about the merits of having a universal/common counting method. I made this thread as a handy quick reference and questions about clarification of existing articles is fine.

This is the absolute last time I am going to ask people to STOP trying to derail this thread by trying to re-open these old, old debates.

Thank you.

[Saintly]

delete all the posts and lock for comments :)

[SofaMan]

Poor Gok - every time this thread gets relaunched, always the debates start again. :)

I'm in agreeance with Gok and Dirge here, Jaydisc. How you count your own collection is up to you - for the purposes of meaningful data comparison, the terms of reference must be clearly defined and consistent, which they are.

Try to think of this less as a democratic government process and more as a consultative academic one. Democratic governments have an obligation to periodically submit to democratic review. Academic consultation, once done, has no such obligation unless there is overhwelmingly compelling reasons, which in this case there is not.

Adding or changing articles must be done for compelling reasons, of which there are few (there may be reasons for occasionally adding new articles, but few reasons for changing existing ones, short of assigning new figures in existing definitions).

It is reasonable to suggest that most people would agree with most of the articles here, and even the ones that they disagree on may well amount to a bit of statistical noise for most collectors. I mean, we're only talking about numbering collections to the nearest 100, for heaven's sake. A slight difference in a definition from your own count to that of the universal system probably won't make a big difference to the number you put in the survey anyway.

I mean, I don't count doubles in my collection, but I have so few doubles anyway that they wouldn't affect my 'nearest 100' count anyway.

[jaydisc]

I'm in agreeance with Gok and Dirge here, Jaydisc.

Don't worry about me. I've conceded. :) I will either play ball for the survey or not participate.

I just find it quite funny that after I had conceded, someone else complained (MV75) and someone else asked about re-polling (Saintly). To me, this just shows the inevitability that this topic will always attract discussion and debate, regardless of whether or not Gok is going to do anything about it (and at this point, I"m quite confident he won't).

Therefore, I must ask, what's the real issue? Is it:

1. The fact that people are commenting on, complaining about or debating the UCM? or
2. The fact that the debate and discussion is happening in this thread?

If it's the latter, why don't the mods lock it up. If it's the former, "tough" I say.

[Borgeman]

First of all we've already HAD the debate in 2005-2007...That was the window of opportunity to submit your arguments -- once the results were collated for the 2007 Collection Survey, the debating was CLOSED.


Debates and discussions are never closed, thats what makes them debates and discussions. Myself and many others here were not present for most/all of these articles, and hence had no say in their conception. That is why we are questioning them now. Just because you are not wanting to discuss it doesnt mean we cant. We arent all saying we WANT them changed - we just dont agree on all of them for various reasons.



This is the absolute last time I am going to ask people to STOP trying to derail this thread by trying to re-open these old, old debates.


They may be old debates for you, but not for many of us. No one is trying to derail this thread gok, we are allowed to discuss whatever (within reason) TF related things we want on this board, and you are not one to say otherwise. That is for the mods to detemine.

If you think what we are posting is wrong, then make a new thread with the counting guidelines, have a mod close the thread and sticky it, so we can all see it but not post in it. Then we can use this thread for our discussions - and that way, anyone who does not want to discuss the nature of the articles wont read this thread.

George

[dirge]

To me, this just shows the inevitability that this topic will always attract discussion and debate, regardless of whether or not Gok is going to do anything about it (and at this point, I"m quite confident he won't).

Therefore, I must ask, what's the real issue? Is it:

1. The fact that people are commenting on, complaining about or debating the UCM? or
2. The fact that the debate and discussion is happening in this thread?


There will always be disagreements on how to count... because:

1) There are so many variants... to the point where most of us would consider it ridiculous -

Fred's variants page (http://www.geocities.com/futuristgroup/vquanda.html)


2) Hasbro & Takara have produced quite a few non-transforming, Transformers themed, lines. Other than Actionmasters, neither ever made any real effort to include (or exclude) them from the main line (especially Hasbro's recent movie spinoffs)

3) Some fans out there feel the need to boost their numbers in silly ways, others feel the need to apply purist standards. And everything in between (which is most of us).


Debates and discussions are never closed, thats what makes them debates and discussions.


Yes, but Goktimus has stated that this thread is not the place for that debate. End of the story (here). Respect that and debate in the appropriate location.

On that note:

Discussion of counting methods (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?p=4003#post4003)

Oh, and this thread isn't being locked, since this thread _is_ the place where new clauses will be added - and their polls announced. It _is_ also the place where we can ask for clarifications and the like.

[GoktimusPrime]

Okay, some people don't agree with the UCM and don't want to use it for their personal counts. We get it. Please move on!

The UCM exists for the sole purpose of allowing the community to make comparisons, specifically (but not exclusively) for the survey.

What are you guys trying to achieve by continuing to debate this?

A more relevant question - should there be a new poll for Beatmix Bumblebee and the Cyber Slammers or can we retcon one of the existing articles to include that toy? I'm thinking that we could just include them in Article07 which states that statues, busts, PVCs, meal/candy toys and model kits don't count.

[GoktimusPrime]

Also, I forgot. Do Action Masters count?
Yes they do but their weapons and vehicles don't. (see Article02)

[springah]

Yes they do but their weapons and vehicles don't. (see Article02)

Wrong thread, thought you didn't want to debate in this thread any more?

This whole thing is stupid. How can you have a _universal_ system if it's only you, griff and dirge using it? (others too, maybe, but not everyone!)

See, I would argue that anything sold in the toy section under the brand name of 'Transformers' should be counted as thats how Hasbro and others do their check lists.

And of course their vehicles and weapsons don't. They're not characters.

Ooo, what about that one? As long as the toy is a character of some kind, its also a Transformer... right?

[GoktimusPrime]

Wrong thread, thought you didn't want to debate in this thread any more?
I'm not debating. You asked a question about a rule and I clarified it for you.

Please edit and delete the rest of your post after what I've quoted there. I will address your question in the more relevant thread.

[springah]

I'm not debating. You asked a question about a rule and I clarified it for you.

Please edit and delete the rest of your post after what I've quoted there. I will address your question in the more relevant thread.

Meh, I'm not a mod :P

[Geminii]

Transfan A's collection count is 200% larger than Transfan B's

Math terminology point. Either of these is correct:

Transfan A's collection count is 100% larger than Transfan B's.
Transfan A's collection count is 200% of Transfan B's.

[loophole]

Do kitbashes count if you have use a transformer toy recoulered it and slighly modified it?

[dirge]

Yes, because you're in purchase of a actual TF.

The layer of spray paint don't count d:

[TheDirtyDigger]

Yes, because you're in purchase of a actual TF.

The layer of spray paint don't count d:

Oh that's cool. I can now add my G1 Earl and Movie Fragface in!

[GoktimusPrime]

Okay, to answer loophole's question I would say that if you're just touching up the toy, but it's still essentially the same toy/character/incarnation, then yeah it counts. So your modified Universe Sunstreaker and Sideswipe would count. But if you're going to kitbash them into a substantially different toy/character/incarnation, then it wouldn't count.

Many of us touch up toys here and there. I've touched up a lot of worn out chrome on some of my G1 toys with mithral silver paint. Your touch-ups are just a lot more extensive (:)) - but it's fundamentally the same principle.

e.g.: I don't count my G1 Sentinel Prime toy - a repaint of a G1 Rodimus Prime figure.

[loophole]

But if you're going to kitbash them into a substantially different toy/character/incarnation, then it wouldn't count.

in other words if stays the same character yes it counts but if you are repainting and slighlty customising a figure to be a different character then no it would not count e.g. Hot Rod into Wildrider because then it wouldnt be a HasTak official product or repaint

[GoktimusPrime]

Pretty much, yes. :)

[jaydisc]

How are Music Label Frenzy and Rumble counted? As 0, 1 or 2?

[iceburn]

How are Music Label Frenzy and Rumble counted? As 0, 1 or 2?

haha..might have to split them!!! pity

[GoktimusPrime]

They count as two individuals even though they're connected... think of them as conjoined twins. ;)

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/Transformers/musiclabel_stuckonyou.jpg

[SofaMan]

in other words if stays the same character yes it counts but if you are repainting and slighlty customising a figure to be a different character then no it would not count e.g. Hot Rod into Wildrider because then it wouldnt be a HasTak official product or repaint


Pretty much, yes.

See, this seems weird to me - we allow doubles. I mean, if I have two Sideswipes and repaint one as a Red Alert, either way that should count as two. Why does adding some paint applications to a Sideswipe (which does count) make it no longer a countable toy? At worst, it's a Sideswipe with some paint on it.

This is a very philosophical thread - what is the qualia of a Transformer? I think we are finding that these discussions are very useful.

[Paulbot]

Yeah I would count a kitbased based on a Transformer toy, for example: "I have two Universe Sunstreakers, one is repainted as Breakdown". However I wouldn't count "Machine Man toy Leader-1 repainted as Starscream" because although it's meant to be a TF character it's a not a TF toy.

Edit: I realise by this post I might be in danger of prolonging a discussion that maybe should be in another thread, leaving this thread to just deal with questions about articles previously democratically voted on...

[SofaMan]

Edit: I realise by this post I might be in danger of prolonging a discussion that maybe should be in another thread, leaving this thread to just deal with questions about articles previously democratically voted on...

Well, I see this particular point as still being under discussion in search of consensus. Gok has made a assertion about what he thinks, and some other people have made other opinions. I don't see this point as one of 'settled law' at this point. None of the articles at present make specific reference to kitbashes/repaints.

If it's made by HasTak, it meets Articles 1 and it counts. If it's a multiple, it meets Article 10 and it counts. For the purposes of counting, the name we call it is irrelevant. I'm sure most of us refer to Universe 2.0 Tankor as Octane, but whatever it's called it counts as one toy.

Therefore, a duplicate Sideswipe repainted as Red Alert meets Articles 1 and 10 and therefore should be counted, regardless of whether it gets called Red Alert or not.

[Paulbot]

I don't see this point as one of 'settled law' at this point. None of the articles at present make specific reference to kitbashes/repaints.

I agree and wonder therefore if Goktimus would prefer this discussed (even voted on?) elsewhere?

[GoktimusPrime]

I would like to resolve this using existing articles before resorting to making a new one because a lot of people feel that there are already too many articles in the UCM already. So let's see if this can be sorted using the existing rules, if we can't come to a resolution then I'll open it for voting.

I believe that kitbashes and custom-character repaints do not count under Article01 because you are essentially re-making a toy into a "new" toy. For example, if you were to modify a Universe Sideswipe into Universe Red Alert, that Universe Red Alert was not made under licence from HasTak. Therefore it does not count. The base toy Sideswipe was manufactured under licence, sure, but once it's modified into a "new" character like Red Alert, then you have re-made it into essentially a new toy-character which wasn't done under licence or with permission from HasTak.

If you repainted a toy to improve on it or touch it up, but still basically kept it as the same character, then that still counts because your modification isn't intended to deviate it away from its original character-intent. For example, when loophole repainted Universe Sunstreaker, it's still Universe Sunstreaker - just with a nicer paint job.

It all boils down to intent. If you modify a toy with the intention that it won't be the same character afterwards, then it is no longer that same toy-character.

That's how I see it anyway... again, if you think that's too ambiguous and would rather see this issue put the poll then I'll go ahead and do it.

[SofaMan]

It all boils down to intent. If you modify a toy with the intention that it won't be the same character afterwards, then it is no longer that same toy-character.

That's how I see it anyway... again, if you think that's too ambiguous and would rather see this issue put the poll then I'll go ahead and do it.

I think once we start introducing notions of subjective intent into the UCM it loses its authority as an unambiguous guide to what is or is not countable as a TF. I think a vote on whether to include/exclude kitbashes under Articles 1 and/or 10 would be worthwhile.

Perhaps we need to have a catch-all clause for future unresolved issues. Something like "A toy counts until an article specifically excludes it". I think a fair cautionary principle should let us include things in cases of doubt, rather than exclude them.

There might also be some scope to edit the presentation of the Articles into "What Counts" and What Doesn't Count", since at the moment they're all kind of mixed in together. This doesn't change the content, just the presentation. I've had a go preliminary draft effort here (http://adam.com.au/comfortzone/UCM-newdraft.pdf).

[dirge]

I believe custom repaints have to count... although the chopped up and silly puttied stuff where you're not really looking at an actual TF anymore wouldn't count.

[liegeprime]

Erm I thought that custom repaints dont count :confused:. Thats why I havent included the custom seeker paintjob done for me by Stencilator. Also that of the custom Ironhide/ratchet repainted from a energon Towline. As far as I understood from reading the UCM guide it's what Gok explained a few replies back on the intent of changing it as its not an official variation done by the company (HasTakTom) thereby nullifying it as an official TF even thought the base toy is an official TF - hence seeker Classic Starscream repainted to Thundercracker - does not count. This was how I know/understood it for 2 years since reading it ( viewing at youtube as well) :confused:

[GoktimusPrime]

Okay, I'm gonna be polling this.

[jacksplatt11]

So many polls...

[GoktimusPrime]

Poll for counting customs (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3236) <--continue debate here and cast your votes.

[jaydisc]

Targetmasters count? (Is a Targetmaster a "nebulan"?)

[GoktimusPrime]

A Targetmaster is a Transformer whose gun can transform into a humanoid. In Anglophone continuity the gun component is called a Nebulan whereas in Japanese continuity they're Master robots - toywise they're the same thing. So let's take Kup and Recoil for example - Kup is a Targetmaster and Recoil is his Nebulan partner.

As far as the UCM is concerned, the Targetmaster Transformer (e.g.: Kup) counts but the Nebulan partner (e.g.: Recoil) does not count. So if you have Targetmaster Kup, with or without Recoil, it counts as 1.

Click here (http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Nebulan) to learn more about Nebulans.

[GoktimusPrime]

Article 20 has been added to the Universal Counting Method - see Post #1 on page 1. :)

[Adzma]

I wanted to update my collection count to the UCM but there's only one thing that I need to clarify. Does a Targetmaster's partner count separately? I.e. Hot Rod = 1 Transformer and Firebolt = 1 Transformers for a total of 2 Transformers?

[dirge]

Targetmaster partners don't count separately under the UCM.

[Adzma]

Cool, thanks dirge. ;)

[bruticus]

I can see why we may need to have a UCM if we ever need to gather statistics and do a normalised comparison around the world but it ill never be perfect.

But who really cares what the numbers show anyways?
I mean what is it really designed to measure anyways? your pen*s size? your wallet size? how hardcore a collector you are?

fark that, a guy who spends his whole life collecting hundreds of multiples of just the Spike headmaster or a person who collects only diaclone/microman pre-transformers will have a collection of 0 under the UCM but they are just as devoted and enthusiastic (and even crazy) about transformers as the guy who has 2,000 TFs under the UCM....

In the end we should all be focussing instead on what we are here for in the first place... To discuss, support, promote, celebrate and encourage one another under our mutual fondness for Transformers.

ok, thats enough from me... back to work so i can pay for my TF addiction...

[dirge]

I can see why we may need to have a UCM if we ever need to gather statistics and do a normalised comparison around the world but it ill never be perfect.


Yeah, that's really the point of it. The whole point of something like this is purely to allow a statistical analysis of collection size. It's not about what you can/can't count, rather a method of direct comparison.



But who really cares what the numbers show anyways?
I mean what is it really designed to measure anyways? your pen*s size? your wallet size? how hardcore a collector you are?


Yeah for some reason there are fans who try to prove their worth through collection sizes, though. And then arguments arise about what people count... something I've never understood.

I don't advertise how big my collection is (or isn't!), because it's a personal thing. I don't feel the need to have a bigger collection than anyone else, or the need to catch up to anyone else. I enjoy my hobby and that's the point. Check my profile for a false count of my collection :D

[blackie]

Yeah, that's really the point of it. The whole point of something like this is purely to allow a statistical analysis of collection size. It's not about what you can/can't count, rather a method of direct comparison.



Yeah for some reason there are fans who try to prove their worth through collection sizes, though. And then arguments arise about what people count... something I've never understood.

I don't advertise how big my collection is (or isn't!), because it's a personal thing. I don't feel the need to have a bigger collection than anyone else, or the need to catch up to anyone else. I enjoy my hobby and that's the point. Check my profile for a false count of my collection :D


you only have 7???
wow, im so ahead of you :P

[GoktimusPrime]

Someone PMed me this question, but since it contains nothing personal I'll answer it publicly. I've omitted the user's name should s/he wish to remain anonymous. I've also replaced the name of the toy with the name "MacGuffin" and the name of the part in question with the name "Maynard" to further protect his/her privacy.


Hello, I managed to fix my MacGuffin toy. But throughout the standards of the transformers counting method, would my MacGuffin still count as a transformer in the counting law? All that has happened to it was that the Maynard had fallen in to the leg due to worn glue from the past, and the second time from my first repair was the same thing except I accidently applied pressure there so it fell in again.

Article 19 states:


* ARTICLE 19: Only Transformers in C-6 condition or above count
i.e.: junkers don't count but anything that's not a junker counts.
So just use your common sense judgement here. If you don't think of the toy as a junker, then count it.

[GoktimusPrime]

I've editted Article08 to clarify that Mighty Muggs don't count. I've also made what I see as a correction - Be@rbricks were previously in Article12 which meant that they count, but I think that if other PVCs, Mighty Muggs, Robot Heroes etc. don't count then I don't see why Be@rbricks should, so I've put them into Article08.

[blackoptimus]

Someone PMed me this question, but since it contains nothing personal I'll answer it publicly. I've omitted the user's name should s/he wish to remain anonymous. I've also replaced the name of the toy with the name "MacGuffin" and the name of the part in question with the name "Maynard" to further protect his/her privacy.



Article 19 states:


So just use your common sense judgement here. If you don't think of the toy as a junker, then count it.

Wow so if a toy is body complete and not broken, it still counts and so do customs.

[GoktimusPrime]

Wow so if a toy is body complete and not broken, it still counts and so do customs.
Yes. Not all customs count though. See Article20.

[tron07]

I really have no idea how many TF I have in my collection.... all I know is I have a lot... and mostly still MISB and MIB. Only started taking them out of their box to display last year....

[GoktimusPrime]

Transformers Stealth Force -- should they count for UCM? I just see if a general consensus can be agreed upon here before resorting to making another poll.

My opinion: no. They're more like merchandise than what I consider to be proper Transformer action figures.

[Sharky]

Transformers Stealth Force -- should they count for UCM? I just see if a general consensus can be agreed upon here before resorting to making another poll.

My opinion: no. They're more like merchandise than what I consider to be proper Transformer action figures.


what was the ruling on RPM's? i see these in the same classification

[GoktimusPrime]

The RPMs don't count because they're classified under Article 17 which states that only transforming movie toys count and non-transforming movie toys don't. Stealth Force do technically transform though... but they don't transform into robots. They're just vehicles with attack modes.

But I suppose the same could be said about Combiner Class Devastator who is a set of vehicles that transform into body parts. I don't think we ever reached a consensus for Combiner Class Devastator. Perhaps it may be time to have a poll about movie toys that do transform but don't have robot modes... but I'd rather avoid doing a poll if possible.

Lemme put it this way, does anyone object if we don't count the Combiner Class Constructicons and Stealth Force TFs individually? If a sufficient number of people object on this thread then I'll make a poll -- if not then I say they don't count.

[griffin]

Didn't BW Mutant Beasts counted? Same thing - 2 modes, no robot mode.

And just to be difficult... I think the polls were flawed because they allowed people to rule out various 'Transformers Toys' from a Transformers Toy counting method.
Transformers are toys, and it's a Transformers Toy count... so if it is recognised as a 'Toy' and classified as legally branded as a 'Transformers' (toy) product, all those 'non convertable' toys and 'non-robot' toys shouldn't have been polled to begin with.
It's a Toy collection, so just count *all* the toys, and don't ask collectors to subjectively decide on things that are undisputably toys... because their demographic's focus is on the (older) action-figure side of collecting, making voting flawed.
Polling non-collectors would be more objective, because they can more accurately identify a 'toy', without thinking about how it makes them look for accepting 'junior' toys, or worrying about other people having a bigger collection based on what each restrict themselves to collecting. Ask a non-collector, 'is this a toy', and if they say yes, then it counts (if it is a Transformers product).

The only thing that should be polled, if required, is what constitutes 'complete' when it comes to things like multi-packs (like Reflector or Armada toys packed with a Minicon - how far do you break up a set before one becomes 'incomplete' in the collection listing). A good test is how would you list it for sale/review, and list whatever is left when that figure is removed - if any component can't be classed as 'complete', then something can't be separated from it as a separate 'Toy' (would you buy or review Armada Optimus without Sparkplug... Sparkplug may look like it's a separate toy, but if it makes Optimus incomplete without it, it would need to remain a componant of the larger figure - like Cityformers with their smaller robots).
Objectively, everything that is legally released as a Transformers toy, in a toy collection, should count, no matter what it is or how many they have.

To test that, RPMs MiniVehicles and Speed Stars Stealth Force - are they Transformers products? Yes. Are they Toys? Yes.
I count how many toys I have in my Transformers collection... so they count.
If the people polled are all more committed to the toys aimed at the older demographic, and vote against these 'toys', then the poll result is biased and contradicts the purpose of a toy collection count.

It's like when people are polled in public about things... results are often flawed based on how the poll is conducted (using phones or internet rules out certain demographics from participating), or where it is conducted (socio-economic differences, politically sensative areas, ethnic groupings), or even who is asked (gender, religion)... can all alter a poll result.

In the case of the UCM, only serious collectors were polled about what counts to them as a Transformers toy, instead of asking what counts as a toy in general.
If you can't avoid a biased demographic, then an objective question needs to be asked to get an objective response. It would have then avoided the 'need' to poll a majority of the Articles listed in the first posting.

Unfortunately, for the purpose of comparing new data to past data, any re-definition of a collection count would mean starting all over again with the comparative data.
(then again, if consistancy of data is an issue as addressed on the first page of this topic, then the other variable should be eliminated - the participants... only those people involved in a previous count, can and must all be involved in future counts, or else the total results and averages of such a small, changing sample of people, are gonna throw out the integrity of the results anyway)

[GoktimusPrime]

Didn't BW Mutant Beasts counted? Same thing - 2 modes, no robot mode.
To me, the Mutant Beasts have two definitive modes - i.e. two alt modes. The Combiner Class Constructicons and Stealth Force TFs only have one "definitive" mode and transform into an 'intermediate' mode (i.e. body part, attack mode). I personally don't really consider intermediate modes as being a proper mode... but this is just my opinion.


And just to be difficult... *snip*
You're looking at a quantitative count whereas I believe the UCM looks more at a qualitative count. There are pros and cons to either method of counting - your quantitative way is simpler and would probably yield more consistent results... however others might feel it to be "cheap" because people could boost their collection counts with what they perceive as merchandise rather than action figures like PVCs, statues, balls, bop bags, pinball games etc.

Anyway, this is all a moot point since, as you said...

Unfortunately, for the purpose of comparing new data to past data, any re-definition of a collection count would mean starting all over again with the comparative data.

As for...

(then again, if consistancy of data is an issue as addressed on the first page of this topic, then the other variable should be eliminated - the participants... only those people involved in a previous count, can and must all be involved in future counts, or else the total results and averages of such a small, changing sample of people, are gonna throw out the integrity of the results anyway)
The project is a census to keep track of collectors' collection sizes and ultimately answer the question of "How big is the average collection?"

Anyway, all this really should have been debated at the outset of this project in 2005-06 when we were deciding the rules of the project. The ship's pretty much sailed now, unless someone wants to start a new project and run with that.

-----------------------------------------------------

Getting back to the question at hand... I take it you're voicing an objection against not counting the Combiner Class Constructicons and Stealth Forcers then.

Does anyone else concur?

[griffin]

however others might feel it to be "cheap" because people could boost their collection counts with what they perceive as merchandise rather than action figures like PVCs, statues, balls, bop bags, pinball games etc.

None of those are 'toys', which was the point of what I was saying... if you are counting toys for a 'Transformers Count', polls on those sort of things (and most of the Articles) would have been unnecessary. It just over-complicated a process that could have been a lot simpler (and more objective) from the outset.
And personal bias doesn't boost collections, it prohibits others from counting *toys* they have in their collection. I have a room full of toys, but according to what other people have voted, a large number aren't toys. I support a universal method for statistical purposes (like this project), but that just bugs me.


The project is a census to keep track of collectors' collection sizes and ultimately answer the question of "How big is the average collection?"

Which was the point of the 'devils advocate' bit on how accurate is 'an average' if the sample polled is so different each time? (I'm not saying a poll shouldn't be taken - just that people participating or compiling shouldn't get too worked up over its accuracy or parameters) It's like surveying people about what their religion is, and each time it involves different people... statistically it would appear that the demographic has changed, but those people in the first survey may not have changed their religion at all...


Getting back to the question at hand... I take it you're voicing an objection against not counting the Combiner Class Constructicons and Stealth Forcers then.

As per my posting... if they are toys, and they are legit Transformers (r), they count. As per the existing UCM, you may have to take a poll to see what the 'collectors' think.

[GoktimusPrime]

None of those are 'toys', which was the point of what I was saying...
I think we're now delving into subjective definitions of what counts as a "toy". The technical definition of "toy" can be quite broad, such as "...any object that can be used for play" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy). Perhaps it would be better to replace the word "toy" with "action figure," which is defined as "a posable character figurine" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_figure). The term 'action figure' would, by definition, discount toys like balls, PVC figurines etc. But you may still run into problems here because a lot of Transformer PVC figurines actually do have some posability and some collectors may argue that the term action figure would only exclude absolutely non-posable statues (thus PVCs and even Mighty Muggs could still arguably be counted as action figures).


It just over-complicated a process that could have been a lot simpler (and more objective) from the outset.
That's why I'm hesitant in making more polls and creating new articles. Even when new polls are made, whenever possible I try to update existing articles rather than create new ones.


And personal bias doesn't boost collections, it prohibits others from counting *toys* they have in their collection. I have a room full of toys, but according to what other people have voted, a large number aren't toys.
Devil's advocate: your personal bias would disclude people from counting "toys" like balls and bop bags etc.


I support a universal method for statistical purposes (like this project), but that just bugs me.
Fair enough, but as you know it's too late to really change anything for this project now.

[LordCyrusOmega]

I object to combiner class devestator (ROTF) being removed from the UCM.
As I see it Devestator while lacking individual modes does transform from multiple vehicles into a robot. While lacking the amount of vehicles needed to make him movie accurate as a toy he does reflect what the movie portrayed: one singular personality.

As for the rest, when i count my collection for personal track i tend to count any that have their own individual personality or bio ie i also include targetmasters etc as they have their own bio in western release.

However a good point was raised as what makes an item complete. If an armada line figure didn't have it's minicon i wouldn't count it as complete.

Thats just what i think anyway.

[Sharky]

i personaly do not care how many i have and i dont really care about playing a measuring stick game with how many toys i have, thats why i stick with lots and lots when people ask me.... if you cant enjoy looking at my collection without wanting to know how many i have to compare to other collections then i really dont want you to know.. just enjoy the perve for what it is.

so Sharkys collection count = Lots and Lots

and thats the bottom line.................
:p

[LordCyrusOmega]

It's not that i like comparing my collection to others. i just like to know how many i have.

It's more i don't like some being classed and not others. Though i can see everyone has a different point of view on this as some will class rpm's and i don't but i do class 3" titanium and targetmasters etc

[GoktimusPrime]

I object to combiner class devestator (ROTF) being removed from the UCM.
As I see it Devestator while lacking individual modes does transform from multiple vehicles into a robot. While lacking the amount of vehicles needed to make him movie accurate as a toy he does reflect what the movie portrayed: one singular personality.
Nobody's suggesting that Combiner Class Devastator be completely discounted from the UCM - but whether or not he should count as 1 Transformer or 6. Under existing rules for counting gestalts, only the component robots count individually but the gestalt robot doesn't. So for example, original G1 Devastator counts as 6 Transformers - but not 7 (cos some people would count Devastator as the 7th Constructicon). But Combiner Class Devastator has created some controversy because the individual Constructicons don't have robot modes.


As for the rest, when i count my collection for personal track i tend to count any that have their own individual personality or bio ie i also include targetmasters etc as they have their own bio in western release.

[quote=LordCyrusOmega]It's more i don't like some being classed and not others. Though i can see everyone has a different point of view on this as some will class rpm's and i don't but i do class 3" titanium and targetmasters etc
Pretty much. There isn't any one method of counting that everyone will agree to. But at least the UCM was created (and maintained) via a democratic process and represents the majority consensus. Even I don't agree with all the UCM articles... but I abide by the majority will of voters.


It's not that i like comparing my collection to others. i just like to know how many i have.
Same here. I first started making a list of my Transformers in 1985 on my family's Commodore 64. I made on a word processor program and it was a pretty simple list - only 3 columns; Name, Allegiance, Function. That was it! And when I printed it out on our dot matrix printer the entire list fitted on one page! :) And like you said, it was never about comparing or competing with others... I just wanted to know.

[LordCyrusOmega]

In the case of devastator I think it should be counted as one due to one personality unlike usual gestalts that require the meshing of two or more minds.

I like the current ucm as it puts all of is in the same boat.

[Paul Agnew]

but i do class 3" titanium and targetmasters etc

Truth is, I have always considered traditional Targetmasters (and Headmasters) as 2 figures, given they have names, profiles, and such rather than mindless drones. Then again that's just me.

[Mr Ed]

Just watched your Youtube video Gok on UCM.... interesting..

Very technical. you should write taxation legislation. :p

I have a massive collection of Diamond Select Toy / Palisades / Titanium 3" statues and was horrified to find they are excluded. I probably spent more money on those statues than my normal TFs....

But like everyone says, each to their own.

Good on you for interesting Article numbers on Transformer counts!

So do we have an 'auditor' to review people's collections to ensure compliance with UCM?

[1AZRAEL1]

Throw in my 2c here. WST's count yes?

[GoktimusPrime]

I have a massive collection of Diamond Select Toy / Palisades / Titanium 3" statues and was horrified to find they are excluded. I probably spent more money on those statues than my normal TFs....
Because that's what the majority of people voted for. Remember that the UCM isn't based on any individual fan thinks should or shouldn't count, but based on a majority consensus. There are some rules in the UCM I don't like either (like counting multiples), but I respect it because it's what the majority of participants voted for. :) And for the sake of maintaining comparative data, once the rules were voted on, they cannot be changed (this was clearly outlined at the beginning of this project).


So do we have an 'auditor' to review people's collections to ensure compliance with UCM?
No, it's based on trust/honesty.


Throw in my 2c here. WST's count yes?
The licensed ones count, yes. :)

[Bidoofdude]

How about two of the same toy, one repainted (by yourself) into a different character? Do they count as 2? Do customs count as well?

[GoktimusPrime]

See Article 20

[1AZRAEL1]

Thought that was the case, just wanted to clarify. Finally got round to counting my collection last night. Well, only the ones on display lol

[Cat]

So seeing as I collect statues and busts, they don't count?

A minority product is voted against, as its a minority product.

Coming up with all these ways to discount what others have and enjoy from 'counting' as a part of their cherished collection = pointless data.

Especiallt when plush toys count, but not statues and busts? Besides the media, they're quite a similar thing.

And kitbashes count? They're not official product. They're not even product made in numbers. Yet they count, while tons of official product doesn't?

So I could have every figure made, yet you could have more because you mash different heads into different bodies? Because you have a fancharacter you made? That totally blows any numbers out the water, as what comparison can be made there? None.

Seems like a great way to minimise others' collection for self-fellating purposes.

'Oh you have and enjoy all these Transformers products? They don't count. You have nothing. Bai.'

[griffin]

So seeing as I collect statues and busts, they don't count?

A minority product is voted against, as its a minority product.

Coming up with all these ways to discount what others have and enjoy from 'counting' as a part of their cherished collection = pointless data.

Especiallt when plush toys count, but not statues and busts? Besides the media, they're quite a similar thing.

And kitbashes count? They're not official product. They're not even product made in numbers. Yet they count, while tons of official product doesn't?

So I could have every figure made, yet you could have more because you mash different heads into different bodies? Because you have a fancharacter you made? That totally blows any numbers out the water, as what comparison can be made there? None.

Seems like a great way to minimise others' collection for self-fellating purposes.

'Oh you have and enjoy all these Transformers products? They don't count. You have nothing. Bai.'

It's not a counting method to cover everything that would legitimately count as a "Transformers item" or "Transformers toy" or "Transformers action figure" (three main parameters people count for their collections, which gives significantly different figures to each).... this counting method is to create a comparative method between collectors. The reason it excludes certain items by popular vote ends up coming down to what you said - it is a product collected by a small number of people... not because people are trying to limit the final count of others.

People are free to count their collection in any way they want.

This "counting method" is just for statistical purposes, NOT for forcing people to change their own counting method.

I have a more objective counting method than the UMC, but I'm not trying to gain statistical data on collecting habits. This UMC project is the only one that aims to collect that data, and preferred to include as many people as possible. As such, democratically elected parameters of the collection of data for those stats was the fairest thing. Otherwise, for a project to collect statistical data (NOT to compare one person's collection to another, or to change their counting method), many people wouldn't bother being involved if they didn't feel like they contributed in the parameters (if they were just dictated by just one person).

I personally have never used the UMC, because I don't like how complicated it is. But I don't like hearing people criticising it (especially those who didn't even participate in the voting), because you are missing the point of it.

IT IS NOT A COUNTING METHOD TO CHANGE YOUR OWN PERSONAL COUNTING METHOD - IT IS JUST FOR STATISTICAL DATA OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

Thankyou.

[GoktimusPrime]

Article 03 and Article 08 have been amended to clarify the counting of model-kit style Arms Microns. Basically any Arms Microns that you need to assemble like a model kit doesn't count (since Article 08 states that models don't count). Yes, I know that they are marketed as Mini-Cons, thus now model kit style Arms Microns are exempted from Article 03 - they're classified under Article 08 and thus don't count.

e.g.:
* Arms Micron Aimless counts because that's not a model kit that requires assembly like a model (it's a repaint of a PCC Mini-Con, who already count separately)
* Arms Micron Zamu (Breakdown's Micron) does _not_ count because it's essentially a model kit rather than a Micron action figure.

Thank you.

[BigTransformerTrev]

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this but am interested to find out if i am correct

In my personal cataloging method I have put my new G2 Bruitics under the following catagories:


Name, Allegiance, Toyline, Series, Transformation
Brawl, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybetronian Tank
Swindle, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Armored Truck
Blast Off, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Shuttle
Vortex, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Helicopter
Onslaught, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Missile Truck

So it counts as 5 for me



But if I'm guessing right according to the universal counting method it would be:


Name, Allegiance, Toyline,
Bruiticus, Decepticon Super Warrior, G2


So it would only count as 1. Am I right?

[5FDP]

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this but am interested to find out if i am correct

In my personal cataloging method I have put my new G2 Bruitics under the following catagories:


Name, Allegiance, Toyline, Series, Transformation
Brawl, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybetronian Tank
Swindle, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Armored Truck
Blast Off, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Shuttle
Vortex, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Helicopter
Onslaught, Combaticon, G2, FOC, Cybertronian Missile Truck

So it counts as 5 for me



But if I'm guessing right according to the universal counting method it would be:


Name, Allegiance, Toyline,
Bruiticus, Decepticon Super Warrior, G2


So it would only count as 1. Am I right?

I believe the answer you are looking for is...


* ARTICLE 04: Only the component members of a Gestalt team count. e.g.:
- Devastator = 6 Transformers (6 Constructicons)
- Superion = 5 Transformers (5 Aerialbots) -- in total these all count as 11 Transformers.

[GoktimusPrime]

BigTransformerTrev: As 5FDP pointed out, Article04 defines how gestalts are counted, so those 1 set of FoC Combaticons would count as 5 Transformers.

[BigTransformerTrev]

Ah, I thought that maybe because he came in 1 box as the Collectors Edition G2 Bruticus that maybe he would only be counted as one bot, whereas the FOC Combaticons all came seperately and hence would be counted individually. Thank you for clarification

What is the take on McDonald's happy meal toys? Do they count? (a mate sent me a Maccas Animated Bumblebee & Ratchet for my birthday)

Though I don't really adhere to the Universal Counting Method I'm always interested to see what it's take is :)

[liegeprime]

I think they (maccas toys) count.

I can't remember what you said to me regarding - AM microns Gok. you mentioned an amendment in the UCM - do they count? - coz they do transform, they are basically now the new minicons and they are sold separately from larger figures aside from the ones that do come with the figures ( though these seem like targetmaster figures really)... can you clarify please? thanks

[GoktimusPrime]

Ah, I thought that maybe because he came in 1 box as the Collectors Edition G2 Bruticus that maybe he would only be counted as one bot, whereas the FOC Combaticons all came seperately and hence would be counted individually. Thank you for clarification
No worries. 5 Combaticons is 5 Combaticons, regardless of how they're packaged. :)




What is the take on McDonald's happy meal toys? Do they count? (a mate sent me a Maccas Animated Bumblebee & Ratchet for my birthday)

I think they (maccas toys) count.

I can't remember what you said to me regarding - AM microns Gok. you mentioned an amendment in the UCM - do they count? - coz they do transform, they are basically now the new minicons and they are sold separately from larger figures aside from the ones that do come with the figures ( though these seem like targetmaster figures really)... can you clarify please? thanks

The answer to both your questions lies in Article 08:
Decoys, Statues, busts, PVCs, meal/candy toys, kits etc. do not count. e.g.:
- Super Collection Figures don't count
- Mega Collection Figures don't count
- Mighty Muggs don't count
- Be@rbricks don't count
- Model kit style Arms Microns don't count

So all meal toys (Maccas, Red Rooster etc.) do not count. If Maccas toys interest you, check out the Armada Happy Meal toys... they're the best made meal toys IMHO (especially Hot Shot and Starscream). :)

The model-kit style Arms Microns don't count because they are model kits, not pre-made action figures like orthodox Mini-Cons. Yes, they transform, but so do some of the other confectionery model kits, like Death Zaras or even Tripledacus who can transform and combine. But those model kits have never counted before, so for the sake of consistency it's been ruled that the model-kit style Arms Microns do not count under the UCM.

[BigTransformerTrev]

So all meal toys (Maccas, Red Rooster etc.) do not count. If Maccas toys interest you, check out the Armada Happy Meal toys... they're the best made meal toys IMHO (especially Hot Shot and Starscream). :)



I've got 2 Hot Shots that people have given me and I thought they about the worst HM toys, along with Armada Smokescreen. Maybe I'm not transforming them correctly. Personally I liked HM Energon Megatron, he came with a little scout plane with a torch in it!

[GoktimusPrime]

The thing I like about the Armada Happy Meal toys is that they can combine into gestalts (Autobots into a gestalt robot, Decepticons into a gestalt vehicle). Sure, they're pretty silly looking gestalts, but for a bunch of really cheap Happy Meal toys, I'm impressed. Also I like how they all have Mini-Con ports that are compatible with actual Mini-Cons. Sure, they're "dead ports" (i.e. they don't activate any gimmicks in the toys themselves), but again - given that these are just $2 meal toys, I really like how they're designed to be compatible with mainstream Transformer toys! And they all have individual gimmicks too.

So in the case of Hot Shot, he has the pull back motor gimmick, Mini-Con ports that are compatible with Mini-Cons/Microns and he can combine w/ the other Happy Meal Armada Autobots to form a gestalt. That's a LOT more value than ROTF Combiner Class Devastator, and it's only a Happy Meal toy! :D And I like how Starscream has the G1 Jumpstarter gimmick that actually works better than the G1 Jumpstarters. I've just always been impressed with how much value they crammed into these cheap little toys, and I can't think of any other Meal toy that offers that much bang for your buck. :)

[liegeprime]

the Armada Maccas toys combine?!? well now that is one thing I didnt know. I only had Armada Maccas Sreamer and I left him back in Phils when I migrated the collection here coz I think it's a crap toy, but for some reason I couldn't throw it away :o:o:o so it's just there in my box of told toys... they combine huh? that's pretty neat for a freebie toy :):)

[GoktimusPrime]

I think it's an incredibly neat thing to do for such cheap and simple Happy Meal toys! Their combined modes aren't flash or anything... but yeah, the fact that they can do it is pretty kewl IMHO. :D These are a bunch toys that are $2 each (or free if you purchase a Happy Meal) that can transform from individual robots to vehicles and combine. Puts Revenge of the Fallen Combiner Class Devastator to shame! :)

Anyway, here's a picture of their combined modes:
http://www.x-entertainment.com/articles/0689/camazing.jpg
(for Maccas toys that you buy with spare change, I think it's mighty impressive)

[5FDP]

Anyway, here's a picture of their combined modes:
http://www.x-entertainment.com/articles/0689/camazing.jpg
(for Maccas toys that you buy with spare change, I think it's mighty impressive)

HA!... it's a totem pole :D

[Bidoofdude]

Kreo and Kreons?

[GoktimusPrime]

Block toys are excluded by Article08 - which currently exclude Transformer Be@rbricks. I've updated Article08 to explicitly include (to exclude :p) KreOs

[GoktimusPrime]

Some 'housecleaning' amendments made to Articles 02 and 03.
+ Under Article02 Takara's Headmaster and Godmaster Warriors now count.
+ Article03 now excludes Power Core Combiner Mini-Cons -- this brings them in line with Targetmaster Partners and Arms Microns which have always been excluded under the UCM, so it makes it more consistent to also exclude PCC Mini-Cons.

Since these toys exist in relatively limited quantities, it shouldn't affect comparable poll data since they're rounded to the nearest hundred anyway.

[DELTAprime]

- Be@rbricks don't count

Why not? They transform from bear to robot, are posable and are licensed by Takara Tomy.

[BigTransformerTrev]

The UCM sucks balls - it excludes tons of great and totally valid TF figures - plus of all the TF collectors out there I know of only ONE person that uses it - hardly universal :rolleyes: Even if it is only for statistical purposes it's still exclusionary and reeking of bias.

Not going to get into an argument about it - said my piece and can sit back with that warm fuzzy feeling in the knowledge my opinion is just :D

Big Angry Trev out ;)

[theshape]

I think the system makes us more 'selective' collectors look insignificant. Is it really fair to count a g1 galaxy shuttle as 1 toy and a $6 movie toy as 1 also :confused:

[Sinnertwin]

I think the system makes us more 'selective' collectors look insignificant. Is it really fair to count a g1 galaxy shuttle as 1 toy and a $6 movie toy as 1 also :confused:

Why would it not be fair? They're both toys that transform, despite what people have paid for them.

[theshape]

Just in terms of comparing collections (which is what these polls do). They favour one type of collector over the other.

[Sky Shadow]

I think the system makes us more 'selective' collectors look insignificant. Is it really fair to count a g1 galaxy shuttle as 1 toy and a $6 movie toy as 1 also :confused:


Just in terms of comparing collections (which is what these polls do). They favour one type of collector over the other.

It's okay, Shape, it's just a count of toys, not something important like a measure of one's phallus size. ;)

[theshape]

It's okay, Shape, it's just a count of toys, not something important like a measure of one's phallus size. ;)

:D

[GoktimusPrime]

I'm not going to explain the history and rationale of the UCM all over again, it's all detailed in post #1 (http://otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=217) of this thread. The opportunity for debating and voting on the individual rules happened back in 2006-07. The nature and objective of the project was outlined from the very beginning; it was made clear that this was the one and only chance for people to have their say about how they wanted to have Transformers counted, or forever hold their peace. That window of opportunity has since closed. Complaining about it 7 years later doesn't seem terribly constructive.

And remember that this is all voluntary. At the end of the day, if you find the counting method and the survey project disagreeable, then feel free not to participate.

[Sky Shadow]

There's no point in acting all surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department on Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years, so you've had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it's far too late to start making a fuss about it now. What do you mean you've never been to Alpha Centauri? For heaven's sake mankind, it's only four light years away you know. I'm sorry, but if you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs that's your own lookout.

...

[autobreadticon]

http://theoutmost.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Helen-Lovejoy.gif

Oh won't someone please think of the PVCs....

[BigTransformerTrev]

why does Revoltech count but Mega Collection Figures don't? they are pretty much the same thing!


that isnt right is it? if you own a complete trypticon whose gimmiks dont work, would that mean that it is a junker under this definition?

i certainly hope not

George


Will the polls be redone yearly? If not, what interval?


Borgeman, You're going to upset Gok :D

I think we can all find flaws in various bits of this, but I think he thinks that that isn't what this thread is for...

Hence my question, now that this is the "official" counting method and we've had some time to reflect, when do we get to go back to the polls?


I think that's a bad move. As has been demonstrated here and in virtually every place this counting method has been mentioned, people have had second thoughts once seeing the implementation in place.

If the method is truly sound, the voting results shouldn't change.



I'm simply blaming the fact that it's locked and has no ability for [democratic] review. I believe that at least ONE review AFTER having the system in place allows for greater finesse and polish.


I don't know why I've let myself get bothered over this. Must be childhood remnants of my lack of respect for authority. As long as the system lacks democratic review, I will be forced to use my own method. If you don't want to count my poll responses, don't. I'm not competing anyway.


sorry jumping in alittle late with my two cents...

isn't the votes THE democractic system for what counts in the UCM? :/

speaking of the UCM, when is the 2008 polling beginning?? :D


This is the part I find the most challenging. Why is it closed to debate? Talk is cheap and free. No one is forcing your hand to change anything or re-poll, but if people want to discuss it, why not?


Don't worry about me. I've conceded. :) I will either play ball for the survey or not participate.

I just find it quite funny that after I had conceded, someone else complained (MV75) and someone else asked about re-polling (Saintly). To me, this just shows the inevitability that this topic will always attract discussion and debate, regardless of whether or not Gok is going to do anything about it (and at this point, I"m quite confident he won't).

Therefore, I must ask, what's the real issue? Is it:

1. The fact that people are commenting on, complaining about or debating the UCM? or
2. The fact that the debate and discussion is happening in this thread?

If it's the latter, why don't the mods lock it up. If it's the former, "tough" I say.


Debates and discussions are never closed, thats what makes them debates and discussions. Myself and many others here were not present for most/all of these articles, and hence had no say in their conception. That is why we are questioning them now. Just because you are not wanting to discuss it doesnt mean we cant. We arent all saying we WANT them changed - we just dont agree on all of them for various reasons.



They may be old debates for you, but not for many of us. No one is trying to derail this thread gok, we are allowed to discuss whatever (within reason) TF related things we want on this board, and you are not one to say otherwise. That is for the mods to detemine.

If you think what we are posting is wrong, then make a new thread with the counting guidelines, have a mod close the thread and sticky it, so we can all see it but not post in it. Then we can use this thread for our discussions - and that way, anyone who does not want to discuss the nature of the articles wont read this thread.

George


Wrong thread, thought you didn't want to debate in this thread any more?

This whole thing is stupid. How can you have a _universal_ system if it's only you, griff and dirge using it? (others too, maybe, but not everyone!)

See, I would argue that anything sold in the toy section under the brand name of 'Transformers' should be counted as thats how Hasbro and others do their check lists.

And of course their vehicles and weapsons don't. They're not characters.

Ooo, what about that one? As long as the toy is a character of some kind, its also a Transformer... right?


Didn't BW Mutant Beasts counted? Same thing - 2 modes, no robot mode.

And just to be difficult... I think the polls were flawed because they allowed people to rule out various 'Transformers Toys' from a Transformers Toy counting method.
Transformers are toys, and it's a Transformers Toy count... so if it is recognised as a 'Toy' and classified as legally branded as a 'Transformers' (toy) product, all those 'non convertable' toys and 'non-robot' toys shouldn't have been polled to begin with.
It's a Toy collection, so just count *all* the toys, and don't ask collectors to subjectively decide on things that are undisputably toys... because their demographic's focus is on the (older) action-figure side of collecting, making voting flawed.
Polling non-collectors would be more objective, because they can more accurately identify a 'toy', without thinking about how it makes them look for accepting 'junior' toys, or worrying about other people having a bigger collection based on what each restrict themselves to collecting. Ask a non-collector, 'is this a toy', and if they say yes, then it counts (if it is a Transformers product).

The only thing that should be polled, if required, is what constitutes 'complete' when it comes to things like multi-packs (like Reflector or Armada toys packed with a Minicon - how far do you break up a set before one becomes 'incomplete' in the collection listing). A good test is how would you list it for sale/review, and list whatever is left when that figure is removed - if any component can't be classed as 'complete', then something can't be separated from it as a separate 'Toy' (would you buy or review Armada Optimus without Sparkplug... Sparkplug may look like it's a separate toy, but if it makes Optimus incomplete without it, it would need to remain a componant of the larger figure - like Cityformers with their smaller robots).
Objectively, everything that is legally released as a Transformers toy, in a toy collection, should count, no matter what it is or how many they have.

To test that, RPMs MiniVehicles and Speed Stars Stealth Force - are they Transformers products? Yes. Are they Toys? Yes.
I count how many toys I have in my Transformers collection... so they count.
If the people polled are all more committed to the toys aimed at the older demographic, and vote against these 'toys', then the poll result is biased and contradicts the purpose of a toy collection count.

It's like when people are polled in public about things... results are often flawed based on how the poll is conducted (using phones or internet rules out certain demographics from participating), or where it is conducted (socio-economic differences, politically sensative areas, ethnic groupings), or even who is asked (gender, religion)... can all alter a poll result.

In the case of the UCM, only serious collectors were polled about what counts to them as a Transformers toy, instead of asking what counts as a toy in general.
If you can't avoid a biased demographic, then an objective question needs to be asked to get an objective response. It would have then avoided the 'need' to poll a majority of the Articles listed in the first posting.

Unfortunately, for the purpose of comparing new data to past data, any re-definition of a collection count would mean starting all over again with the comparative data.
(then again, if consistancy of data is an issue as addressed on the first page of this topic, then the other variable should be eliminated - the participants... only those people involved in a previous count, can and must all be involved in future counts, or else the total results and averages of such a small, changing sample of people, are gonna throw out the integrity of the results anyway)


None of those are 'toys', which was the point of what I was saying... if you are counting toys for a 'Transformers Count', polls on those sort of things (and most of the Articles) would have been unnecessary. It just over-complicated a process that could have been a lot simpler (and more objective) from the outset.
And personal bias doesn't boost collections, it prohibits others from counting *toys* they have in their collection. I have a room full of toys, but according to what other people have voted, a large number aren't toys. I support a universal method for statistical purposes (like this project), but that just bugs me.



Which was the point of the 'devils advocate' bit on how accurate is 'an average' if the sample polled is so different each time? (I'm not saying a poll shouldn't be taken - just that people participating or compiling shouldn't get too worked up over its accuracy or parameters) It's like surveying people about what their religion is, and each time it involves different people... statistically it would appear that the demographic has changed, but those people in the first survey may not have changed their religion at all...



As per my posting... if they are toys, and they are legit Transformers (r), they count. As per the existing UCM, you may have to take a poll to see what the 'collectors' think.


I object to combiner class devestator (ROTF) being removed from the UCM.
As I see it Devestator while lacking individual modes does transform from multiple vehicles into a robot. While lacking the amount of vehicles needed to make him movie accurate as a toy he does reflect what the movie portrayed: one singular personality.

As for the rest, when i count my collection for personal track i tend to count any that have their own individual personality or bio ie i also include targetmasters etc as they have their own bio in western release.

However a good point was raised as what makes an item complete. If an armada line figure didn't have it's minicon i wouldn't count it as complete.

Thats just what i think anyway.


So seeing as I collect statues and busts, they don't count?

A minority product is voted against, as its a minority product.

Coming up with all these ways to discount what others have and enjoy from 'counting' as a part of their cherished collection = pointless data.

Especiallt when plush toys count, but not statues and busts? Besides the media, they're quite a similar thing.

And kitbashes count? They're not official product. They're not even product made in numbers. Yet they count, while tons of official product doesn't?

So I could have every figure made, yet you could have more because you mash different heads into different bodies? Because you have a fancharacter you made? That totally blows any numbers out the water, as what comparison can be made there? None.

Seems like a great way to minimise others' collection for self-fellating purposes.

'Oh you have and enjoy all these Transformers products? They don't count. You have nothing. Bai.'


Why not? They transform from bear to robot, are posable and are licensed by Takara Tomy.


The UCM sucks balls - it excludes tons of great and totally valid TF figures - plus of all the TF collectors out there I know of only ONE person that uses it - hardly universal :rolleyes: Even if it is only for statistical purposes it's still exclusionary and reeking of bias.




I think the system makes us more 'selective' collectors look insignificant. Is it really fair to count a g1 galaxy shuttle as 1 toy and a $6 movie toy as 1 also :confused:


Just in terms of comparing collections (which is what these polls do). They favour one type of collector over the other.


http://theoutmost.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Helen-Lovejoy.gif

Oh won't someone please think of the PVCs....

I think a lot of the complaints would go away if you just got rid of the name "Universal Counting Method". THATS what gives people the irrits! Because it is simply not a Universal Method.


I'm not going to explain the history and rationale of the UCM all over again, it's all detailed in post #1 (http://otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=217) of this thread. The opportunity for debating and voting on the individual rules happened back in 2006-07. The nature and objective of the project was outlined from the very beginning; it was made clear that this was the one and only chance for people to have their say about how they wanted to have Transformers counted, or forever hold their peace. That window of opportunity has since closed. Complaining about it 7 years later doesn't seem terribly constructive.

And remember that this is all voluntary. At the end of the day, if you find the counting method and the survey project disagreeable, then feel free not to participate.

A hell of a lot of us were not participating or even around in TF online chatrooms back when this was done 8 years ago. Yet we are told that its "The Universal Counting Method" and that we should have had our say way back when and if we didn't its our own damn fault. Nobody uses this! It's not universal! And we get told that the debate happened 8 years ago and nothing can be changed, yet last year:


Block toys are excluded by Article08 - which currently exclude Transformer Be@rbricks. I've updated Article08 to explicitly include (to exclude :p) KreOs


Some 'housecleaning' amendments made to Articles 02 and 03.
+ Under Article02 Takara's Headmaster and Godmaster Warriors now count.
+ Article03 now excludes Power Core Combiner Mini-Cons -- this brings them in line with Targetmaster Partners and Arms Microns which have always been excluded under the UCM, so it makes it more consistent to also exclude PCC Mini-Cons.

Since these toys exist in relatively limited quantities, it shouldn't affect comparable poll data since they're rounded to the nearest hundred anyway.

So Gok can change stuff, but noone else can? Hardly seems fair in the slightest. It really is not universal, it's just one mans opinion of what constitues a TF figure. And oddly it seems to discount all the figures that this person in particular does not like, yet tons of others do. I think Jaydisc said it perfectly back in 2008:


Rubbish I say. I doth hereby refer to the so-called Universal Counting Method as "Gok's Counting Method". I will hereby participate in any counting surveys with my own system.

I've made the same suggestion. Call it Gok's Counting Method and I think everyone would stop complaining and back off because people are entitled to their devise their own counting method and it could still be used for data collection etc. It's what I was trying to suggest the other day, in what was a failed and wasted attempt to be nice and get you out of the firing line Gok. I don't like the UCM and I wont be participating in any more of the polls but if it was not called the UCM I wouldn't object to it because it would be Goks or whoevers system and people are totally entitled to their own system and others shouldn't criticize them. But when you call it "The Universal Counting Method" and noone gets a say except a select few, or as now seems to be the case just one person, then of course everyone gets ticked off! It's fascism! You simply cant call it Universal when noone else uses it - Universal implies that it represents everyone and this counting system does not do this at all! People feel with the name UCM that the counting system is getting imposed upon them, even if its only for statistical purposes. Thats why we get annoyed!

Change the name, and everyone will chill out and go away - very simple.

[dirge]

Trev, if you don't like it, do the mature thing and disregard it. There's no need to flame. Nor throw around terms like "sook" as you did earlier. Count your collection however you wish & ignore the "UCM" as many others do.

I'm not defending or agreeing with the UCM - and you can quietly hate it all you want - simply ignore it if you're not a fan of it. I'll delete any further post you make arguing against it's existence (or calling names).

[BigTransformerTrev]

Trev, if you don't like it, do the mature thing and disregard it. There's no need to flame. Nor throw around terms like "sook" as you did earlier. Count your collection however you wish & ignore the "UCM" as many others do.

I'm not defending or agreeing with the UCM - and you can quietly hate it all you want - simply ignore it if you're not a fan of it. I'll delete any further post you make arguing against it's existence (or calling names).

What? I cant even make a suggestion? Wouldn't my suggestion extinguish the flames? That was my original intent and as my last line said, it would chill everyone out. Its damn annoying to be told you cant question things and make suggestions. Thats not cool man. But somehow it seems to be completely in line with the what is happening here in this thread and the topic in general. But fine, whatever, sorry for trying to have a voice. I take it you'll give an even-handed treatment and delete any other people's questioning as well. But fine, I'll never dare comment on the topic again.

And as far as I know noone but admins would have seen that term which I used when annoyed and deleting a post a fellow user asked me to delete (I wasnt happy but I did it) so I don't know why you are trotting it out here for everyone to see.

[dirge]

Trev, you can question, yes. But this is something which has been developed for years & everything put to votes - so the results are collated & then essentially fixed. So agitating against the results goes against how Gok's set it up. It might be stupid - some of the outcomes probably are - but that's the way votes go sometimes.

If you don't like the outcomes, use your own method - don't get worked up over this one. Is it flawed? Probably. But it's only being done for the sake of consistency in Gok's polling. So if you think it's too heavily flawed, ignore it & get on with life.

[Bidoofdude]

You could always make your own counting method and collect yearly data. It would make a good comparison against Gok's Counting Method to see the numbers when you go by different rules.

I do think that the Universal Counting Method isn't at all universal (and it should be renamed to avoid angering people, illlustrated in previous comments), but it's only a word. It's just a statistic according to those rules. I think most people are misled to believe it is some kind of official end all be all method, which it seems to be going for.

As Gok has pointed out, you can't really change the rules now, considering the survey has been going on for years to create consistent results. Using new rules would require creating a new survey with new rules, which would actually be fine. In my opinion this would actually greatly help gather the accurate opinions and preferences of the members here, most (almost all) of which were not here for the original deciding of the requirements for counting.

If you don't like it, just don't participate, ignore it or make your own counting method and count by what you want.

[dirge]

Also, Trev, with regards to the name - seriously, it's a name. You don't see Tasmania & Victoria arguing with South Australia about how stupid that state's name actually is (look at the map, seriously...) - the name is what it is and isn't really used descriptively.

[Bidoofdude]

Also, Trev, with regards to the name - seriously, it's a name. You don't see Tasmania & Victoria arguing with South Australia about how stupid that state's name actually is (look at the map, seriously...) - the name is what it is and isn't really used descriptively.

I think what is bugging people is that the term 'Universal' is seemingly being treated as descriptive. But at the end of the day, it is just a name and should not be taken with such heart. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[griffin]

I hate that you're making me defend Goktimus. :p Digging up old comments isn't necessary - people can read through the topic themselves.

If you have a problem with the name, it fits the definition, as it aimed to find a common denominator for the purpose of future counts and statistical comparisons of each year. It's not "Compulsory Counting Method" for a reason.

This wasn't a method one person came up with and demanded that all people follow.
If anything, he was the one person who stood up to say, lets find a way to scientifically compare collection counts over the long term, through a counting method that must remain uniform for it to maintain its statistical integrity.... and then did all the work to develop that concept.
That's not an easy task to achieve. Everyone has different ways to count toys, so it requires the "lowest common denominator" by incorporating a democratically elected method that involved anyone at that time who was interested in the long-term value of the project.

When he says that discussion is over, it's not that he doesn't permit people to comment - he's trying to say that complaining/debating/disputing the voting process AFTER the vote has ended won't achieve anything, because the counting method is not, and must not, be allowed to be altered after counting periods have begun (otherwise, you have to throw out all previous counts, and start all over again with the modified counting method - and if it keeps getting modified every year because someone doesn't agree with what the majority already voted, we'd never get any comparative data).
It's not like he's going to come out and say that you're wasting your time after the vote has been taken, but the counting method can't change if it is to remain valid for future usage (with any adjustments only being made according to future article votes), and he's not obligated to answer criticism of something he didn't dictate. So who's going to respond to complaints to make it worthwhile complaining?
It's like a referendum or federal election - you can't change the result even if the outcome applies directly to you... and complaining about a result that the majority voted on doesn't make much sense. And if you arrived in the country after that day, and the result of the referendum or election applies to you, it may not be fair, but that's just bad timing. If a future vote comes along, then you can have your say (like this one, if someone decided to put in the effort to create their own, and start from scratch with the statistical data).

If you don't come up with a strictly adhered to counting method, the comparison of each year is meaningless, and statistically and scientifically flawed.
Since there is no counting method that everyone could agree to, theoretically it requires a democratically voted counting method to appease the majority of willing participants... which was done across several fansites.

It's not a "perfect" system, or an accurate system, but it is the most scientific system.
If anyone is interested in participating and/or seeing the "approximate average of current collectors", this is/was the only existing way of seeing that data, showing an approximate amount of toys that "current" collectors have over time, with those who are new and enthusiastic to collecting, replacing those who have left and have lost interest in collecting. (a fluid dynamic of total toys in current circulation, but with approximate results due to minimal involvement each year)

The point is, don't complain about the person who actually stood up to finally create a system that was agreed to by the majority of people who wanted to participate at the time.
And don't complain about the system after it is voted in. It may not seem fair to miss it, but the legacy of the original vote was aimed at both current and future collectors. Besides, if you had been around during the vote, would you have participated and voted, or still just be criticising the concept making it moot as to missing the vote and its discussion at the time.

[Bidoofdude]

I agree with Griffin's points. It's misconceived by lots of people. At the time, it's what people decided and in order to remain scientific, you have to keep those requirements.

I still think that it would be pretty interesting and well worth to create another survey with more open requirements to see how the count of people's collections differs compared to the UCM.

[Sky Shadow]

The other thing is that it really shouldn't make a big mathematical difference how people count. For example (props to MayzaPrime for bothering to count his collection twice) Mayza got 1784 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436493&postcount=5) according to Smax, and 1825 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436809&postcount=11) by this method. Both put him in the same tier when voting, and any method is really not going to throw out result. I personally use the Can't Be Arsed Counting method. According to my method, I have 'Meh', which is exactly the same result I get when trying to use the UCM.

[Bidoofdude]

The other thing is that it really shouldn't make a big mathematical difference how people count. For example (props to MayzaPrime for bothering to count his collection twice) Mayza got 1784 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436493&postcount=5) according to Smax, and 1825 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436809&postcount=11) by this method. Both put him in the same tier when voting, and any method is really not going to throw out result. I personally use the Can't Be Arsed Counting method. According to my method, I have 'Meh', which is exactly the same result I get when trying to use the UCM.

I often get 'some' when I count my collection using the Can't Be Arsed Counting Method (CBAC).

To see any kind of mathematical distance, we'd have to narrow down each interval, which would be very difficult (impossible, really), considering the UCM survey only previously recorded results according to said intervals (rounding to the nearest hundred, IIRC). If there were to indeed be a new method to go alongside it as a mathematically differentiating comparison, you would have to record future UCM data as done before and also record with smaller intervals to compare the data. But then you'd not be looking at the UCM method, as the rounding would be different. Apples and oranges. Dammit. -_-

There goes the entire above paragraph out the window. :o

EDIT: Then again, the purpose of creating a second method with the same intervals as the UCM to compare would be to see if there actually would be a difference, then how much, if so. It's not completely out the window yet.

[GoktimusPrime]

Just a reminder that:
* The 2014 survey ended on Tuesday, 11:00 EST.
* This year's survey is the last one ever (from me anyway). I'm not doing any more.
http://otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436540&postcount=6

This survey project is finished. We have results collated from 6 years' worth of survey data, and I think that's enough. Once again, I would like to offer my thanks to everyone who's participated, helped and supported this project.

Take care.

[BigTransformerTrev]

If I am not allowed to comment on the issue and am in such trouble for daring to suggest something as simple as a one word name change (I must be histories greatest monster!), will folk and admins etc stop directing comments to me that I'm not allowed to respond to. I'll shut up about the UCM now that I know it is such a sacred cow but I won't be made to sit in f'ing silence by Dirge while I get f'ing lectured by people.

[dirge]

Trev you are of course allowed to comment. But given that this project has been running for several years, walking in now and asking for change at his stage does nothing but start a pointless argument. No one is calling you a monster (in fact so far the only one name calling has been yourself). I care not for the UCM & think it's one person's indulgence. But I also realise that your demanding changes now isn't going to have any effect after several years of the project other than to create tension. So from that point of view I ask you to refrain from commenting.

If you want to offer supportive criticism (kinda too late for that as its winding down) or start an alternative, go for it. Clearly you dislike this method (and I suspect are partly motivated by your opinion of Goktimus), I have no issue with that. But do what most here have done & just ignore the thing. I don't see why you feel compelled to waste your time (and mine - I don't care for the UCM and don't want to be dealing with it either) actively fighting it - if you dislike Goktimus ignore him as others here do.

[Bartrim]

The other thing is that it really shouldn't make a big mathematical difference how people count. For example (props to MayzaPrime for bothering to count his collection twice) Mayza got 1784 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436493&postcount=5) according to Smax, and 1825 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showpost.php?p=436809&postcount=11) by this method. Both put him in the same tier when voting, and any method is really not going to throw out result. I personally use the Can't Be Arsed Counting method. According to my method, I have 'Meh', which is exactly the same result I get when trying to use the UCM.

You have Meh? Wow we have the exact same amount of Transformers... What a coincidence. :p

[GoktimusPrime]

Amendment made to Article02: Special Exemption -- Titan Masters which are sold individually count separately, but those that are not do not.

e.g.
TR Apeface counts as 1
TR Hardhead w/ Furos counts as 1

This is simply to keep things consistent with the already existing rule where Nebulans don't count separately but the individually sold Headmaster and Powermaster Warriors from Takara (e.g. Kirk, Rodney etc.) do count.

Thank you.

[GoktimusPrime]

Amendment made to Article 03 which includes CW Liokaiser's Ion Scythe as an "Arms Micron," as the toy is basically a pre-assembled (and decoed) Arms Micron Gul. And since Gul wouldn't count separately, then logically neither should Ion Scythe.

[Krayt]

Amendment made to Article 03 which includes CW Liokaiser's Ion Scythe as an "Arms Micron," as the toy is basically a pre-assembled (and decoed) Arms Micron Gul. And since Gul wouldn't count separately, then logically neither should Ion Scythe.

Arms Micron Weapon series
The Arms Micron Weapon series is a secondary line of individually-packaged Arms Microns sold without any larger companion figure. These vary between entirely new molds and redecoes of partner Microns. They come in identical clear-plastic bags with adhesive flaps, with the assembly instructions printed on the cardboard backer inside. Initial installments had weapon combinations formed by trios of Microns, with later installments featuring five-Micron weapon combinations.
Released toys
AMW-01 Gabu
AMW-02 Baru
AMW-03 Dai
AMW-04 C.L. GR
AMW-05 Balo G
AMW-06 Jida R
AMW-07 Pral
AMW-08 Sais
AMW-09 Jayz
AMW-10 Zori M
AMW-11 B.H. B
AMW-12 Arc S
AMW-13 Arms Micron Ultimate 5 Piece Set Advanced Star Saber (B.2 R, Iro R, O.P. R, R.A. O, Wuji G)
AMW-14 Arms Micron Ultimate 5 Piece Set Gravity Planet Bowgun (Gora II E, Gul B, Ida B, Noji B, Zori CS)

[DELTAprime]

You still trying to push your Unvasal Counting Agenda Gok?:p:D

[GoktimusPrime]

You still trying to push your Unvasal Counting Agenda Gok?:p:D
Nobody is being coerced or forced to do anything. I've merely amended/updated the rules for anyone who may still be choosing to use this method. You are free to use whatever method you like. If you don't want to use the UCM then just walk away.

[DELTAprime]

Nobody is being coerced or forced to do anything. I've merely amended/updated the rules for anyone who may still be choosing to use this method. You are free to use whatever method you like. If you don't want to use the UCM then just walk away.

Gok, it was just a joke.;)

[VodooCaMo]

Wow, that is some hardcore collecting!