Discussion of Collection counting methods

[GoktimusPrime]

By definition then, all Transformer products are Transformers. They carry the name, they are identified as such. Hasbro would regard a Robot Replica or Robot Heroes as a Transformer, albeit a non-transforming one.

EXACTAMUNDO!

UCM Article01 is the only factual definition of a Transformer - i.e.: any toy manufactured under licence from Hasbro/Takara and marketed as part of the Transformers line/franchise by HasTak. Everything else is a matter of subjective opinion!! This is why there is no "right" or "wrong" way of classifying or counting Transformers, because by its very nature TF classification is obscenely arbitrary.

Well, in the case of Actionmasters or Animorphs (I hate to admit it, in the latter case) it removes the ambivalence attached to so many other items. Which is why the general concensus is to count such items.

Indeed. Animorphs and Star Wars Transformers do count as Transformers. Under the UCM they are covered by Article01 and I reckon that they would satisfy both of the requirements of jaydisc's systems too. Both Animorphs and SWTFs are officially marketed as Transformers by Hasbro (satisfying rule #1) and they transform (satisfying rule #2).

The_Damned - I would tend to agree with you that most parents wouldn't have an issue. Rectum _is_ an anatonomical term. But there are some frighteningly conservative views out there.

I don't think it's quite enough for any moderator action, mind you. The odds of someone taking serious offence are very low, and the concepts Jay is discussing are not obscene.

I was more concerned about the D.I.C.K. acronym. Rectum isn't a profane word, but given the context of the situation (i.e.: we're not discussing anatomy) then it could be deemed as distasteful.

If these acronyms are to be introduced to fans worldwide then there might be a chance of someone taking offence to it. I don't think anyone here would take offence to it, but on one of the larger international boards it could potentially cause some fuss (the amount of nitpickiness here is nothing compared to what I see on international boards)

Anyway folks does it really matter what counting method we use?

Only if you're making a comparison or participating in a survey. Otherwise it really doesn't matter. Personally people can go ahead and count freakin' Gobots if they wanted to... (-_-)

From what I've seen in the past, surveys like the UCM survey only create friction amongst friendship as some more competitive collector might get upset that someone claims they have more transformers then them due to mis interpretation of a definition. (Typing that made me feel smart)

I consider us all friends in this little close knit community. It would be a shame if the thing that united us is the thing that divides us.

The UCM is fine so long as people remember its purpose - as a means for comparison and survey participation. That's it! And even then it's voluntary (nobody is being forced to participate in the survey).

If you hate the UCM so much that you never want to use it - FINE. Don't! I encourage people to use it and participate in the annual survey, but I'm not forcing it down anyone's throat.

It's an option which is out there if people choose to use it. People are equally capable of choosing NOT to use it if they don't want to.

In conclusion why don't we all just use the honour system. If The_Damned tells me he has 510 (or whatever the actual ammount is) Transformers I'm not going to sit there and examine ever figure and to prove him wrong. I'm going to believe him because he is my friend and I trust him.

That might work if you were making a personal comparison between just yourself and your friends - fine. But on an international survey? Um... not really.

For the sake of fairness we need to ensure that people are counting by the same rules when making any comparison (otherwise the comparison is worthless). Between a small circle of peers you can get away with coming to terms with a general consensus on how to count and work on an "honour system," but when you're dealing with hundreds of fans from across multiple message boards from around the world it doesn't quite work.

[The_Damned]

but this is an australian fan site not an international one, as voted to by the majority of members.

[Bartrim]

I'm just a little curious as to why we need 19+seperate articles in the UCM? Are we trying to work out the laws to govern a new country or are we trying to work out how to count toys?

[jaydisc]

But what makes them not Transformers? They're toys manufactured under licence and they transform - e.g.: Aimless transforms from a robot (especially in Japan where he was a robot, not a Nebulan) to a gun... just like original G1 Megatron. Why doesn't it count as a Transformer?

They're simply accessories with a gimmick. Just look at how they're portrayed on the packaging:



VERY low billing... and they don't even get a tech spec:

fwiw I actually agree that Nebulans, Master Robots et al do NOT count as Transformers - but this is just our subjective opinion on this matter. It's not a fact!

And this is the problem with creating a counting method than can be entirely accepted by the entire community.

You say that they don't count. I agree that they don't count. According to poll results from the UCM the majority of fans agree that they don't count (hence why they also don't count according to the UCM) - but the fact is that there is a number of fans who would strongly disagree with us and count them.

Just because their point of view is different from ours doesn't make it any less valid. And as I was saying, aside from Article01, all the definitions listed in the UCM are based on highly subjective opinions... not facts. Hence why I keep saying that there's no "right" or "wrong" way to count Transformers. Everyone has their own view of what is right or wrong. People like you and I think that it's right not to count Nebulans et al., whereas others would believe the complete opposite. Who's "right"? Neither of us... it's purely a matter of personal preference.

We prefer not to count Nebulans.

Every methodology, theory, idea, document, etc. is subject to interpretation. This is no different.

Devastator most certainly does transform. He transforms from a gestalt robot in six smaller robots and/or construction vehicles (i.e.: the Constructicons). Okay, this might not fit into your definition of "transformation," but your rules never stated a specific definition of "transform" so it's open to subjective interpretation. And what about gestalts like SixTurbo? That gestalt robot kinda transforms into a jet (independently of the Autobots that merge to form him). Does SixTurbo count separately from Circuit, Discharge, Glide, Neo-Wheel, Road Police and Sireen?

Maybe I can think of a better way to communicate gestalts and other combiners. Remember that we are talking about the counting of toys here. In the case of the Constructicons, if you buy six toys, you get a bonus. If you buy the gift set, you're getting six toys (not seven). In the case of Reflector, you are buying one toy. In the case of Tidal Wave, one toy. In the case of Apeface, Metroplex, Batteltrap.... you're still buying one toy. So count it as such. Any attempt to count an accessory or to separately count the amalgamation of already-counted toys is just so obviously wrong to me (and obviously to others as well)

As for your answers to questions 4, 5, 6 and 8 - the problem you're going to come up against is that many fans (according to polls the majority of fans) would disagree with counting those kinds of Transformers. It doesn't matter if you think you're right, fans will still disagree with you.

Hence the "Un-universal"

And again you will find that the majority of fans would object with you there (and again poll results support this).

I can understand how some people have argued that the UCM is too complicated, and as I've said before I have already merged some of the articles in an attempt to simplify the system, but it hasn't been easy. But to me your system appears to be on the other end of the spectrum - for me at least it feels too simple. I feel that it requires either further clarifications or redefinitions of existing rules or additional rules to allow it to cater for what I personally believe should and shouldn't count in a Transformers collection.

The world is polar. I believe that the complexity of the UCM has contributed to my drive for simplicity, so I welcome you to take equal credit for my system The fact that you think the R.E.C.T.U.M. requires further "clarification" and "redefinition" is simply and demonstrative of my point.

That's your personal opinion - and you're fully entitled to it. But others disagree. kup has admitted to being a character/fiction driven collector - he seldomly buys a toy unless he likes the character.

What you're basically doing there is imposing your own personal values onto the rest of the community. In other words, you're saying, "TF fiction doesn't enter into the equation when I count my Transformers, nor should it for everyone else!"

Is that fair? For example, I'm not really into the whole "show-accuracy" thing. The toys came first and where there were discrepancies between the G1 toys and cartoon, usually it was because the animators made the changes. Having said that, I cannot deny that "show accuracy" is a VERY powerful sentiment amongst the fandom. e-Hobby Astrotrain made me aware of that. I picked that toy up thinking, "oh cool, it's Astrotrain in the same colours as the G1 catalogues," but then a buttload of other fans went, "z0mg!!1! Show-accurate Astrotrain!!" and fully fapped till Kingdom Come(TM) over that toy until it's now selling for obscenely high prices on the secondary market! Phwoar!

I'm not saying you're wrong or right, but again, you need to realise that this standard you're imposing is based on your own personal opinions and feelings rather than concrete demonstrable facts.

Fiction is used as a tool to sell toys. From the cartoon to the comics to the two movies. It is NO DIFFERENT THAN A TV COMMERCIAL with the exception that many (yourself, Kup and even myself included) have varying levels of emotional connections with the folklore. Believe it or not, it's DESIGNED to install that within us (in order to sell us more toys).

Now, beyond the folklore, Hastak (or any manufacturer) uses LOTS of OTHER tools to aide the selling of its products, including, for example, attrative box art. There is a guy named Botch the Crab that has a website DEDICATED to Transformer box art (to those unaware, it's fantastic!) Now, akin to the way Kup uses fiction as a tool to aide his purchasing choices, it's quite possible that another fan could use box art as the criteria for their toy selection...

But that does not mean that we should use box art as a tool to count our toys!

For that reason I cannot see the entire fandom coming to completely and entirely agree on a single method of counting.

The UCM is far from being the "perfect" or "most agreeable" method of counting Transformers, but I believe that it is the fairest as the rules have been determined via democracy rather than any single fan's opinion. The UCM represents what we as a fandom 'collectively' have determined to be the most ideal way of counting Transformers.

I too cannot see the entire fandom agreeing on a single method of counting. And I would have loved to have stood behind the UCM until it demonstrated a clear inflexibility and refusal to accept true democratic reform. I know, yearly trends, blah blah blah.

[Bartrim]

That might work if you were making a personal comparison between just yourself and your friends - fine. But on an international survey? Um... not really.

For the sake of fairness we need to ensure that people are counting by the same rules when making any comparison (otherwise the comparison is worthless). Between a small circle of peers you can get away with coming to terms with a general consensus on how to count and work on an "honour system," but when you're dealing with hundreds of fans from across multiple message boards from around the world it doesn't quite work.

Just doing some more thinking here (yes I know it is quite dangerous) but effectively don't we use an honour system anyway...or do a panel of "judges" go around and check every participants tally according to the articles of the UCM?

[jaydisc]

In reference to the requiring of a transformation to robot mode, the immediate issue I foresaw was good ol' Laserbeak and Ravage

[Paulbot]

I think I'd count Reflector as three toys as each individual toy robot was given it's own name - they just share a gestalt alt mode called Reflector.

I don't have any of the three but if I ever got one of them (Viewfinder for example) I'd count him as 1 in my Transformer toy in his own right.

But that's how I count Transformers and I don't expect anyone else to do the same.

In reference to the requiring of a transformation to robot mode, the immediate issue I foresaw was good ol' Laserbeak and Ravage

Yes me too, but you could get away with saying robotic animal mode... so I used the Mutants as an example of Transformers with solely two non-robotic (by any definition) modes.

[kup]

I just realized that I have been used as an example in an argument.

For Clarity here is what motivates me as a collector:

- My appreciation of the overall fiction (official) in which the character participated, even if it was a minor role.

- My apreciation of the fictional development of the character. This is a mayor motivator and includes characters such as Bludgeon, Thunderwing, etc.

Side Notes: This is also a bit of a controversy when it comes to Counting repaints, particularly Hasbro's lazy attempts as I would likely begin to count an officially released figure after it has been modified to resemble its original character likeness. Example: I would not consider Classics Cliffjumper as nothing more than a Red Bumblebee (a variation) than a unique head count. I would only started counting him as a unique figure after I upgraded him with the Cliffjumper upgrade because he now properly looks like CJ.

My motivation of the fiction also makes me a bit volatile as a collector since my oppinion on a toy could change drastically from before to after I read its fictional representation. This is why I have a love/hate relationship with Simon Furman's writing since he makes me want to buy toys that otherwise I would have no interest in.

- I will ignore figures that I own from lines that I do not apreciate. For example, thanks to group buys, freebies and so forth, I have come into possession of figures from the Energon, Cybertron and Armada lines. These includes Energon Downshift(wheeljack, Damn you Archer!!), Roadblock, a couple of minicons and legends. They are not included in my collection. However I also own Armada Unicron and Cybertron Vector Prime who are from lnes that I generally dislike/ignore but make exception of these characters and make them part of my collection because they have been integrated into continuities that I enjoy.

As you can see from the above, I am very volatile on what I personally include and not include in my collection and that could change from a moment to the next if I happen to read fiction relating to that toy which I enjoy, even when the 'real' toy number in my collection has not increased at all. Its a very personal thing with me so if I ever count my collection, it would only be for my benefit.

However, if I ever do feel inclined to compare collections with someone else, I would need some sort of tool or uniform method as my personal count is too chaotic. Here is where a method such as the concept of UCM comes in handy . I can mutualy agree to use the UCM (or some other method) as a guideline with the other parties involved so that we can get a proper and fair comparison of our collections.

In conclusion, the UCM or any other counting method is nothing more than a guideline to be used for comparison of collection sizes between fans. It doesn't matter which counting method is better or simpler, at the end its your choice if you want to use one at all.

Personally I do not need one as I don't even count my collection and have no interest in comparing it.

[dirge]

I once came across a fan who would count a set of combiners as one if he picked them up as a boxset, but separately if he bought them separately. Even with stuff like Devastator who was available in both formats.

It's hard to attain consistency when some are determined to contradict themselves!

[jaydisc]

Ignoring the U.C.M. or R.E.C.T.U.M. how would you count:

1 x Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Classic Camaro)
1 x Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Concept Camaro)
1 x Evolution of a Hero gift pack