The Universal Counting Method

[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

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.

[GoktimusPrime]

I'm not going to explain the history and rationale of the UCM all over again, it's all detailed in post #1 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]

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

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??

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 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

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

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 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 ) 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.