Need clarification on "No Retailer Links" rule

[GlassJaw]

See, the basic problem is that I didn't want to tell everyone about it quite yet! It was supposed to be a surprise!

Cat's well and truly out of the bag now, though, I guess.

Well it was easy to figure something was up as soon as the new policy was posted.

 

[HinterWelt]

It's fine, Bill. Answering questions is not a problem. The only issues I have is when people attribute things to me that are false, and only a couple of people have done that in this thread.

Just my way of trying to make you life less antagonistic. I owned a couple of retail stores once and I would through people out of the store when they would wander in trying to sell game supplies to buddies. The nature of EnWorld is changing. Whether that is good or bad is yet to be seen.

I, for one, an very interested in seeing the EnWorld PDF store. RPGShop already carries HinterWelt (although their graphics for our products are horribly out of date dispite repeated emails ) so we are already there.

Bill

 

[HinterWelt]

I seriously doubt another thread wouldn't have sprung up in its place.

I was expressing regret at the antagonism this thread has generated. My original post was purely a request for clarification.

Bill

 

[PatrickLawinger]

Etc....

Okay, I believe I understand the reasons for this whole change, the new store, etc. I do think it raises some questions that should be considered. By stating them, I rather expect to get flamed. So be it.

Does the store use server space/bandwith that people helped pay for through donations in the last server drive?

If yes, then you are setting up a commercial enterprise in direct competition with some of the people that actually donated money to you for that server/bandwith. I realize the plan is to avoid having such drives in the future, but success is not guaranteed.

ENWorld has said that the ENpublishing books couldn't be entered in the Ennies. What about publishers that now have commercial interest in the new store? Ideally they should be allowed to enter, of course, but companies that decide not to release their electronic or other products through your storefront can have a legitimate concern about fair treatment. Before getting all heated about this, remember that even the APPEARANCE of impropriety can end careers as well as "awards."

When you first started the ENPublishing (er, or whatever the name is now, sorry) I recall that people said it would be "unfair" for the staff reviewers to review those products. I am not surprised that ENPub products receive more reviews from your staff reviewers as well as fan reviews than most other pdf products. Are you going to have more reviews of products released in the ENShop than of other .pdf products? If I were a publisher releasing .pdfs through the shop I would insist on reviews as part of the service you provide. This means that your review site is no longer unbiased and must, by design, lean towards products released through your store.

I understand the planned upside to this, but I see significant downsides as well. Yes, you provide publishers and fans with a great service. It does need to be payed for somehow. I understand that.

Well, I had a few others but it is time to go coach soccer. I'll try to stop by later for more.

Patrick

 

[Morrus]

Does the store use server space/bandwith that people helped pay for through donations in the last server drive?

It is paying for itself and is paying EN World for the resources it uses.

ENWorld has said that the ENpublishing books couldn't be entered in the Ennies. What about publishers that now have commercial interest in the new store? Ideally they should be allowed to enter, of course, but companies that decide not to release their electronic or other products through your storefront can have a legitimate concern about fair treatment. Before getting all heated about this, remember that even the APPEARANCE of impropriety can end careers as well as "awards."

No change.

Are you going to have more reviews of products released in the ENShop than of other .pdf products?

Nope.

If I were a publisher releasing .pdfs through the shop I would insist on reviews as part of the service you provide.

That's not part of the service.

 

[Mouseferatu]

An easier, and I imagine far less controversial, question...

Does the storefront simply default products to three stars if they haven't been reviewed? That seems to the case, from what I'm looking at. I'd actually prefer that products that have not been reviewed receive a "No review" label of some sort; the three stars thing can be misleading.

Other than that, it looks good on casual perusal. I'll delve into it in depth more later.

 

[Morrus]

Does the storefront simply default products to three stars if they haven't been reviewed? That seems to the case, from what I'm looking at. I'd actually prefer that products that have not been reviewed receive a "No review" label of some sort; the three stars thing can be misleading..

Yep. I was on the fence on this one. I can be convinced either way on it.

 

[BrooklynKnight]

Maybe all this, uh, bruhaha, might have been avoided if the rule change was implimented AFTER the Enworld GameStore was officially announced and live.

I'm just sayin....

 

[Cathix]

All this means is one extra click for would-be customers. They see your product in your sig or announcement. They click on it. It takes them to a single page on your company's website which says something to the effect of:

Buy Baba Yaga at:

rpgnow | enworldstore | e23 | paizo


One extra click. Virtually painless.

 

[smokewolf]

All this means is one extra click for would-be customers. They see your product in your sig or announcement. They click on it. It takes them to a single page on your company's website which says something to the effect of:

I am not trying to be arguementative here...

I see your point, but it would be easier for me just to go to gamingreport.com and any PR there IS a one less click and I am at the purchasing site. Plus the point I brought up earlier (which is actually more important to me) is I can get unbiased news there.

What I liked about the old ENWORLD was the fact that it didn't take sides when it came to news. Positive or negative it stood its ground and presented an unbiased look at the information. Now, I have to resign myself to the fact that industry companies will now be editting their news and press releases when posting here (but not at other news sites). And while links might be considered relatively trivial, this is not the first restriction to be placed on news distributed through ENWORLD nor would any sensible person assume it to be the last.

I had no problem with ENWORLD and ENPUB because I undestood them to be seperate entities and from what I witnessed they operated as such. I would have no problem supporting ENWORLD and ENSHOP if they had the same relationship. But as it is that ENSHOP is now intertwined with ENWORLD and ENWORLD decisions are designed toward ENSHOP I now see ENWORLD as less of a news site and more of a commercial business.