N.T. Wright vs M. Lloyd-Jones. What's going on?
I have kept an eye on the votes that were given to these two authors. Others have already raised their doubts about sudden big jumps for one or the other. I noticed earlier today that in a time span of less than 30 minutes about 90% of all the votes were going to only one author. Not sure what to think about it (possible of course, but not likely). I realized that if people delete the cookies from their browser or use several browsers, that multiple votes can be given by one person. Not sure if this helps to get a fair outcome.
So my request to Logos, please, when we get to the final, make sure that people can only vote once. I like the easy system as is, but you might want to consider a required log-in or something like that.
Comments
-
I was thinking the same thing. Then I posted my desire on Facebook, and some of my friends on Facebook voted for the author (N.T. Wright). One of my Facebook friends is a person that I went to seminary with. Now, he is aware of Logos and the offers that they offer. If they had to sign in, they would not have voted. Therefore, I am now thinking that it is not in the best interest for Logos to lock down the voting.André Kamphuis said:So my request to Logos, please, when we get to the final, make sure that people can only vote once. I like the easy system as is, but you might want to consider a required log-in or something like that.
0 -
tom collinge said:
If they had to sign in, they would not have voted.
Tom, do you think it's important that non-Logos users should have a voice?
The main benefit of this competition seems to be for people who consider purchasing some titles in Logos. The disadvantage I see of inviting other people to vote as well, is that the people that are most effective in social media can have a significant influance on the outcome of a competition like this. Not sure if that's desirable or not.
0 -
It's in the best interests of Logos to make sure that people are actually voting for something they might buy. If someone(s) is rigging the voting to advance their favourite and Logos subsequently sells less books it's a lose lose for them and their customers.
0 -
With all due respect, I completely disagree with this statement. The main function of March Madness and the other discount programs Logos offers is to expand their user base. This program is to get new customers to use Logos; not for existing users to increase their library.André Kamphuis said:The main benefit of this competition seems to be for people who consider purchasing some titles in Logos
Logos does not care who comes out first, second, or third. I am going to spend x amount of dollars on this sale. I will buy more books from Wright at the higher discounts, but I am going to spend the same amount of money. The same is true for other users.
This program is all about advertising. If you look at the homepage for this sale, all of the social medial sites are listed. Logos wants us to post items like this on social media sights. This is exactly want Logos wants us to do.
0 -
Tom Reynolds said:
It's in the best interests of Logos to make sure that people are actually voting for something they might buy. If someone(s) is rigging the voting to advance their favourite and Logos subsequently sells less books it's a lose lose for them and their customers.
It doesn't matter who wins. Someone is going to buy more books, and someone is going to buy less books. As I just said in the post above, this program is to get new users to Logos.
This sale is not about the number of books Logos sells. This sale is about the amount of money Logos brings in. The more new customers Logos brings in with this sale, the more money they bring in.
0 -
Tom, I'm a bit confused here. First you write that
tom collinge said:I figure people who do want to purchase Carson or Packer should decided - not me
A very ethical position that I certainly respect.
But then, only minutes later, you write another post taking the opposite position:
tom collinge said:I posted my desire on Facebook, and some of my friends on Facebook voted for the author
Sounds to me like you're telling your Facebook friends to do the same thing you found somewhat wrong to do yourself (only for a different author)?
Personally, if I have to grade, I see less problem with a Logos user voting for someone they don't intend to buy -- to promote good theology, say, or simply to try to give 'your guy' easier competition in the next round -- than I do with using Facebook or Twitter to get people who've never heard of Logos to vote out of friendship (though at least it was for the right guy [:)]). But maybe I misunderstood you?
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
tom collinge said:
This program is to get new customers to use Logos; not for existing users to increase their library.
With all due respect, you are wrong. This is not the primary objective of the campaign.
0 -
fgh said:
Sounds to me like you're telling your Facebook friends to do the same thing you found somewhat wrong to do yourself (only for a different author)?
Personally, if I have to grade, I see less problem with a Logos user voting for someone they don't intend to buy -- to promote good theology, say, or simply to try to give 'your guy' easier competition in the next round -- than I do with using Facebook or Twitter to get people who've never heard of Logos to vote out of friendship (though at least it was for the right guy
). But maybe I misunderstood you? Hi FGH,
Easy answer, the difference is that no one (that I personally know) asked me to vote one way or another for the other pairings. If one of my friends did asked me to vote for Carson or Packer, then I would.
When I post something on Facebook, Twitter, Google +, Linked, .... The posting goes to my fellow colleges, my seminary professors, congregational members, ect... And this is something that Logos wants - free advertisement.
0 -
We are going to have to agree to disagree.David Carter said:With all due respect, you are wrong. This is not the primary objective of the campaign.
0 -
0
-
Seems we are not all voting by the same ethical standards. This thread explains a lot of what has been going on.
"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley0 -
Michael Childs said:
Seems we are not all voting by the same ethical standards. This thread explains a lot of what has been going on.
well, it explains that votes can come in through solicitation via forum posts, facebook, twitter etc. I don't think that dishonest forum users "stuffing the ballot" is a necessary explanation. All of the final authors have their fan-base (and maybe as well their adversary-base), so people might get attracted by hearing someplace of a vote "NT Wright against" - and if they then consider buying the discounted Logos resources, or trying to find out what this Logos is in the firstplace, then one of the marketing aspects of it has dealt out.
Of course, Logos wants to inspire the Logos-addicted bibliophile to once again blow their budget and fall for another "occasion" buy. But the real money is in attracting users for the first time, getting those who use the app for free to spend their first dollar on Logos and to intrigue the mass of "base-package-only" users to buy individual resources through the website.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
NB.Mick said:
Of course, Logos wants to inspire the Logos-addicted bibliophile to once again blow their budget and fall for another "occasion" buy. But the real money is in attracting users for the first time, getting those who use the app for free to spend their first dollar on Logos and to intrigue the mass of "base-package-only" users to buy individual resources through the website.
I seem to recall I heard Bob say once that the vast majority of their customers buy once (a base package or a single resource or collection at a trade show or something) and then never come back for more. They would really like to change this pattern. Is it because the users have simple needs and are satisfied with what they've got (that's what all advertising is about: convince people they need more when perhaps they don't really "need" it), or are they overwhelmed with what they've got and aren't getting as much out of it as they could (get them to come visit the forums and learn the product better: only a tiny fraction of customers has ever dropped by the forums), or maybe they don't even know there's anything more available than the base package (that's some of what the advertising in the home page is supposed to address, but maybe it's not working), or are they not using the product at all after being thoroughly disappointed with it (probably a certain percentage), or are they simply financially strapped and can't afford to buy anything more (also probably a certain percentage). Or maybe they are resistant to marketing as a matter of principle but secretly really wish they had the Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament and a few other books....
Anyway, we Logos-addicted bibliophiles who hang out here on the forums egging each other on are in the minority. We could each buy up everything in the Logos catalog that we might ever want, and we still wouldn't address Logos's ultimate need to sell more products to stay in business. So yeah, they're going to have to try some new creative strategies to get more new customers and get more of their customers to be repeat customers. I'm not sure March Madness is going to reach out to that wider audience, but with social networking, maybe it will...
That's why I've spent some time documenting all the books in Logos that are by faculty from my seminary, and I've spread the word on our alumni group on Facebook.
0 -
I promise I did not do this, but from the looks of things I think it would be relatively easy to write a script to vote continuously for particular authors. There is no enforcement against double voting except for cookies, and when you write a program to do the job for you, it doesn't care about cookies. It also wouldn't be difficult to write it so that the script didn't blatantly show that it was there in the background. A strategy might be to vote for 'your guy' when he's behind and catch him up to the competitor with the intention of putting in a few votes at the end to put him over the top.
I hope Logos users aren't doing this, but it only takes one to crash the party.
0 -
David Carter said:
Now that is something we can agree upon. Without tipping my hand on points I disagree on, here are my observations on recent Logos sales techniques:
- Last year Logos brought on-board a talent named Stephen Smith to harness the power of social media thereby expanding exposure to Logos products. Although Stephen has moved on to a more exciting profession of blowing things up, he left behind some obviously well-trained people who continue his legacy of high-profile social networking.
- The "Daily Deals" on both Twitter and Vyrso are designed for behaviour modification. I never used Twitter until Logos "required" it. I now check it every weekday. The free books on Vyrso have me returning daily to a site I thought I would have no use for. I have actually purchased a few titles and intend to buy more.
- The various theme-related sales may garner hard-core fans but I believe most participants are just looking for a good deal. The fun is in securing the bargain price. I have heard of the tourist who tried to pay the merchant's asking price only to be told by the merchant he must barter before settling on a sale's price. If we did not have all the colourful sales think how quiet the forums would be. Sales are necessary to generate excitement.
- Rosie is correct that it is not the "bibliophiles" that keep Logos afloat. Bob Pritchett recently said the new generation of mobile device users has become the largest demographic of Logos customers. If we "bibliophiles" want to continue to feed our addiction for more resources we must accommodate the bread-&-butter crowd that want more apps.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0
