Other features round-up
by matt - September 25th, 2008
Lacy covered the biggest change, about which I’m sure y’all will have plenty to talk about. Try to keep that discussion there. I’ll cover the best of the rest in this post.
Comments
There are now comments on each project, right on the Namethis site. In the past there’ve been lots of discussion on the blog regarding names, whose came first, which are good and bad, etc. We thought it made sense to move those discussions straight into the projects themselves. There’s now a toggle in the upper right side of the page to switch between the names view and the comments view. Keep it civil, keep it fun, keep with the Namethis spirit. Hopefully this will foster an even tighter community of namers or voters.
Variable Rewards
Another super-exciting addition to Namethis is the ability for clients to increase the reward to the community. Every project now shows the exact cash splits for winning names for all three place. Projects with increased rewards will display with a blue plus (plus means even better!). Because we needed to change the algorithm to scale to various amounts, the initial split is slightly different for $99 projects. We hope you’ll agree that the chance to make even more money outweighs any negatives from a different split at $99. And to the clients, our namers are the best around, I think they deserve greater rewards!
Full Archive (w/ stats)
In the past once a project fell off the home page, it disappeared forever. Now you can go back and look at all the projects that have ever been run, complete with winners, your stakes in your invested-in names, and neat graphs and information (like what times of the day do names get suggested). There’s also some summary leaderboards at the top of the page and I’m hoping we can add lots more information (ideas?) as time goes by.
Experience Points
Lacy got into this a bit in his post as well, so in a rare attempt at using less words instead of more, I’ll leave you to read more there. Suffice to say, experience points are the equivalent of rewarded watts that never go away. They’ll be used to track who’s our most successful community member behind Troy … *grin*
One extra note on experience points, I’d love to hear from the community on different ways we can integrate this into the site (for now they’re only available after each name in the list, blind submissions have been disabled). We have some thoughts, but we didn’t want to unleash unfettered wholesale upheaval without at least culling your creative craniums. This is a community where we come together to find the best ideas, after all. So you tell us, how should we use our shiny new XP?
Analytics
For the most part (speaking for myself) when I write these blog entries, I address them to our community of namers and voters, and not to our clients. I know there’s probably a lot of overlap and I’m guessing a lot of you namers will someday need things named for yourself, as well. This next feature is just for the clients, though.
Clients, wouldn’t it be awesome if you had deeper information about why and who loved your name? Welcome to analytics. For each name receiving traction, you’ll be able to see the demographic breakdown of its supporters (age, gender, and household income) as well as a tag cloud of their capabilities/interests, and the velocity of voting in the name (Did the name come late with a lot of support? Was it early and support ebbed as more names were added?). If anyone wants to see a demo of the information, its available from the start a project page. Reasons for this feature? Well, it’s cool and the graphs are kick-ass, but for a concrete example of when it comes in handy, our own Stacy “Mean to Stef” Prince …
Keep-in-touch with Projects
We’ve also given the client the chance to send one message to all participants in the naming (voters and namers) so they can update those interested on their progress. One of the consistent messages we’ve heard from the community is a desire to find out what’s happened to some of the products and services that have been named. We’re hoping that clients will take advantage and keep-in-touch. Balancing a desire to fix that problem with a strong understanding of privacy, these messages are on-site, not directly to your email. If you’re so configured, you’ll hear that you have a new Kluster message, whereupon you can jump into the discussion, and even partipate in an entire thread as opposed to being the recipient of a one-way message.
I hope you guys enjoy these changes. I know they’ve been a long time coming and you’ve been anxiously awaiting them. In the future, we’re going to try to bite off smaller chunks. A lot of other factors kinda came together to make this a bigger release then we had originally intended. The other good news is that we’ve layed the groundwork for even more exciting features to come. I can’t wait to hear how you think we can take advantage of the new experience points for an even better experience. And while I don’t want to pre-empt any later announcement, there was one big feature that didn’t make this release we have 95% done in our back pockets, that I know you’ll love. As soon as we can find a partner befitting the excellence of our community, we’ll be able to launch that feature, as well.
Longest blog post ever …
With sparkling tulip love,
comments
our sites
recent comments
- nicolas Acosta: How can I change my password, I had my mac stolen and it had my password saved!!!!!! I would really appreciate any help as soon
- Brad: 5. The NameThis website is in dire need of a FAQ, and probably a forum as well. I have had a hell of
- Brad: 4. In regards to duplicates, I agree with others that this creates a bit of a problem. If the winners were solely determined
- Brad: 3. I've read a bit about the 'blind submissions' and I'm guessing that this is a feature that has subsequently been removed? Like
- Brad: 2. I think users should be able to make edits to their proposed name if necessary. One option could be to allow the user
It was a long wait, but i think it was worth it with everything you guys have done !
More Power to you guys xD
Two of my friends have said that they have been trying to add names without success? What’s up?
Yup. Every time I try to add a name it never shows up on the page, but it is in the ticker and doesn’t allow me to post the name again (duplicate). Username: ryan@ryanmerket.com
Exactly the same thing happened to me. The first time it looks like it’s gonna post it, but it doesn’t show up. The second time, it says the title is taken… Username: celeste.lindahl@gmail.com
I see that there’s a problem … tracking it down now.
Did refreshing work ?
and you have a limit of submitting names for a certain time period
Use Ctrl-F to find your name instead…if not maybe come back after a few minutes
All fixed … names are still there, they just weren’t showing up on the page. Sorry for the problems, should be all set now.
I’ve been trying to post something on the Entepreneurs Get Aways project but when I click on it there’s only a picture (of you? - I guessed) and the project’s gone. Is it closed? What happened?
By the way awesome changes, although I don’t really understand the use of the experience points with the names on the lists.
D’oh…. from 4 hours…. the timers are counting, but no access to the projects
Same here…though the picture of ben..and someone ? kinda made it funny xD i even took a screenshot for memory sakes xD
Fixed. Sorry guys. When I fixed something else, I broke this. Should be stable now.
Will you be adding the hours of downtime back to our project or is that our loss?
Very nice work, Kluster team!
I appreciate the effort you put into namethis. The changes came just in the right moment.
I am not really sure if the fixed rating system will emerge as something good but I am excited.
But where is the blind submission system gone? I smell the same doubts and questions on project wins as before …
I’ll be happy to give you an additional couple of hours Jesse.
@martin now that users all users have limited votes per project, unlike being able to accumulate watts, we don’t feel like there’s the same danger. we’ll see after a few of these projects close with the new system. I didn’t like how the blind submissions were keeping people from being able to connect on the site.
@matt I appreciate it! I’m getting a lot more submissions now. Starting to get really excited to see the results!
Do we still gain experience points when we invite other people in ? because over the last few weeks, there are issues that some people are not getting watts for their invites and it still says that you will earn 1000 watts when you refer.
you get xp despite what the site says. We’ll fix the explanation page asap.
@all/Kluster,
a few thoughts regarding the revamped NameThis:
- i think it would be much better if the comments section was viewable on the same page as all the names instead of having to toggle back and forth because i feel that this would make the comments/threads a more prominent and accessible feature. the comments could be either added to the bottom or the top of the names page.
- i know different ideas have been thrown around about getting client feedback regarding the top names chosen, which name they actually chose, etc. etc. well i think one thing that would be nice to see/hear from the client’s perspective is feedback on the quality/likability of the top 3 names that were decided. this could be done in the form of a simple scale with criteria such as “way off”, “off”, “ok”, “close”, “right on” or some other related terminology. it would be interesting and helpful to the community to know whether our efforts were meeting the client’s needs, especially since now the names are decided by a “popularity vote” and not by the “magic algorithm”.
- i agree with others in the NameThis community that there ought to be some more or some sort of “logic” built into the system to prevent names that obviously do not meet the client’s requirements from winning. whether this means filters that prevent names from initially being entered or an additional algorithm that sifts through the submitted names to eliminate those that names that clearly defy the client’s requirements. i say this because for a few reasons. it not only shortchanges the clients, but it also screws over those users who submitted valid names and then watch names that aren’t qualified go on to win.
- as well, i agree that the comments needs to be given either more weight or more prominence in the voting requirements or algorithm because often it takes some questions to the client to fully reveal what they are after since most clients do not fully explain what is required for their name. and yes this important information from the client often doesn’t arise until late in the projects existence which frequently means that previously submitted names no longer meet the client’s desires. anyways i just think something needs to be done to address this problem. perhaps the project submission form that the client fills out needs to be more robust or detailed as this may help solve a lot of the ambiguity that users face when trying to decipher what type of name a client is seeking.
- i say many of these things and offer many of these suggestions because the community of users as a whole do not fully take the time to read the project prompts, research qualified names or blatantly disregard the client’s requirements when it comes to a name. the client’s rely on bona fide results from the NameThis community and i think they deserve nothing less, especially those that are willing to offer substantially more money for names than we were previously used to. all this is in hopes of developing a reliable platform for generating excellent names.
other than that i like many of the new features in NameThis and i look forward to see how the results turn out in due time. thanks for reading my latest two cents.
@ Troy
1.) I agree but a simple highlight is okay
2.) Hmmm that would be totally cool to try, since we can grow as a community when we get feedback from the clients. I am not sure if it would have some weight or if should be done during the naming. I think it should be after.
I do suggest a “4th” prize or special prize a client gives because I am pretty sure that clients will not necessarily just choose one of the top 3 but consider everything. So I think a special prize would be nice.
Since namethis is just an initial step, I am taking up Marketing 103 and once you get a name you have to pass it through Focus Groups so Namethis gives clients a list that they can start with. Choosing a name is hard as well.
3.) The Algorithm banning certain words is a good idea but then again, people never know what they want hahaha
4.) Yes more information is better.
I suggest :
Unique Gimmick that they would be having
if they Require a URL
The environment they are in
I am just building on troy’s comments
Nice comments btw Troy
@ Troy — I agree with you wholeheartedly that it would be better to have the comments linked to the individual names, if possible. Although I’m still not sure how it would work on any but our own entries: I mean who wants to write “this doesn’t fit the criteria” on someone else’s entry? It doesn’t seem sporting, somehow, if we’re also posting names ourselves. That’s why a moderator would be nice. (Hey, maybe we could take turns moderating…some pro bono work. LOL.)
Lack of client feedback does seem to be a problem. Jesse posted that he didn’t like the names he was getting for his project, but I didn’t see that until I just happened to check the comment section late in the game. I got the sense he was wanting a name with an imbedded url (lifestrea.me), but I wasn’t sure. I like Troy’s idea of a client submission form. Imagine if every client gave us three names s/he liked? “Some of my favorite names are…” would help us. If the client liked Ben&Jerry’s, Lord&Taylor, and Abercrombie&Fitch, the result would be very different than that of the client who liked snapfish, flickr, and comeget.me. It might also be handy to hear “Some of my least favorite names are…” And, as discussed, if the client adds something crucial in response to questions (”Hey, I just realized I don’t want ‘buzz’ in the name”), it would be wonderful if we were alerted, maybe in color?
Onward and upward.
@ Troy + Matthew: 3.) It is already possible to ban certain words the client wants to exclude from names. That works just fine. Problem is though that the clients seem not to know what they do not want before starting the project. Maybe it would be an option to let them edit that list of words to exclude while to project is already running. Changes in that list would of course need to be indicated, so the community sees what is going on. Also names that had already been submitted but are including these words could be marked red as “not suitable”.
Take the Private Equity Investment Management Company project as an example. The client saw the results and wanted to exclude ‘private equity’, ‘company’, ‘capital’, ‘equity’.
@ Martin,
Which exactly why i said that people don’t really know what they are looking for. On the one hand by banning certain words we keep in line with what the client wants but on the other hand, it discriminates against names that can actually be acceptable if not the best.
hmmm I think a client voice can work here… example, the client can see the votes on certain names. then he can posts to certain names a tag such as…”please not this name” , “hmmm meh, but if you say so”. “I love this name, this maybe the perfect one..what do you guys think ?” or “Our competitor has this name already/ using this name”. this could work but then again it adds bias to the names ><
I think it should not be possible for clients to give positive votings on suggested names, so the votings do not get influenced. Otherwise the names could not be labelled “community-approved” anymore.
I agree with you regarding objective(!) negative votings. But I think the possibility to edit the list of words to exclude while a project is running would be enough for that.
@ Martin.
The thing is that, no matter what the community says, the client is still the one who would still decide whether or not to use the name.
I am currently taking up marketing subjects and names should go through Focus Group Discussion, and even for a small company, they would still ask their friends what they think of the name. But most important of all, the client should love their own brand / company name, and that nobody can tell them.
giving the client an option to join the naming process would give them a chance to get that “Eureka” moment and/or help them decided between two names they want. So people keep giving out names, till the client finds one that they love because without a client interaction once we think of a good name we won’t add anymore, but if we know that the clients has found “the name” we can keep adding more thus producing more value for their money.
@Matthew: It is in my opinion not the purpose of namethis to find the ultimate name that has to be in the gusto of the client. The claim is that the names are certified by a consumer community. So if the client does not like the names suggested he will maybe have to reconsider. At least it will give him new ideas and inspiration.
That is, of course, the ideal case.
But I think some of the projects recently completed had very very poor names. For example the “commercial real estate company” got names that are really shallow and characterless. Also the winner had “realty” in its name although the client stated: “I would like to try and have a name that does no corner me into only one niche as I want to have the opportunity to diversify into other areas of commercial real estate.”
@ Martin,
I believe that you are right that namethis is not to find the ultimate name, but the closer we can get to it, the more value we would give the clients and thus attract more clients.
Yes there were a lot of poor names, which is why a sort of flagging is needed…
What about having a level of ratings that a client can edit. Just like in the private clusters.
Example
Uniqueness Rating = 2
Satisfaction = 3
or something like that, where the client could gauge what is going on the project, so that as namers we can keep checking back if ever the client is happy with the selection or not, so we can keep on adding.
What is happening is that people would arrive and place a name, vote and leave. If we could get them back again and again to think of better names or vote for better names.
Another system is a shoutbox for the client. ..like
Level 1 - I”m not happy with the selection as of now
Level 2 - Meh…..if you say so
Level 3 - I’m excited to see what you guys are conjuring up !!!
Level 4 - OMG !! I Can’t choose between some of those amazing names !!!
Level 5 - you guys are so cool !!
or something like that.
in the end we need to give better value because by giving better value are we able to attract more clients and make more members of the community active
@ Martin and Matthew — As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, we seem to have kind of a zeitgeist in our own microcommunity (where we trend through prefixes and suffixes, for example) that may not reflect the real world to the extent the client would like. So I think Matthew’s shoutbox idea is very cool. I still think having the client tag 10-20 names as “names of interest” or names that “just aren’t what we’re looking for” would help us know what direction was working for him/her. You could even have the tags disappear in the last 1/4 of the project (when many people place their votes).
I also think it would be nice to have some of the actual financial rewards going to the name the client likes (if any), giving us more incentive to do the thing by him/her (right now we don’t really need to think about the client too much; more each other).
@stacy
I think the tag of “interest” or “disinterest” can again bias against good names, just the “disinterest” ..or a “NO WAY CAN WE USE THIS NAME” tag would be better, than an “I think this name could work” tag. and yes I agree that we are thinking too much about each other than the client.
What about veto powers for the client. I am assuming the analytics ben is talking about is real-time …so if the client doesn’t want the 1st name or even all the winning names, the client can veto it out and all the votes return to the person and they are messaged at a certain investment was vetoed. Of course we can go democratic where if 70% of people voted for it, then it cannot be vetoed. We can play with those rules.
That could be an alternative for the 4th prize.
It says “sentinel ass” on the main page. Ha.
@ Dave — Every time I was trying to come up with a new entry for the asset management project I kept coming up with “Ass Man.” I guess that’s one way to market oneself!
Feature Request: a name filter !
I think a message like “Similar name already registered by..”. And there is an option : “Continue” and “Cancel, create a new name”.