Talk:Pogo.com
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Dispute between FixIt2000 and Monsieurbandwidth on the history of Pogo.com
Regarding the actions of the person removing details from the history: Is there a reason to remove the founder's and other individual contributor's info, rather than making it more rich and complete? FixIt2000 22:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)FixIt2000
Wikipedia is a forum for relevant facts told from a NPOV. The founders of Planet Optigon were no longer a part of the company when the T E Network, Inc. project that became Pogo.com was discussed and spawned. If we were going to list the people who were instrumental in creating Pogo.com, we would list the members of the core strategy group (Jack Heistand, Erick Hachenburg, David King, William Lipa, Greg Harper, and Lesley Mansford), Michael Riccio from WebDeck, and all the team members who first built the "Excite Games by TEN" web service. Listing the founders of Planet Optigon and stating that "initial elements came from Planet Optigon" is absurd. The initial games were from WebDeck. The initial matchmaking and community features, were available commercially in Outland and in proprietary online services, such as America Online and GEnie. Monsieurbandwidth 07:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
IsPlanet Optigon started working on Total Entertainment Network in 1991, and launched it nationally in 1994. The web based casual game (not then called "Pogo") project was discussed prior to the formation of TE Network, as well as periodically after. The move to get out of the hardcore gaming space towards the end of '96 and early '97. There was internal research into creating a web based client already. The decision to use WebDeck came later, as it was a easier path than the internal attempts at development. The team you mentioned was built by Daniel Goldman, CEO of TEN until he brought in Jack Heistand. The initial ~$24M was raised by Daniel Goldman. As no one was privy to all the discussions between board members, executive teams, and founders, it is hard to tell the complete list of who was working to what ends when. As Daniel Goldman was the CEO from 1991 to 1996, and chairman through mid-1997, and since he was lobbying for "Excite Games by TEN" and "Yahoo Games by TEN" since late 1996, and TEN had been working on "AOL Games by TEN" since 1995, the history I have entered is supported by available facts. Greg Harper spearheaded bringing in Erick, who was key to the long term success of Pogo. I realize you may not have been privy to the discussion. Vinod Khosla was a big proponent of getting a web based front end as well, the partnership with Excite and AOL. I can't speak to what Lesley or Jack contributed to the process. I know Erick and Greg were the backbone of the company and I cannot overestimate their contributions. Greg Harper had been a key shaper of Total Entertainment Network since the Planet Optigon days, and Erick did a very solid job both as a business development partner for Greg and as CEO through challenging times. David and William were the technical backbone of the company, and always key strategic thinkers. Janice and Daniel had already launched "TEN" with casual games, matching, email, support for Descent, a version of SimCity, et al before the KP investment or Outland involvement. Dr. Cat and Amanda Dee had already created the casual games the network had at launch. Greg Harper, Chris Tolkildson, Tahd Frentzel, Janice Linden-Reed, Sukhbir Siddhu, Marvin Plettner, Darek Lloyd Pendleton, Gino Antone, Amanda Dee, Dr. Cat, Jody Raznik, Jon Zimman built TEN at Planet Optigon with Daniel Goldman before Outland joined. When Outland joined, the 5 member executive team was joined by David King as CTO. Daniel Goldman was CEO/Chairman when the leadership team at Optigon and TE Network were built. Jon Zimman wrote the business plan with the Planet Optigon team, which includes the "vision" of Pogo, but was written in 1994. These facts can be verified. It can also be verified that Pogo.com launched in 1999, after Jack left and two years after Daniel left. That all being said, giving more insight into the decision to move to casual games from your vantage point would add to the history, not detract from it, and would add value to the article. Details on the strategic deliberations you mention of which you have first hand knowledge and documentation would be enlightening.
I will try to incorporate your suggestion that we move the pre-Pogo.com history to the Total Entertainment Network page. FixIt2000 17:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)FixIt2000
I'm not sure how to best handle the "edit war" regarding the history of Pogo. My perspective is that the history of POGO is not complete without including the people who started the company. If Steve Jobs had not come back to Apple, he still would have been the co-founder, and that is relevant to the history of Apple. If you review the information regarding Optigon and Outland, TEN, you see it is relevant to Pogo. You may not view the people involved with a company as relevant to the company's history, but it is an important part of the narrative that allows us to better understand history. Pogo is not just the creation of the corporation EA - it is the creation of people. MB's perspective seems to be that Pogo is not related to Optigon/Outland/TEN, and that information about individuals related to a company do not belong in the history of the company. There is ample information available from press releases, news articles, and independent websites (some are referenced from the Total Entertainment Networkpage) to support the path from Optigon to Pogo, and the information regarding the people mentioned. Any advise from experienced Wikipedia editors on how to best resolve this issue? My preference is to entice MB to include more information on the people who were key to Pogo's direction through the sale to EA and it's current incarnation. FixIt2000 22:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)FixIt2000
The predecessor company to Pogo.com should be mentioned in this article and that Wikipedia page should include its predecessor companies until eventually the founders are mentioned, if relevant. Just mentioning two founders of one predecessor company, especially two who never worked on Pogo.com, is ridiculous and not consistent with the Wikipedia policy to maintain a NPOV. It's also not interesting or relevant to tabulate the list of founders from companies who merged or were acquired to eventually form Pogo.com. We would need to include the founders from Planet Optigon, Outland, Software Creations, and WebDeck. If we're going to include a history section, let's keep the story interesting and focused on the verifiable facts. Monsieurbandwidth 07:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
24.5.45.109 and FixIt2000 are determined to say that "The initial elements of the Pogo.com service had existed as part of the Optigon Interactive. Optigon was founded by Daniel Goldman and Janice Linden-Reed who launched the Total Entertainment Network in 1994" What are these initial elements? Why is it relevant to the history of Pogo.com? Initial elements of the Pogo.com service can likely be traced to many sources (e.g. all the authors who wrote browser-based Java games and all the online services that offered casual online games like chess and hearts with supporting community features such as matchmaking and ratings). Even other companies that were merged into T E Network, Inc., such as Outland, Software Creations, WebDeck, offered online casual games with supporting online community features. These entries are not consistent with the Wikipedia policy to present relevant facts told from a NPOV. They appear to be attempts at self promotion. It's interesting to note that 24.5.45.109 also added Daniel Goldman's LinkedIn profile to the Daniel Goldman page. Monsieurbandwidth 10:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Offending "initial elements" comment was changed. The crux of the dispute is when a company becomes a new company and its previous history is not relevant. My perspective is that a company fundamentally persists when there is continuity in the management team and/or mission. All of four the VPs and the CEO of Planet Optigon became the VPs and CEO of TE Network. The TEN brand continued. The content licenses started at Optigon with Greg Harper taking the lead continued. The mission was modified to focus more on less casual content. While David King and William Lipa made major contributions to TE Network, there isn't any evidence of anything from Outland or Software Creations that carried forward and informed TE Network or TEN. If there is, that contribution should be specified. All of the departments were run by people from Optigon or new hires (HR and Marketing). There were slow changes with the executive team (Janice Linden-Reed, Jon Zimman, Daniel Goldman, Chris Tolkildson, Jack Heistand, Eric Hachenberg, ...) which is normal for a company as it evolves. Had EA shut down the Pogo.com and launched an unrelated service, the history with Optigon, TEN and Outland would not have made a difference, but this was not the case. FixIt2000FixIt2000
Earlier comments restored. You stated that "my perspective is that ..." Wikipedia is a place for NPOV verfiable facts. You never answered the earlier questions. What were these initial elements? Why are they relevant here? How do we verify this? There is evidence that something from Outland carried on as all the founders from Outland remained with the company and were leaders in the creation of Pogo. Greg Harper was the only leader from Planet Optigon who remained. If you want to tell the story of Planet Optigon then please tell it on the Planet Optigon page. Monsieurbandwidth 17:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Even if I proved to you Optigon had a service called TEN which was a national casual game site with player matching, or that prizes were researched with legal experts on lottery design with Daniel Goldman as CEO, I don't think you'd stop rewriting history. I had already changed the "initial elements" language because it makes better narrative flow, although a better direction might be as you have pointed out, to go into more details regarding Optigon's transformations. Let's keep the history on another page until we settle our disagreement so other people can edit the Pogo.com page without our disagreement adversely effecting them. FixIt2000 17:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)FixIt2000
By removing the "initial elements" language you removed the fact that you were trying to state. It thus appears that your only goal here is to associate Pogo.com with Daniel Goldman and Janice Linden-Reed, the founders of one of the predecessor companies of T E Network, Inc., even though they were no longer a part of the company when pogo.com was started. You're asserting that there were early discussions and a "vision" of what would become Pogo. Unless you were on the executive team of T E Network, Inc. when they changed course and focused on an advertising and distribution-based strategy, how would you know if this is true and they considered any of these early visions, even if they existed. Where's the verifiable fact here? I'm all for seeing the history of Planet Optigon, Outland, Software Creations, WebDeck, Pogo.com told, but it should be done in the appropriate place and according to the Wikipedia guidelines of including verifiable relevant facts told from a NPOV. Monsieurbandwidth 21:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Take a look at the history and let me know which facts are not accurate. I would be happy to add that Daniel Goldman and Janice Linden-Reed left in 1997 if that would address what your fundamental concern seems to be. You can check in with Daniel Goldman, Vinod Khosla, Greg Harper, David King, Erick Hachenberg or Jack Heistand with regards to when the discussion with AOL began, or when the research into prizes began. If you were part of the discussions in the company, consult your old email or board decks. That being said, I believe it is all publicly verifiable facts right now. FixIt2000 21:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)FixIt2000
- I agree with the approach to divide the history into sections. Each section should then contribute to the appropriate Wikipedia page. I don't see why discussions with AOL or research into prizes matters, even if they occurred. Virtually all Internet content companies wanted distribution via AOL and there were many online games available that offered prizes before Pogo.com ever offered them. Let's get the publicly verifiable facts referenced appropriately and maintain a NPOV. Monsieurbandwidth 07:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Third party view
I am glad to see that this is being discussed on a talk page, but sorry that the edit war seems to be continuing alongside this discussion. Can I ask both of you to pause your editing of the article for a bit, and particularly to stop reverting, and discuss further. I will try to help if I can. i am an experienced wikipedia editor (and admin) but not at all knowledgeable on this specific topic (although i am a computer professional). Perhaps in explaining your views to me you can make them clearer to each other as well, and come to some agreement or compromise. DES (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking in and offering to help. I think we can really use it. Monsieurbandwidth 21:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestions
I just added a sentence about how only Club Pogo users get to use animated smileys. It should be noted that Club Pogo members get to earn rank badges within games, engage in 2 challenges per week, with an option for a personal challenge weekly of previously offered badges since they began being offered in July 2003. A very important element of this are pogo exclusive games, such as Poppit!, Squelchies, etc. What about the release of Pogo Island? This article is lacking much, due to a dispute between two people. This is an encyclopedia for everyone, and I become disheartened when thinking possible Pogo members may look at this site and not be as informed as they could possibly be. I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but I do have a lot of editting experience (Plus I've been a club pogo member for 3+ years). Any suggestions? WiiAlbanyGirl 03:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I really think the Club Pogo section is weakly written, and many additions can be added to this in order to make it substantially descriptive of the benefits of Club Pogo, while being objective. If no one has any adversities to this within the next 5 days, I am going to overhaul it. WiiAlbanyGirl 19:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Is the .com necessary?
For the sake of the page name, I think it should stay, but in the article itself, I don't think it's necessary as it is usually referred to as simply "Pogo" without the .com part. When people visit the article page, they'll be able to figure out that the address is pogo.com. --David7581 04:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
agreed 153.104.120.150 20:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] List of Games
Do you think I should make a seperate article entitled "List of Pogo.com Games" and have all of the games listed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaron122894 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
We had a list of games before (see this old rev), although it appears to make the article long and doesn't add much substance. That is, there are no articles on any specific games themselves, so anyone looking into the article won't get a feel for what they are other than an alphabetized list. My recommendation is to just get rid of the list entirely as it's not really that notable. Any thoughts? --Chikinsawsage 04:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
There was a list on here before, but it's not really notable, so I removed it. I would have removed this one earlier, but for sme reason I didn't notice it was there. Dengarde ► Complaints 04:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
