7 Binary Options – 99Binary Kritik

My name is Betty Curtis and I’m an Agent /Business Broker in Promdish Company. We deal on Binary option trade. Let’s connect and I can tell you how to trade with 99% guarantee.

My name is Betty Curtis and I’m an Agent /Business Broker in Promdish Company. We deal on Binary option trade. Let’s connect and I can tell you how to trade with 99% guarantee. submitted by Betty-Cutrtis to u/Betty-Cutrtis [link] [comments]

vfxalert Binary Options Signal 99% Winning | IQ option Trading 2020

vfxalert Binary Options Signal 99% Winning | IQ option Trading 2020 submitted by SuccessTrading to u/SuccessTrading [link] [comments]

Binary Options Cheat!!! Always Win 99%

Binary Options Cheat!!! Always Win 99% submitted by ultimatefxtools to u/ultimatefxtools [link] [comments]

10-22 16:24 - 'To iterate: I don't buy your binary premise that there is only two options (either only the Europeans are to blame or only the Africans are to blame). I did not appeal to my authority, I did not say something was tr...' by /u/LateInTheAfternoon removed from /r/history within 99-109min

'''
To iterate: I don't buy your binary premise that there is only two options (either only the Europeans are to blame or only the Africans are to blame). I did not appeal to my authority, I did not say something was true just because I said so. In fact, I only acknowledged a discrepancy between what the two of us know (a discrepancy which admittedly only might exist for that precise region and that precise time frame for all I know) and detailed why I had chosen those specific words and what I intended to convey by them. This is not appeal to authority! I have to conclude that you're a troll and that we're done here. If you want to quibble about literal meanings of words at the expense of the larger picture, refuse to answer questions when asked, and to assume everyone shares your binary way of looking on things then you'll have to find someone else to engage with. As for "my"
theory for why Africans (including warlords who reigned supreme while not ruling) didn't do anything to help slavery except when forced to by evil Europeans
this is the most inane mischaracterisation of my arguments I have ever seen, and I will as a reminder state my real theory opinion which I have argumented for in this whole thread:
There's plenty of blame to go around and both European agents and African leaders and collaborators will be the targets. However, generally speaking and over a long time, more blame is to be apportioned to Europeans and less blame is to be apportioned to Africans, because of the different situations these people could act as moral agents. When, for instance, you consider what motivated the different actors you'll find it is easier to criticize the Europeans because of the greed that drove them and their disrespect for local authority, costums and law, than it is to criticize the African elites and communities which found themselves in a situation of societies and trade networks crumbling around them and was motivated to a lesser extent by greed and more by self preservation, which in many cases (directly or indirectly) dictated the necessity of them to collaborate.
There you have my real opinion and not your bad representation of it. And please take note of the words "many", "most", "to a larger degree", because by using them I'm negating all claims of "all", "every" and "entirely". We're done here, have a good day.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: LateInTheAfternoon
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Liked on YouTube: learn binary options - learn how to win every trade - 99.99% win - binary options

Liked on YouTube: learn binary options - learn how to win every trade - 99.99% win - binary options submitted by TradingStrategys to TopTradingStrategys [link] [comments]

No gods, no kings, only NOPE - or divining the future with options flows. [Part 2: A Random Walk and Price Decoherence]

tl;dr -
1) Stock prices move continuously because different market participants end up having different ideas of the future value of a stock.
2) This difference in valuations is part of the reason we have volatility.
3) IV crush happens as a consequence of future possibilities being extinguished at a binary catalyst like earnings very rapidly, as opposed to the normal slow way.
I promise I'm getting to the good parts, but I'm also writing these as a guidebook which I can use later so people never have to talk to me again.
In this part I'm going to start veering a bit into the speculation territory (e.g. ideas I believe or have investigated, but aren't necessary well known) but I'm going to make sure those sections are properly marked as speculative (and you can feel free to ignore/dismiss them). Marked as [Lily's Speculation].
As some commenters have pointed out in prior posts, I do not have formal training in mathematical finance/finance (my background is computer science, discrete math, and biology), so often times I may use terms that I've invented which have analogous/existing terms (e.g. the law of surprise is actually the first law of asset pricing applied to derivatives under risk neutral measure, but I didn't know that until I read the papers later). If I mention something wrong, please do feel free to either PM me (not chat) or post a comment, and we can discuss/I can correct it! As always, buyer beware.
This is the first section also where you do need to be familiar with the topics I've previously discussed, which I'll add links to shortly (my previous posts:
1) https://www.reddit.com/thecorporation/comments/jck2q6/no_gods_no_kings_only_nope_or_divining_the_future/
2) https://www.reddit.com/thecorporation/comments/jbzzq4/why_options_trading_sucks_or_the_law_of_surprise/
---
A Random Walk Down Bankruptcy
A lot of us have probably seen the term random walk, maybe in the context of A Random Walk Down Wall Street, which seems like a great book I'll add to my list of things to read once I figure out how to control my ADD. It seems obvious, then, what a random walk means - when something is moving, it basically means that the next move is random. So if my stock price is $1 and I can move in $0.01 increments, if the stock price is truly randomly walking, there should be roughly a 50% chance it moves up in the next second (to $1.01) or down (to $0.99).
If you've traded for more than a hot minute, this concept should seem obvious, because especially on the intraday, it usually isn't clear why price moves the way it does (despite what chartists want to believe, and I'm sure a ton of people in the comments will tell me why fettucini lines and Batman doji tell them things). For a simple example, we can look at SPY's chart from Friday, Oct 16, 2020:

https://preview.redd.it/jgg3kup9dpt51.png?width=1368&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf8e08402ccef20832c96203126b60c23277ccc2
I'm sure again 7 different people can tell me 7 different things about why the chart shape looks the way it does, or how if I delve deeply enough into it I can find out which man I'm going to marry in 2024, but to a rationalist it isn't exactly apparent at why SPY's price declined from 349 to ~348.5 at around 12:30 PM, or why it picked up until about 3 PM and then went into precipitous decline (although I do have theories why it declined EOD, but that's for another post).
An extremely clever or bored reader from my previous posts could say, "Is this the price formation you mentioned in the law of surprise post?" and the answer is yes. If we relate it back to the individual buyer or seller, we can explain the concept of a stock price's random walk as such:
Most market participants have an idea of an asset's true value (an idealized concept of what an asset is actually worth), which they can derive using models or possibly enough brain damage. However, an asset's value at any given time is not worth one value (usually*), but a spectrum of possible values, usually representing what the asset should be worth in the future. A naive way we can represent this without delving into to much math (because let's face it, most of us fucking hate math) is:
Current value of an asset = sum over all (future possible value multiplied by the likelihood of that value)
In actuality, most models aren't that simple, but it does generalize to a ton of more complicated models which you need more than 7th grade math to understand (Black-Scholes, DCF, blah blah blah).
While in many cases the first term - future possible value - is well defined (Tesla is worth exactly $420.69 billion in 2021, and maybe we all can agree on that by looking at car sales and Musk tweets), where it gets more interesting is the second term - the likelihood of that value occurring. [In actuality, the price of a stock for instance is way more complicated, because a stock can be sold at any point in the future (versus in my example, just the value in 2021), and needs to account for all values of Tesla at any given point in the future.]
How do we estimate the second term - the likelihood of that value occurring? For this class, it actually doesn't matter, because the key concept is this idea: even with all market participants having the same information, we do anticipate that every participant will have a slightly different view of future likelihoods. Why is that? There's many reasons. Some participants may undervalue risk (aka WSB FD/yolos) and therefore weight probabilities of gaining lots of money much more heavily than going bankrupt. Some participants may have alternative data which improves their understanding of what the future values should be, therefore letting them see opportunity. Some participants might overvalue liquidity, and just want to GTFO and thereby accept a haircut on their asset's value to quickly unload it (especially in markets with low liquidity). Some participants may just be yoloing and not even know what Fastly does before putting their account all in weekly puts (god bless you).
In the end, it doesn't matter either the why, but the what: because of these diverging interpretations, over time, we can expect the price of an asset to drift from the current value even with no new information added. In most cases, the calculations that market participants use (which I will, as a Lily-ism, call the future expected payoff function, or FEPF) ends up being quite similar in aggregate, and this is why asset prices likely tend to move slightly up and down for no reason (or rather, this is one interpretation of why).
At this point, I expect the 20% of you who know what I'm talking about or have a finance background to say, "Oh but blah blah efficient market hypothesis contradicts random walk blah blah blah" and you're correct, but it also legitimately doesn't matter here. In the long run, stock prices are clearly not a random walk, because a stock's value is obviously tied to the company's fundamentals (knock on wood I don't regret saying this in the 2020s). However, intraday, in the absence of new, public information, it becomes a close enough approximation.
Also, some of you might wonder what happens when the future expected payoff function (FEPF) I mentioned before ends up wildly diverging for a stock between participants. This could happen because all of us try to short Nikola because it's quite obviously a joke (so our FEPF for Nikola could, let's say, be 0), while the 20 or so remaining bagholders at NikolaCorporation decide that their FEPF of Nikola is $10,000,000 a share). One of the interesting things which intuitively makes sense, is for nearly all stocks, the amount of divergence among market participants in their FEPF increases substantially as you get farther into the future.
This intuitively makes sense, even if you've already quit trying to understand what I'm saying. It's quite easy to say, if at 12:51 PM SPY is worth 350.21 that likely at 12:52 PM SPY will be worth 350.10 or 350.30 in all likelihood. Obviously there are cases this doesn't hold, but more likely than not, prices tend to follow each other, and don't gap up/down hard intraday. However, what if I asked you - given SPY is worth 350.21 at 12:51 PM today, what will it be worth in 2022?
Many people will then try to half ass some DD about interest rates and Trump fleeing to Ecuador to value SPY at 150, while others will assume bull markets will continue indefinitely and SPY will obviously be 7000 by then. The truth is -- no one actually knows, because if you did, you wouldn't be reading a reddit post on this at 2 AM in your jammies.
In fact, if you could somehow figure out the FEPF of all market participants at any given time, assuming no new information occurs, you should be able to roughly predict the true value of an asset infinitely far into the future (hint: this doesn't exactly hold, but again don't @ me).
Now if you do have a finance background, I expect gears will have clicked for some of you, and you may see strong analogies between the FEPF divergence I mentioned, and a concept we're all at least partially familiar with - volatility.
Volatility and Price Decoherence ("IV Crush")
Volatility, just like the Greeks, isn't exactly a real thing. Most of us have some familiarity with implied volatility on options, mostly when we get IV crushed the first time and realize we just lost $3000 on Tesla calls.
If we assume that the current price should represent the weighted likelihoods of all future prices (the random walk), volatility implies the following two things:
  1. Volatility reflects the uncertainty of the current price
  2. Volatility reflects the uncertainty of the future price for every point in the future where the asset has value (up to expiry for options)
[Ignore this section if you aren't pedantic] There's obviously more complex mathematics, because I'm sure some of you will argue in the comments that IV doesn't go up monotonically as option expiry date goes longer and longer into the future, and you're correct (this is because asset pricing reflects drift rate and other factors, as well as certain assets like the VIX end up having cost of carry).
Volatility in options is interesting as well, because in actuality, it isn't something that can be exactly computed -- it arises as a plug between the idealized value of an option (the modeled price) and the real, market value of an option (the spot price). Additionally, because the makeup of market participants in an asset's market changes over time, and new information also comes in (thereby increasing likelihood of some possibilities and reducing it for others), volatility does not remain constant over time, either.
Conceptually, volatility also is pretty easy to understand. But what about our friend, IV crush? I'm sure some of you have bought options to play events, the most common one being earnings reports, which happen quarterly for every company due to regulations. For the more savvy, you might know of expected move, which is a calculation that uses the volatility (and therefore price) increase of at-the-money options about a month out to calculate how much the options market forecasts the underlying stock price to move as a response to ER.
Binary Catalyst Events and Price Decoherence
Remember what I said about price formation being a gradual, continuous process? In the face of special circumstances, in particularly binary catalyst events - events where the outcome is one of two choices, good (1) or bad (0) - the gradual part gets thrown out the window. Earnings in particular is a common and notable case of a binary event, because the price will go down (assuming the company did not meet the market's expectations) or up (assuming the company exceeded the market's expectations) (it will rarely stay flat, so I'm not going to address that case).
Earnings especially is interesting, because unlike other catalytic events, they're pre-scheduled (so the whole market expects them at a certain date/time) and usually have publicly released pre-estimations (guidance, analyst predictions). This separates them from other binary catalysts (e.g. FSLY dipping 30% on guidance update) because the market has ample time to anticipate the event, and participants therefore have time to speculate and hedge on the event.
In most binary catalyst events, we see rapid fluctuations in price, usually called a gap up or gap down, which is caused by participants rapidly intaking new information and changing their FEPF accordingly. This is for the most part an anticipated adjustment to the FEPF based on the expectation that earnings is a Very Big Deal (TM), and is the reason why volatility and therefore option premiums increase so dramatically before earnings.
What makes earnings so interesting in particular is the dramatic effect it can have on all market participants FEPF, as opposed to let's say a Trump tweet, or more people dying of coronavirus. In lots of cases, especially the FEPF of the short term (3-6 months) rapidly changes in response to updated guidance about a company, causing large portions of the future possibility spectrum to rapidly and spectacularly go to zero. In an instant, your Tesla 10/30 800Cs go from "some value" to "not worth the electrons they're printed on".
[Lily's Speculation] This phenomena, I like to call price decoherence, mostly as an analogy to quantum mechanical processes which produce similar results (the collapse of a wavefunction on observation). Price decoherence occurs at a widespread but minor scale continuously, which we normally call price formation (and explains portions of the random walk derivation explained above), but hits a special limit in the face of binary catalyst events, as in an instant rapid portions of the future expected payoff function are extinguished, versus a more gradual process which occurs over time (as an option nears expiration).
Price decoherence, mathematically, ends up being a more generalizable case of the phenomenon we all love to hate - IV crush. Price decoherence during earnings collapses the future expected payoff function of a ticker, leading large portions of the option chain to be effectively worthless (IV crush). It has interesting implications, especially in the case of hedged option sellers, our dear Market Makers. This is because given the expectation that they maintain delta-gamma neutral, and now many of the options they have written are now worthless and have 0 delta, what do they now have to do?
They have to unwind.
[/Lily's Speculation]
- Lily
submitted by the_lilypad to thecorporation [link] [comments]

# /r/Peloton Pre-TDF Survey 2020

Gentlemen, Ladies and those otherwise addressed - we know you've been waiting for a good thing, and the survey results are finally ready!
The answers were collected from you all during August 2020 with 1428 unique replies. That's a participation of 0.5% of all subscribers! That's really not too bad, when you keep in mind how popular these kind of surveys are. But we here at /peloton want to show you that this is all about presenting the information in the subreddit to cater better to our audience!
Updated after a few hours to include some more historical data the final edit that for some reason wasn't copied properly
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2018 Mar 2018 Aug 2019 2020
Results 2013-06-12 2014-06-25 2015-08-07 2016-11-17 2018-03-06 2018-08-20 2019-07-22 2020-10-12
Replies 351 598 1395 892 630 928 986 1428
Without further ado, let's get cracking on the response

You and Cycling

1. Where do you live?

Country 2015 2016 2018 Mar 2018 Aug 2019 2020
USA 32% 28.3% 22.84% 25.32% 20.23% 24.59%
UK 18.6% 17.6% 14.70% 20.13% 15.48% 14.80%
Netherlands 6.4% 9.4% 11.50% 11.58% 10.01% 11.01%
Germany 3.73% 3.4% 4.95% 6.39% 7.84% 6.65%
Denmark 3.9% 3.6% 4.31% 3.79% 7.64% 5.79%
Belgium 3.8% 2.7% 8.15% 3.57% 5.78% 5.36%
France 2.01% 1.08% 2.88% 2.27% 5.26% 3.50%
Canada 4.9% 7% 6.39% 4.22% 4.95% 4.50%
Australia 5.2% 4.7% 3.83% 4.00% 4.33% 3.93%
Slovenia 0.73% 0.32% 1.30% 1.14% 2.14%
Norway 2.58% 1.8% 1.60% 1.95% 2.58% 1.86%
Sweden 1.08% 1.09% 1.44% 1.41% 1.75% 1.43%
Ireland 1.00% 1.09% 1.44% 1.19% 0.72% 1.36%
Portugal 1.65% 1.8% 2.40% 1.52% 1.34% 1.14%
Italy 1.45% 1.44% 0.65% 1.03% 1.07%
Largely the same picture as ever, with the US leading the way, the UK in second and then a sliding scale of Europeans countries. Slovenia continues to pick its way up the pile for obvious reasons!
World Map to demonstrate

2. What's your age?

u17 17-19 20-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-50 51+ Total
2015 2.22% 12.04% 41.51% 24.66% 10.68% 4.87% 2.94% 1.08% 1395
2016 1.5% 8.9% 40.8% 24% 12% 5.4% 5.2% 2% 887
2018 Mar 1% 7.1% 33.5% 27.4% 16.2% 7% 5.7% 2.1% 617
2018 Aug 1.7% 9% 33.9% 26.4% 15.5% 7% 5% 1.5% 905
2019 1.5% 6.6% 33.2% 27.5% 16.4% 7.1% 5.8% 2% 972
2020 1.3% 6.8% 31.7% 28% 16.6% 7.2% 5% 2.5% 1420
Pretty much the same as last year, with the usual reddit demographics of majority 20 somethings dominating.

3. What's your gender?

'13 '14 '15 '16 '18 (1) '18 (2) '19 '20
Male 97.2% 97% 94.9% 93.4% 93.3% 93.6% 95.1% 94.9%
Female 2.8% 2.7% 4.8% 5.3% 5.3% 5.4% 3.7% 4.8%
Other - 0.33% 0.29% 0.78% 0.76% - -
Non-Binary - - - - 0.64% 0.99% 1.2% 0.4%
More normality here for reddit.

4. How much of the men's season do you watch/follow?

Type March '18 (%) August '18 (%) 2019 (%) 2020 (%)
Grand Tours 84.7 92.0 90.2 87.3
Monuments 79.1 74.9 79 75.9
WT Stage races 67.4 62.4 70.5 71.7
WT One day races 73.3 59.8 62.3 60.7
Non WT Stage races 32.6 16.7 17.4 25
Non WT One day races 34.8 13.7 17.4 20.7
Literally everything I can consume 35.9 18.1 21.1 27.1
Whilst GT following may be down (somehow), all the lower level stuff is up, which makes sense considering how desperate we have been for any racing during the season shutdown.

5. Do you maintain an interest in women's professional road racing?

Do you maintain an interest in women's professional road racing? '19 '20
Yes 49.8 49.2
No 50.2 50.8
Still very much a half/half interest in women's cycling on the subreddit.

6. How much of the women's season do you follow?

The following is true for the half of you that follows womens cycling.
How Much %
Just the biggest televised events 63.15%
Most of the live televised/delayed coverage stuff 29.08%
All televised racing 5.09%
Down to .Pro & beyond 2.69%

7. How long have you been watching cycling?

How Long %
Under a year 2,95%
1-3 years 19,50%
4-6 years 19,85%
7-9 years 14,10%
10-12 years 13,81%
13-15 years 7,15%
15-20 years 10,73%
20-25 years 6,17%
25 years + 5,75%
Simplified the years a little this time, but whilst we have a fair number of newbies, most people have picked the sport up since around 2013/14.

Sporting Favourites

8. Do you have like/dislike feelings about WT teams?

Once more, 14.4% of people really don't have feelings on the subject.
Of those that do:
AG2R Astana Bahrain Bora CCC Cofidis Quick-Step EF FDJ
Like 352 213 127 770 156 116 847 724 423
Meh 775 620 773 415 889 896 310 448 700
Dislike 52 356 263 31 112 141 71 37 53
Karma 300 -143 -70 739 44 -25 776 677 370
Israel Lotto Michelton Movistar NTT Ineos Jumbo Sunweb Trek UAE
Like 135 364 517 231 101 304 925 279 383 118
Meh 740 764 626 646 931 414 282 805 765 734
Dislike 302 40 52 326 121 562 53 97 42 331
Karma -167 324 465 -95 -20 -258 872 182 341 -213
So, the most popular team this year is Jumbo-Visma, followed by Quick-Step & Bora-hansgrohe. Least popular are Ineos & UAE.
As per usual, no one cares about NTT & CCC, with nearly 81% of users rating NTT as meh. Pretty damning stuff.
Lastly, we have the usual historical comparison of how teams have fared over time, normalised to respondents to that question on the survey.
Things to note then, firstly that the Astana redemption arc is over, seeing them back in the negative, maybe Fulgsangs spring issues helped aid that? The petrodollar teams of UAE & Bahrain are stubbornly negative too, with Israel keeping up the Katusha negative streak. Meanwhile, at the top end, EF & Jumbo go from strength to strength, whilst some others like Sunweb are sliding over time - their transfer policies no doubt helping that.

10. Do you ride a bike regularly?

Answer 2018Mar 2018Aug 2019 2020
For fun 61.5% 63.4% 59.9% 62.9%
For fitness 59.3% 59.6% 54.8% 59.8%
For commuting 46% 46% 45.6% 40%
For racing 20.6% 20.6% 15.9% 17.7%
No, I don't 14.2% 12.9% 14.8% 13.6%
Still a fairly small group of racers out of all of us

11. Out of the sports you practice, is cycling your favourite?

Yes No
58,29% 41,71%
A new addition to the survey prompted by a good point last time, just over half of us rate cycling as the favourite sport we actually do.

12. What other sports do you follow?

Sport #
Association Football / Soccer 50.78%
Formula 1 35.81%
American Football 26.27%
Basketball 22.46%
Track & Field 17.58%
Esports (yes, this includes DotA) 17.30%
Rugby 14.27%
Skiing 14.12%
Ice Hockey 13.63%
Baseball 12.15%
Motorsports (Not including F1) 10.59%
Cricket 10.52%
Tennis 9.53%
Chess 8.97%
Triathlon 8.69%
Biathlon 8.12%
Snooker 7.06%
Golf 6.92%
Swimming 6.85%
Ski Jumping 6.78%
Climbing 5.72%
Martial Arts 5.65%
Handball 5.44%
Darts 5.01%
Speed Skating 5.01%
Football always tops the charts, and Formula 1 continues to rank extremely highly among our userbase. Those who have a little following below 5% include Sailing, Fencing, Surfing, Boxing & Ultra-Running.
Other cycling disciplines
Sport #
Cyclocross 22.10%
Track Cycling 14.34%
MTB 8.97%
BMX 1.20%

13. Out of the sports you follow, is cycling your favourite sport?

Yes No
61.79% 38,21%
Good. Makes sense if you hang out here.

Subreddit stats

14. How often do you participate in a /Peloton Race Thread whilst watching a race?

2015 2016 2018Mar 2018Aug 2019 2020
I always participate in Race Threads during races 2.8% 2% 2.2% 4% 2.5% 3%
I follow Race Threads during races 41.7% 36.7% 38.1% 42.1% 42.5% 38.9%
I often participate in Race Threads during races 16.8% 19% 16.5% 18.9% 15.2% 13%
I rarely/never participate in Race Threads during races 38.7% 41.3% 43.1% 35% 39.8% 45.1%
Slightly less invested than before, reverting back to an older trade.

15. How do you watch Races?

Method 2018Mar 2018Aug 2019 2020
Pirate Streams 62% 46.5% 50.2% 47.9%
Free Local TV 55.7% 64.5% 59.6% 53.9%
Desperately scrabbling for Youtube highlights 37.9% 30.2% 28.2% 24.9%
Paid Streaming services 32.3% 35.4% 38.3% 46.3%
Year on year, paid streaming services go up - the increasing availability of live content legally continues to improve, and so do the numbers on the survey.

16. Where else do you follow races live (in addition to watching them)?

Type 2018Mar 2018Aug 2019 2020
/Peloton race threads 86.2% 83.4% 80.2% 76.9%
Twitter 30.5% 34.7% 33.3% 38.3%
PCS Liveticker - - 30.2% 32%
Official tracker (if available) 24%
The Cyclingnews liveticker 26% 23.5% 21.5% 18.9%
Sporza (site/ticker) 1.89% 9.5% 10.8% 10.8%
NOS Liveblog - 6.8% 7% 9.2%
Steephill 0.52% 13.5% 10.2% 8.2%
/Peloton discord 6.5% 5.4% 7.5% 7.2%
Other cycling forums 15.1% 8.1% 7.6% 7%
feltet.dk - 2.2% 5.4% 5.2%
Facebook 3.8% 5.4% 4% 4.2%
BBC Ticker - 3.5% 2.1% 4.1%
DirectVelo - 1.3% 1.6% 1.8%
Non Cycling Forums - 1.3% 1.2% 1.2%
/cyc/ - 1.3% 1% 0.6%
/peloton IRC ~0 0.8% 0.4% 0.5%
The PCS liveticker continues to have a strong following, whilst the cyclingnews ticker slowly slides into less usage over time.

17. Do you use /Peloton mostly in classic reddit or redesign when on the desktop?

Type 2018 Aug 2019 2020
Classic 75.1% 67.2% 46.2%
Redesign 24.9% 32.8% 53.8%
Time to abandon ship. The end has come.

18. With what version of reddit do you browse the sub?

Version 2019 2020
Official App 17.9 31.1
Desktop Classic 37.8 25.8
3rd Party App 18.3 17.2
Mobile Web 12.4 14.7
Desktop Redesign 13.7 11.2
Phone browsing is very much in vogue.

19. How did you find the sub?

How %
Through other forms of reddit, f.e. /bicycling 48.33%
Too long - can't remember 38.65%
Google search 9,11%
My friend told me 2,28%
I wanted to talk about my exercise bike 0.78%
Twitter 0.5%
Lantern Rouge Youtube 0.28%

Other bits and bobs

20. Did you think back in March we would see any more racing this year?

Yes No
52,81% 47,19%
Despite the threat, we have seen racing again

21. Will we manage to fulfill the rest of the UCI calendar without further Covid-19 issues postponing more races?

Yes No
25.3% 74.7%
Sorry to you 25%, Amstel, Roubaix & a bunch of other races have falled foul of COVID-19 related cancellations.

22. When did you become aware of Alexander Foliforov?

When %
Before the 2016 Giro 3,25%
22nd May, 2016 15,55%
On /pelotonmemes in 2020 21,13%
Who? 60,07%
If you didn't know of the man, watching him demolish the Giro field in 2016 on the stage 15 ITT should help to gain understanding

23. Who will win the 2020 Tour de France?

Rider %
Roglic 52,12%
Bernal 16,57%
Pinot 9,24%
Dumoulin 7,9%
N.Quintana 2,82%
Pogacar 1,41%
Richie Porte 0,35%
We can safely say that most of us were wrong about this one.
That's not a lot of confidence in Richie Porte either, the man who was to finish on the third spot of the podium. Alexander Foliforov (0,23%) had just a tiny number of votes less, and that man wasn't even in the race.

24. What for you was the defining cycling moment of the previous decade?

We had a lot of brilliant suggestions, but these were the clear five favourites when we tabulated the results.
Honorable mentions go to the Giro 2018, which had Tom Dumoulin winning, and of almost identical fascination to many of you - Tom Dumoulin going on someones porta-potty in the middle of the stage.
Little bit of recency bias perhaps, but that's better than ignoring that this was for the last decade and firmly insisting Tom Boonens 2005 WC win was the biggest thing. Special shoutout to almost all the Danes present in /peloton who voted for Mads Pedersens WC win last year. It's an understandable reaction.

25. Any suggestions for the Survey?

New Questions
We promise to feature one of these suggestions in the next survey
Suggestions
We will try to implement this. But it will also skew results.
About the Survey
The subscribers are torn on Women's cycling, nearly a 50/50 split there as the survey showed - The moderators at /peloton are firmly in the "more cycling is better" basket, and we will continue to get as good coverage of womens cycling as possible.
Are you trying to give the moderators PTSD? Because this is how you give the moderators PTSD.

26. Any suggestions for the sub?

ALSJFLKAJSLDKJAØLSJKD:M:CSAM)=#/()=#=/")¤=/)! - Your moderator seems to be out of function. Please stand by while we find you a new moderator
The Weekly threads are great for these types of questions, where several people can contribute and build up once it is understood which information is relevant.
Our experience is that "limited" will never be so, if we're going to moderate it fairly. Moderating is not a popularity contest, but believe it or not, we're actually trying to be as fair as possible. and for that, we need rules that are not subjective. Unless you have a stationary exercise bike.
All of these are good suggestions, but remember that all of you can also contribute - The mods are sometimes stretched thin, specially in the middle of hectic race schedules. It's easier if one of you has a way to contact a rider or a person of interest and can facilitate the initial communication.
We've worked on this! The Official Standard is now as follows: [Race Thread] 202x Race Name – Stage X (Class)
This sounds as a nice community project for the after-season, and hopefully many of you subscribers can contribute.
Come with suggestions on how to tidy it up!
We have chastised all the mods. They are now perfectly trained in gender-neutral pronouns. Be well, fellow being.
If we can implement this for hard liquor, you know we will.
The spoiler rule is one that is discussed frequently - in general - some users absolutely hate it, but a majority love it. Perhaps we'll include a question in the next survey to see how this divide is exactly.
We actually do - whenever there is a matter of life or death, we think public information is more important than a spoiler rule. But at the same time, we try to collect all the different posts into one main thread, so to keep things focused and letting very speculative posts meet with hard evidence from other sources.
This is a tough ask of the internet. While we can agree that voting should be done accordingly to what insights they bring, not subjective opinions, it is very hard to turn that type of thinking around. We can ask of you, our subscribers, that you please think twice about hitting that downvote button, and only do so because of you think a post is factually incorrect, not because it differs with your own subjective opinion.
That's the primary analysis of the survey! Feel free to contribute with how you experience things here!
submitted by PelotonMod to peloton [link] [comments]

Pi-hole for Windows, now even easier to set up

Pi-hole for Windows, now even easier to set up
PH4WSL1.cmd (Pi-hole for Windows)
This script performs an automated install of Pi-hole 5 on Windows 10 (version 1809 and newer) / Windows Server 2019 (Standard or Core). No Linux, virtualization, or container expertise required.
If you have an issue installing PH4WSL1.cmd please don't bother the Pi-hole developers. Your best option is to open an issue on the GitHub page.
Copy PH4WSL1.cmd to your computer and "Run as Administrator"
If you don't have Windows up to date, Pi-hole installer will throw an "Unsupported OS" error midway through the installation, see below for required update KB. Uninstall Pi-hole, update your machine and try again
  • Enables WSL1 and downloads Ubuntu 20.04 from Microsoft
  • Installs and Configures distro, downloads and executes Pi-hole installer
  • Creates a /etc/pihole/setupVars.conf file for an automated install
  • Adds exceptions to Windows Firewall for DNS and Pi-hole admin page
  • Includes a Scheduled Task Pi-hole_Task.cmd to allow auto-start at boot, before logon. Edit the task, under General tab check Run whether user is logged on or not and Hidden and (if needed) in the Conditions tab uncheck Start the task only if the computer is on AC power
Requires the recent (August/Sept 2020) WSL update for Windows 10:
  • 1809 - KB4571748
  • 1909 - KB4566116
  • 2004 - KB4571756
Additional Info:
  • DHCP Server is disabled
  • To reset or reconfigure Pi-Hole, run Pi-hole_Reconfigure.cmd in the Pi-hole install folder
  • To uninstall Pi-Hole, run Pi-hole_Uninstall.cmd in the Pi-hole install folder
Below is a console dump and (trimmed) screenshot of the install procedure:
Pi-hole for WSL --------------- Location of 'Pi-hole' folder [Default = C:\Program Files] Response: Pi-hole listener IP and subnet in CIDR format, ie: 192.168.1.99/24 Response: 10.74.0.253/24 Port for Pi-hole. Port 80 is good if you don't have a webserver, or hit enter for default [8880]: Response: 80 Install to: C:\Program Files\Pi-hole Network: 10.74.0.253/24 Port: 80 Fetching LxRunOffline... Installing distro... Configuring distro, this can take a few minutes... Extracting templates from packages: 100% [✓] Root user check .;;,. .ccccc:,. :cccclll:. ..,, :ccccclll. ;ooodc 'ccll:;ll .oooodc .;cll.;;looo:. .. ','. .',,,,,,'. .',,,,,,,,,,. .',,,,,,,,,,,,.... ....''',,,,,,,'....... ......... .... ......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ......... .... ......... ........,,,,,,,'...... ....',,,,,,,,,,,,. .',,,,,,,,,'. .',,,,,,'. ..'''. [✓] Update local cache of available packages [i] Existing PHP installation detected : PHP version 7.4.3 [i] Performing unattended setup, no whiptail dialogs will be displayed [✓] Disk space check [✗] Checking apt-get for upgraded packages Kernel update detected. If the install fails, please reboot and try again [i] Installer Dependency checks... [✓] Checking for dhcpcd5 [✓] Checking for git [✓] Checking for iproute2 [✓] Checking for whiptail [✓] Checking for dnsutils [✓] Supported OS detected [i] SELinux not detected [✗] Check for existing repository in /etc/.pihole [i] Clone https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole.git into /etc/.pihole...HEAD is now at 6b536b7 Merge pull request #3564 from pi-hole/release/v5.1.2 [✓] Clone https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole.git into /etc/.pihole [✗] Check for existing repository in /vawww/html/admin [i] Clone https://github.com/pi-hole/AdminLTE.git into /vawww/html/admin...HEAD is now at a03d1bd Merge pull request #1498 from pi-hole/release/v5.1.1 [✓] Clone https://github.com/pi-hole/AdminLTE.git into /vawww/html/admin [✓] Enabling lighttpd service to start on reboot... [✓] Creating user 'pihole' [i] FTL Checks... [✓] Detected x86_64 architecture [i] Checking for existing FTL binary... [✓] Downloading and Installing FTL [✓] Installing scripts from /etc/.pihole [i] Installing configs from /etc/.pihole... [✓] No dnsmasq.conf found... restoring default dnsmasq.conf... [✓] Copying 01-pihole.conf to /etc/dnsmasq.d/01-pihole.conf [✓] Preparing new gravity database [i] Target: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/mastehosts [✓] Status: Retrieval successful [i] Received 56949 domains [i] Target: https://mirror1.malwaredomains.com/files/justdomains [✓] Status: Retrieval successful [i] Received 26854 domains [✓] DNS service is running [✓] Pi-hole blocking is Enabled [i] Web Interface password: EPDvXZPh [i] This can be changed using 'pihole -a -p' [i] View the web interface at http://pi.hole/admin or http://10.74.0.253/admin [i] You may now configure your devices to use the Pi-hole as their DNS server [i] Pi-hole DNS (IPv4): 10.74.0.253 [i] If you set a new IP address, please restart the server running the Pi-hole [i] The install log is located at: /etc/pihole/install.log Installation Complete! Web Interface Admin Enter New Password (Blank for no password): [✓] Password Removed SUCCESS: The scheduled task "Pi-hole for WSL" has successfully been created. SUCCESS: Attempted to run the scheduled task "Pi-hole for WSL". Wait for Pi-hole launcher window to close and Press any key to continue . . . Pi-hole for WSL Installed to C:\Program Files\Pi-hole 
Expected installer output (truncated screen shot)
Pi-hole-Reconfigure.cmd
Pi-hole running alongside your Windows apps. It can run on a Windows PC with just one CPU core and 1GB RAM.
submitted by desktopecho to pihole [link] [comments]

[Fanatical] 25th Anniversary Sale Day 4 (Includes GUILTY GEAR XX ACCENT CORE PLUS R (-81%), Learn Japanese to Survive Complete Pack (-93%), F1 2020 Deluxe Schumacher Edition (-50%), Space Crew (-20%), Human: Fall Flat 4 Pack (-79%), BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle - Basic Edition (-53%) & More)

Hi Reddit, Day 4 of our 25th Anniversary celebration brings more games and DLC on sale! Join our party and enjoy big savings today.
Plus, with every basket over $4.99 you will get to spin to win with huge prizes to be won. Including spending sprees, free games and PC gaming accessories. You can find more information about this in our blog post.
You can also learn all about Focus Multimedia’s history with this overview of the company.
TOP DEALS OF DAY 4
Title DRM Fanatical Discount USD GBP EUR
Abyss Odyssey Steam 81% $2.84 £2.08 €2.84
Aliens vs. Predator - Collection Steam 81% $4.55 £3.03 €4.17
Aliens: Colonial Marines Collection Steam 81% $5.69 £4.74 €5.69
Bayonetta Steam 77% $4.59 £3.44 €4.59
Binary Domain Collection Steam 81% $3.03 £2.08 €3.03
BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle - Basic Edition Steam 53% $14.09 £14.09 €16.44
Castle of Illusion Steam 77% $3.44 £2.29 €2.98
Catherine Classic Steam 54% $9.19 £6.89 €9.19
Chicken Police Steam 20% $15.99 £14.39 €15.99
Citizens of Earth Steam 72% $4.19 £2.79 €3.35
Citizens of Space Steam 68% $4.79 £3.83 €4.79
Company of Heroes 2 Steam 77% $4.59 £3.44 €4.59
Company of Heroes Complete Pack Steam 81% $7.02 £3.79 €4.74
Company of Heroes Franchise Edition Steam 77% $16.09 £11.49 €16.09
Condemned: Criminal Origins Steam 77% $3.43 £2.29 €2.29
Crazy Taxi Steam 85% $1.19 £0.83 €1.19
Dawn of War II: Retribution - The Last Stand Steam 77% $2.29 £1.60 €2.29
DiRT Rally 2.0 Steam 77% $9.19 £5.74 €7.81
DiRT Rally 2.0 Super Deluxe Edition Steam 77% $13.79 £10.34 €12.64
Dreamcast Collection Steam 85% $4.49 £2.99 €4.49
Dungeon of the Endless - Crystal Edition Steam 77% $4.36 £3.21 €4.36
Endless Legend - Collection Steam 15% $92.48 £71.51 €92.48
Endless Space 2 - Awakening Steam 54% $5.97 £5.05 €5.97
F1 2020 Steam 50% $29.99 £22.49 €27.49
F1 2020 - Deluxe Schumacher Edition Steam 50% $34.99 £27.49 €32.49
For The King Steam 67% $6.59 £5.11 €6.59
For The King 2 Pack Steam 44% $21.99 £16.99 €21.99
For The King 3 Pack Steam 54% $26.99 £20.89 €26.99
Gas Guzzlers Extreme Gold Pack Steam 82% $6.29 £4.85 €5.75
GUILTY GEAR XX ACCENT CORE PLUS R Steam 81% $2.84 £2.08 €2.84
GUILTY GEAR Xrd -REVELATOR- (+DLC Characters) + REV 2 All-in-One (does not include optional DLCs) Steam 81% $8.54 £5.69 €7.97
Hell Yeah! Wrath of the Dead Rabbit Collection Steam 77% $4.48 £2.98 €3.79
Hotshot Racing Steam 35% $12.99 £10.39 €12.99
Human: Fall Flat Steam 67% $4.94 £3.95 €4.94
Human: Fall Flat 2 Pack Steam 63% $10.99 £8.79 €10.99
Human: Fall Flat 4 Pack Steam 79% $12.49 £9.99 €12.49
Jet Set Radio Steam 85% $1.19 £0.83 €1.19
KILL la KILL Steam 53% $9.39 £8.45 €9.39
King of Retail Steam 25% $13.49 £10.49 €11.24
Learn Japanese to Survive Complete Pack Steam 93% $2.99 £2.09 €2.78
Offworld Trading Company - Ultimate Edition Steam 73% $27.69 £20.95 €27.29
Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire - Obsidian Edition Steam 55% $26.99 £20.24 €26.99
Puyo Puyo Champions Steam 54% $4.59 £3.67 €4.59
Puyo Puyo Tetris Steam 45% $10.99 £8.24 €10.99
Renegade Ops Collection Steam 80% $3.39 £2.19 €2.99
Rising Storm 2: VIETNAM Steam 67% $8.24 £6.26 €7.58
Rock of Ages Steam 77% $2.29 £1.60 €2.29
Rock of Ages 2: Bigger & Boulder Steam 77% $3.44 £2.52 €3.44
SEGA Bass Fishing Steam 85% $1.19 £0.83 €1.19
SEGA Mega Drive & Genesis Classics Bundle Steam 70% $8.99 £7.49 €8.99
Shenmue I & II Steam 77% $6.89 £5.74 €8.04
Shining Resonance Refrain Steam 68% $9.59 £7.99 €9.59
SolSeraph Steam 68% $4.79 £3.83 €4.79
Sonic & SEGA All-Stars Racing Steam 77% $2.29 £1.14 €2.29
Sonic Adventure DX Steam 85% $1.19 £0.83 €1.19
Sonic Forces Steam 77% $9.19 £8.04 €9.19
Sonic Generations Collection Steam 77% $4.59 £3.44 €4.59
Sonic Lost World Steam 77% $6.89 £4.59 €6.89
Sonic Mania Steam 77% $4.59 £3.44 €4.59
Sonic Mania - Encore DLC Steam 52% $2.39 £1.91 €2.39
Sonic the Hedgehog 4 - Episode I Steam 77% $2.29 £1.37 €1.60
Sonic the Hedgehog 4 - Episode II Steam 77% $2.29 £1.37 €1.60
Space Crew Steam 20% $15.99 £14.39 €15.99
SpellForce 3: Fallen God Steam 10% $22.49 £19.56 €22.49
Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz HD Steam 54% $13.79 £11.49 €13.79
TEMBO THE BADASS ELEPHANT Steam 75% $3.74 £2.49 €3.24
The Banner Saga 3 Steam 55% $11.24 £8.43 €11.24
The Club Steam 85% $2.24 £1.49 €1.49
The Political Machine 2020 Steam 18% $12.29 £9.33 €12.29
Two Point Hospital Steam 72% $9.79 £6.99 €9.79
Two Point Hospital: Bigfoot Steam 52% $4.31 £3.35 €4.31
Two Point Hospital: Close Encounters Steam 52% $4.31 £3.35 €4.31
Two Point Hospital: Off The Grid Steam 35% $5.84 £4.54 €5.84
Two Point Hospital: Pebberley Island Steam 52% $4.31 £3.35 €4.31
UNDER NIGHT IN-BIRTH Exe:Late Steam 81% $5.69 £4.36 €5.31
Valkyria Chronicles Steam 70% $5.99 £4.49 €5.99
Valkyria Chronicles 4 Complete Edition Steam 70% $14.99 £11.99 €14.99
Vanquish Steam 77% $4.59 £3.44 €4.59
Warhammer 40,000 : Dawn of War Franchise Collection Steam 77% $32.19 £22.99 €31.50
Warhammer 40,000 Dawn of War III Steam 77% $9.19 £6.89 €9.19
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War - Master Collection Steam 77% $8.73 £6.89 €8.96
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II - Grand Master Collection Steam 77% $18.39 £12.64 €16.09
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II - Master Collection Steam 77% $12.64 £9.19 €12.64
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II - Retribution - Complete DLC Collection Steam 77% $12.64 £8.73 €11.03
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II: Retribution Steam 77% $6.89 £4.59 €6.89
Warhammer 40,000: Kill Team Steam 77% $2.29 £1.60 €2.29
Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine Steam 77% $6.89 £4.59 €4.59
Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine Collection Steam 77% $13.79 £9.19 €9.88
Warhammer® 40,000: Dawn of War® II Steam 77% $4.59 £3.44 €4.59
TOP SELLERS OF THE SALE
Title DRM Fanatical Discount USD GBP EUR
Yakuza: Like a Dragon - Day Ichi Edition Steam 18% $49.19 £45.09 €49.19
Yakuza: Like a Dragon - Legendary Hero Edition Steam 18% $73.79 £61.49 €73.79
SpellForce 3 Steam 75% $12.49 £9.99 €12.49
Metro Exodus - Gold Edition Steam 66% $22.09 £18.69 €22.09
The Jackbox Party Pack 7 Steam 15% $25.49 £20.22 €21.24
RESIDENT EVIL 3 Steam 55% $26.99 £22.49 €26.99
Anno® 1800 - Complete Edition Uplay 48% $51.99 £43.67 €51.99
Wreckfest Steam 50% $14.99 £13.37 €14.99
Yakuza: Like a Dragon - Hero Edition Steam 18% $57.39 £53.29 €57.39
Far Cry® 5 Gold Edition + Far Cry® New Dawn Deluxe Edition Bundle Uplay 80% $25.99 £19.99 €23.99
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon® Breakpoint - Ultimate Edition Uplay 76% $28.79 £23.99 €28.79
RimWorld Steam 15% $29.74 £23.62 €25.49
Disgaea 5 Complete Steam 60% $15.99 £11.99 €15.99
Monster Hunter World: Iceborne Master Edition Steam 34% $39.58 £32.99 €39.59
Assassin's Creed Odyssey: Ultimate Edition Uplay 75% $29.99 £23.99 €28.74
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six® Siege - Deluxe Edition Uplay 68% $9.59 £8.31 €9.59
Monster Hunter World: Iceborne Steam 34% $26.39 £23.09 €26.39
Baldur's Gate: The Complete Saga Steam 69% $28.09 £20.65 €22.45
Dead by Daylight Steam 60% $7.99 £5.99 €7.99
The Jackbox Quintpack Steam 50% $64.19 £49.25 €57.75
It wouldn’t be a big event without Killer! Slay that lockdown boredom and grab nine impressive Steam PC games in the brand-new, exclusive Killer Bundle 14! You will also get a spin of the wheel for a chance to get incredible prizes with every $4.99 purchase.
You can check out the Reddit Thread here
Title Genres Reviews Historical Low (USD) Trading Cards Times in Bundle
Peaky Blinders: Mastermind Adventure, Strategy, Indie 74% of 194 Reviews $10.25 No 0
Rec Center Tycoon Indie, Early Access, Simulation, Casual, Strategy 91% of 147 Reviews $8.99 No 1
Project CARS Game of the Year Edition Racing, Simulation, Sports 76% of 7508 Reviews $9.38 Yes 1
Talisman: Origins RPG, Indie, Strategy 83% of 90 Reviews $2.97 No 0
Close to the Sun Indie, Adventure 74% of 175 Reviews $7.50 No 0
Autonauts Indie, Casual, Simulation 90% of 2115 Reviews $4.99 No 1
RollerCoaster Tycoon®: Deluxe Strategy, Simulation 93% of 4109 Reviews $0.99 No 1
Chris Sawyer's Locomotion™ Strategy, Simulation 83% of 322 Reviews $0.99 No 0
Table Manners: Physics-Based Dating Game Simulation 61% of 131 Reviews $7.20 No 1
submitted by WeAreFanatical to GameDeals [link] [comments]

[ Poll results!!] Drag Race Holland Episode 5: 'Snatch Game.'

[ Poll results!!] Drag Race Holland Episode 5: 'Snatch Game.'
So once again I am surprised at your reactions, I expected you to disagree HARD with the judges on this episode, but besides the mini-challenge and the runway most of the answers generally agree with the judges. Though that could also be attributed to it being the top 6 and there's just not enough space to disagree anymore. What are you looking for next week? Who's your personal favourite of the top 5 and what are your views on the gender-binary? I'm looking forward to the discussion below and I'm also looking forward to having some less serious bonus question again haha. See you next sunday with another poll!
We're all born and the rest is drag; who do you think had the best nude photo? / We zijn allemaal naaktgeboren en de rest is drag; wie vindt jij dat de beste naaktfoto had?
1. ChelseaBoy – 263 (34,3%)
2. Envy Peru – 190 (24,8%)
3. Janey Jacké – 121 (15,8%)
4. Ma’Ma Queen – 118 (15,4%)
5. Sederginne – 41 (5,4%)
6. Miss Abby OMG – 33 (4,8%)
Then we headed straight into the snatch game; which queens had the best snatch? / Toen gingen we direct door naar de snatch game; wie gaf jou de beste 'snatch?'
1. ChelseaBoy (Joe Exotic) – 549 (71,7%)
2. Envy Peru (Patty Brard)– 181 (23,6%)
3. No opinion / geen mening – 33 (4,3%)
4. Miss Abby OMG (Michella Kox) – 1 (0,1%)
5. Janey Jacké (Anny Schilder) – 0 (0,0%)
6. Ma’Ma Queen (Ryanne van Dorst) – 0 (0,0%)
7. Sederginne (Mega Mega Mindy) – (0,0%)
Our Tiger King
Dutch exclusive question: Nou jongens, ik heb dit in mijn eigen kringen lopen roepen voordat we wisten dat we een snatchgame zouden krijgen; maar ik vind persoonlijk dat ze 'Ranking the Stars' als format hadden moeten nemen. Het is in vorm een vergelijkbaar spel, en daarnaast heel herkenbaar voor de gewone Nederlander. Wat is jullie mening hier in?
Disclaimer: I’ve left out the percentages in the results of this question as the overwhelming majority (over 600 respondents) is not Dutch (yay international audience!).
1. Ik ben het hier wel mee eens – 48
2. Als het grappiger was geweest dan deze snatch game dan zou ik het er wel mee eens zijn hoor! - 39
3. Ik sta hier neutral in - 28
4. Ik ben Anny Schilder – 28
5. Ik ben het er niet mee eens – 16
For reference this is 'Ranking the Stars,' a program in which Dutch celebs rank eachother comedically based on a humorous prompt. As I asked in this exclusively Dutch question, it's a program which in form and content is similar to Snatch Game but which I think would have worked better for Drag Race Holland.
Category is: 'Split Personality,' which 3 looks made you feel moist in your split? / categorie is: 'Gespleten persoonlijkheid,' welke 3 looks maakten het vocht in je spleetje warm?
· ChelseaBoy – 695 (90,7%)
· Ma’Ma Queen – 672 (87,7%)
· Envy Peru – 552 (72,1%)
· Janey Jacké – 267 (34,9%)
· Miss Abby OMG – 69 (nice (9%))
· Sederginne – 43 (5,6%)
Who would you give your top toot to? wie zou jij je top toet geven?
1. ChelseaBoy – 392 (51,4%)
2. Ma’Ma Queen – 245 (32,2%)
3. Envy Peru – 91 (11,9%)
4. Janey Jacké – 27 (3,5%)
5. Miss Abby OMG – 5 (0,7%)
6. Sederginne – 2 (0,3%)
Our top toot of the week is: ChelseaBoy!
Based on the runway, as well as both challenges; who would you say 'condragulations, you're the winner of this week.' to? / Gebaseerd op de runway en de beide challenges; wie zou jij willen feliciteren met de winst van deze week?
1. ChelseaBoy – 613 (80,3%)
  1. Envy Peru – 139 (18,2%)
  2. Janey Jacké – 5 (0,7%)
  3. Ma’Ma Queen – 5 (0,7%)
  4. Miss Abby OMG – 0 (0,0%)
  5. Sederginne – 0 (0,0%)
Who would you have picked for the bottom two? / wie zou jij hebben laten lipsyncen?
· Miss Abby OMG – 695 (90,7%)
· Sederginne – 671 (87,6%)
· Janey Jacké – 81 (10,6%)
· Ma’Ma Queen – 71 (9,3%)
· Envy Peru – 11 (1,4%)
· ChelseaBoy – 3 (0,4%)
Who lost the lipsync? / wie verloor de lipsync?
1. Sederginne – 297 (39,1%)
2. Miss Abby OMG – 228 (30%)
3. Double Sashay / ze hadden beiden moeten vertrekken – 218 (28,7%)
4. Double Shantay / ze hadden beiden moeten blijven – 17 (2,2%)
Who are your favorite 3 queens thus far? / welke 3 queens zijn tot nu toe je favoriet?
· ChelseaBoy – 709 (92,6%)
· Envy Peru – 651 (85%)
· Ma’Ma Queen – 558 (72,8%)
· Janey Jacké – 302 (39,4%)
· Miss Abby OMG – 78 (10,2%)
who's your personal favorite going into next week? / welke queen uit de top 5 is je persoonlijke favoriet?
Interesting to see how our 2nd most favorite queen gets eliminated.
B-B-B-Bonus question #1 The eliminated queens have announced who they would have done on their respective socials, what snatch did you miss most on the current panel? / De geëlimineerde queens hebben op hun respectievelijke socials bekend gemaakt wie zij voor hun snatchgame zouden hebben gedaan; wie van deze had jij het liefst op het panel gezien?
Considering over 600 respondents weren’t Dutch it’s not very surprising that the top 3 here are the international choices.
1. Patty Pam Pam (option 2: Dame Edna) – 236 (32,6%)
2. Roem Service (Option 2: Miranda Priestly) – 233 (32,2%)
3. Madame Madness (Conchita Wurst) – 99 (13,7%)
4. Patty Pam Pam (option 1: Princess Beatrix) – 81 (11,2%)
5. Roem Service (option 1: Juf Ank) – 55 (7,6%)
6. Megan Schoonbrood (Rachel Hazes) – 20 (2,8%)

Patty's Dame Edna
B-B-B-Bonus question #2 the Judges response to Ma'Ma Queen's explaination for their outfit has sparked some discussion about non-binarity acceptance in the Netherlands; which response suits your opinion on the situation best: / Het jury commentaar op Ma'Ma queens uitleg van hun outfit heeft voor wat discussie gezorgd online over de acceptatie van non-binairiteit in Nederland; welk van de volgende antwoorden past het beste bij jouw mening op het onderwerp?
1. The producers should have brought in judges that are informed on the subjects that matter in the LGBTQ+ community, this is unacceptable on Drag Race. / De producenten hadden ervoor moeten zorgen dat er jury-leden zaten die op de hoogte zijn van de onderwerpen die er toe doen binnen de LHBTIQ+ gemeenschap, dit is niet acceptabel voor Drag Race. – 317 (42,2%)
  1. I think the judges were uninformed on the subject of non-binarity, which speaks to the lack of representation of non-binarity. / Ik denk dat de juryleden van het bestaan van 'non-binair zijn' niet afwisten, en dat zegt wat over de representatie van Non-binaire personen. – 201 (26,7%)
  2. I acknowledge that the producers are fighting to balance the issues on this show to keep it relevant for a mainstream audience, but if they don't want to hit controversy they should not have chosen this category or interpreted it as they did. / Ik begrijp goed dat de producenten alle onderwerpen wikken en wegen om het programma ook toegankelijk te maken voor het gewone publiek, maar als ze geen controverse willen scheppen hadden ze dit onderwerp niet moeten aansnijden of in ieder geval niet zo moeten interpreteren. – 142 (18,9%)
  3. I'm neutral on this subject, but I'm glad a discussion has started. / Ik sta hier neutral in maar ik ben blij dat een discussie op gang komt. – 61 (8,1%)
  4. I'm not informed enough on the subject matter to choose any of these answers. / Ik weet te weinig over dit onderwerp om één van deze antwoorden te kiezen. – 29 (3,9%)
B-B-B-Bonus Question #3: How do you identify? (if your option isn't in the list, choose one of the 'other' options and inform me in the comments of the reddit post on how you identify!) / Hoe identificeer jij jezelf? (als je je niet kunt vinden in de opties in de lijst kies dan een van de 'anders namelijk...' opties en geef het aan in de comments van de reddit post hoe jij je identificeert!)
Disclaimer, I had to change two of the possible answers half way through because the wording of them was bio-essentialist. I referred to 'identifying with your biological sex,' implying that biology plays a part in gender identity while gender is a social construct. instead I was given the tip to change it to 'identifying with the gender you were assigned at birth.' which is a more suitable answer in the context as it leaves biology completely out of the discussion. But because of this change Google forms categorized the changed answers as a different answer so the math of this question could be off as I added up the percentages to create two answers in the end result.
1. I identify myself along the binary and I identify with the gender that was assigned to me at birth (Cis) / Ik identificeer mijzelf langs de binaire verdeling en ik identificeer mij met het geslacht wat mij bij mijn geboorte is toegewezen(Cis.) – 550 (74,8%)
  1. I identify myself along the binary but I'm fluid in my identity (genderfluid) / Ik identificeer mezelf langs de binaire verdeling maar ik ben fluïde in mijn identiteit (gender fluïde) – 55 (7,5%)
  2. I don't identify myself along the binary (non-binary) / Ik identificeer me niet langs de binaire verdeling ( non-binair) – 55 (7,5%)
  3. I don't identify myself along the binary but I don't consider myself non-binary (other...) / Ik identificeer me niet langs de binaire verdeling maar ik identificeer mij ook niet als non-binair (anders namelijk...) – 47 (6,4%)
  4. I identify myself along the binary but I don't identify as any of the other options given (other...) / Ik identificeer me wel langs de binaire verdeling maar ik identificeer me niet als een van de gegeven opties. (anders namelijk...) – 15 (2%)
  5. I identify myself along the binary but I don't identify with the gender I was assigned at birth (Trans) / Ik identificeer mijzelf langs de binaire verdeling maar ik identificeer mij niet met het geslacht dat mij bij mijn geboorte werd toegewezen(Trans). – 7 (1%)
submitted by mythologue to DragRaceHolland [link] [comments]

Subreddit Demographic Survey 2020 : The Results

2020 Childfree Subreddit Survey

1. Introduction

Once a year, this subreddit hosts a survey in order to get to know the community a little bit and in order to answer questions that are frequently asked here. Earlier this summer, several thousand of you participated in the 2020 Subreddit Demographic Survey. Only those participants who meet our wiki definition of being childfree's results were recorded and analysed.
Of these people, multiple areas of your life were reviewed. They are separated as follows:

2. Methodology

Our sample is redditors who saw that we had a survey currently active and were willing to complete the survey. A stickied post was used to advertise the survey to members.

3. Results

The raw data may be found via this link.
7305 people participated in the survey from July 2020 to October 2020. People who did not meet our wiki definition of being childfree were excluded from the survey. The results of 5134 responders, or 70.29% of those surveyed, were collated and analysed below. Percentages are derived from the respondents per question.

General Demographics

Age group

Age group Participants Percentage
18 or younger 309 6.02%
19 to 24 1388 27.05%
25 to 29 1435 27.96%
30 to 34 1089 21.22%
35 to 39 502 9.78%
40 to 44 223 4.35%
45 to 49 81 1.58%
50 to 54 58 1.13%
55 to 59 25 0.49%
60 to 64 13 0.25%
65 to 69 7 0.14%
70 to 74 2 0.04%
82.25% of the sub is under the age of 35.

Gender and Gender Identity

Age group Participants # Percentage
Agender 62 1.21%
Female 3747 73.04%
Male 1148 22.38%
Non-binary 173 3.37%

Sexual Orientation

Sexual Orientation Participants # Percentage
Asexual 379 7.39%
Bisexual 1177 22.93%
Heterosexual 2833 55.20%
Homosexual 264 5.14%
It's fluid 152 2.96%
Other 85 1.66%
Pansexual 242 4.72%

Birth Location

Because the list contains over 120 countries, we'll show the top 20 countries:
Country of birth Participants # Percentage
United States 2775 57.47%
United Kingdom 367 7.60%
Canada 346 7.17%
Australia 173 3.58%
Germany 105 2.17%
Netherlands 67 1.39%
India 63 1.30%
Poland 57 1.18%
France 47 0.97%
New Zealand 42 0.87%
Mexico 40 0.83%
Brazil 40 0.83%
Sweden 38 0.79%
Finland 31 0.64%
South Africa 30 0.62%
Denmark 28 0.58%
China 27 0.56%
Ireland 27 0.56%
Phillipines 24 0.50%
Russia 23 0.48%
90.08% of the participants were born in these countries.
These participants would describe their current city, town or neighborhood as:
Region Participants # Percentage
Rural 705 13.76
Suburban 2661 51.95
Urban 1756 34.28

Ethnicity

Ethnicity Participants # Percentage
African Descent/Black 157 3.07%
American Indian or Alaskan Native 18 0.35%
Arabic/Middle Eastern/Near Eastern 34 0.66%
Bi/Multiracial 300 5.86%
Caucasian/White 3946 77.09%
East Asian 105 2.05%
Hispanic/Latinx 271 5.29%
Indian/South Asian 116 2.27%
Indigenous Australian/Torres Straight IslandeMaori 8 0.16%
Jewish (the ethnicity, not religion) 50 0.98%
Other 32 0.63%
Pacific IslandeMelanesian 4 0.08%
South-East Asian 78 1.52%

Education

Highest Current Level of Education

Highest Current Level of Education Participants # Percentage
Associate's degree 233 4.55%
Bachelor's degree 1846 36.05%
Did not complete elementary school 2 0.04%
Did not complete high school 135 2.64%
Doctorate degree 121 2.36%
Graduated high school / GED 559 10.92%
Master's degree 714 13.95%
Post Doctorate 19 0.37%
Professional degree 107 2.09%
Some college / university 1170 22.85%
Trade / Technical / Vocational training 214 4.18%
Degree (Major) Participants # Percentage
Architecture 23 0.45%
Arts and Humanities 794 15.54%
Business and Economics 422 8.26%
Computer Science 498 9.75%
Education 166 3.25%
Engineering Technology 329 6.44%
I don't have a degree or a major 1028 20.12%
Law 124 2.43%
Life Sciences 295 5.77%
Medicine and Allied Health 352 6.89%
Other 450 8.81%
Physical Sciences 199 3.89%
Social Sciences 430 8.41%

Career and Finances

The top 10 industries our participants are working in are:
Industry Participants # Percentage
Information Technology 317 6.68%
Health Care 311 6.56%
Education - Teaching 209 4.41%
Engineering 203 4.28%
Retail 182 3.84%
Government 172 3.63%
Admin & Clerical 154 3.25%
Restaurant - Food Service 148 3.12%
Customer Service 129 2.72%
Design 127 2.68%
Note that "other", "I'm a student", "currently unemployed" and "I'm out of the work force for health or other reasons" have been disregarded for this part of the evaluation.
Out of the 3729 participants active in the workforce, the majority (1824 or 48.91%) work between 40-50 hours per week with 997 or 26.74% working 30-40 hours weekly. 6.62% work 50 hours or more per week, and 17.73% less than 30 hours.
513 or 10.13% are engaged in managerial responsibilities (ranging from Jr. to Sr. Management).
On a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest), the overwhelming majority (3340 or 70%) indicated that career plays a very important role in their lives, attributing a score of 7 and higher.
1065 participants decided not to disclose their income brackets. The remaining 4,849 are distributed as follows:
Income Participants # Percentage
$0 to $14,999 851 21.37%
$15,000 to $29,999 644 16.17%
$30,000 to $59,999 1331 33.42%
$60,000 to $89,999 673 16.90%
$90,000 to $119,999 253 6.35%
$120,000 to $149,999 114 2.86%
$150,000 to $179,999 51 1.28%
$180,000 to $209,999 25 0.63%
$210,000 to $239,999 9 0.23%
$240,000 to $269,999 10 0.25%
$270,000 to $299,999 7 0.18%
$300,000 or more 15 0.38%
87.85% earn under $90,000 USD a year.
65.82% of our childfree participants do not have a concrete retirement plan (savings, living will).

Religion and Spirituality

Faith Originally Raised In

There were more than 50 options of faith, so we aimed to show the top 10 most chosen beliefs.
Faith Participants # Percentage
Catholicism 1573 30.76%
None (≠ Atheism. Literally, no notion of spirituality or religion in the upbringing) 958 18.73%
Protestantism 920 17.99%
Other 431 8.43%
Atheism 318 6.22%
Agnosticism 254 4.97%
Anglicanism 186 3.64%
Judaism 77 1.51%
Hinduism 75 1.47%
Islam 71 1.39%
This top 10 amounts to 95.01% of the total participants.

Current Faith

There were more than 50 options of faith, so we aimed to show the top 10 most chosen beliefs:
Faith Participants # Percentage
Atheism 1849 36.23%
None (≠ Atheism. Literally, no notion of spirituality or religion currently) 1344 26.33%
Agnosticism 789 15.46%
Other 204 4.00%
Protestantism 159 3.12%
Paganism 131 2.57%
Spiritualism 101 1.98%
Catholicism 96 1.88%
Satanism 92 1.80%
Wicca 66 1.29%
This top 10 amounts to 94.65% of the participants.

Level of Current Religious Practice

Level Participants # Percentage
Wholly seculanon religious 3733 73.73%
Identify with religion, but don't practice strictly 557 11.00%
Lapsed/not serious/in name only 393 7.76%
Observant at home only 199 3.93%
Observant at home. Church/Temple/Mosque/etc. attendance 125 2.47%
Strictly observant, Church/Temple/Mosque/etc. attendance, religious practice/prayeworship impacting daily life 56 1.11%

Effect of Faith over Childfreedom

Figure 1

Effect of Childfreedom over Faith

Figure 2

Romantic and Sexual Life

Current Dating Situation

Status Participants # Percentage
Divorced 46 0.90%
Engaged 207 4.04%
Long term relationship, living together 1031 20.10%
Long term relationship, not living with together 512 9.98%
Married 1230 23.98%
Other 71 1.38%
Separated 18 0.35%
Short term relationship 107 2.09%
Single and dating around, but not looking for anything serious 213 4.15%
Single and dating around, looking for something serious 365 7.12%
Single and not looking 1324 25.81%
Widowed 5 0.10%

Childfree Partner

Is your partner childfree? If your partner wants children and/or has children of their own and/or are unsure about their position, please consider them "not childfree" for this question.
Partner Participants # Percentage
I don't have a partner 1922 37.56%
I have more than one partner and none are childfree 3 0.06%
I have more than one partner and some are childfree 35 0.68%
I have more than one partner and they are all childfree 50 0.98
No 474 9.26%
Yes 2633 51.46%

Dating a Single Parent

Would the childfree participants be willing to date a single parent?
Answer Participants # Percentage
No, I'm not interested in single parents and their ties to parenting life 4610 90.13%
Yes, but only if it's a short term arrangement of some sort 162 3.17%
Yes, whether for long term or short term, but with some conditions (must not have child custody, no kid talk, etc.), as long as I like them and long as we're compatible 199 3.89%
Yes, whether for long term or short term, with no conditions, as long as I like them and as long as we are compatible 144 2.82%

Childhood and Family Life

On a scale from 1 (very unhappy) to 10 (very happy), how would you rate your childhood?
Figure 3
Of the 5125 childfree people who responded to the question, 67.06% have a pet or are heavily involved in the care of someone else's pet.

Sterilisation

Sterilisation Status

Sterilisation Status Participants # Percentage
No, I am not sterilised and, for medical, practical or other reasons, I do not need to be 869 16.96%
No. However, I've been approved for the procedure and I'm waiting for the date to arrive 86 1.68%
No. I am not sterilised and don't want to be 634 12.37%
No. I want to be sterilised but I have started looking for a doctorequested the procedure 594 11.59%
No. I want to be sterilised but I haven't started looking for a doctorequested the procedure yet 2317 45.21%
Yes. I am sterilised 625 12.20%

Age when starting doctor shopping or addressing issue with doctor. Percentages exclude those who do not want to be sterilised and who have not discussed sterilisation with their doctor.

Age group Participants # Percentage
18 or younger 207 12.62%
19 to 24 588 35.85%
25 to 29 510 31.10%
30 to 34 242 14.76%
35 to 39 77 4.70%
40 to 44 9 0.55%
45 to 49 5 0.30%
50 to 54 1 0.06%
55 or older 1 0.06%

Age at the time of sterilisation. Percentages exclude those who have not and do not want to be sterilised.

Age group Participants # Percentage
18 or younger 5 0.79%
19 to 24 123 19.34%
25 to 29 241 37.89%
30 to 34 168 26.42%
35 to 39 74 11.64%
40 to 44 19 2.99%
45 to 49 1 0.16%
50 to 54 2 0.31%
55 or older 3 0.47%

Elapsed time between requesting procedure and undergoing procedure. Percentages exclude those who have not and do not want to be sterilised.

Time Participants # Percentage
Less than 3 months 330 50.46%
Between 3 and 6 months 111 16.97%
Between 6 and 9 months 33 5.05%
Between 9 and 12 months 20 3.06%
Between 12 and 18 months 22 3.36%
Between 18 and 24 months 15 2.29%
Between 24 and 30 months 6 0.92%
Between 30 and 36 months 2 0.31%
Between 3 and 5 years 40 6.12%
Between 5 and 7 years 25 3.82%
More than 7 years 50 7.65%

How many doctors refused at first, before finding one who would accept?

Doctor # Participants # Percentage
None. The first doctor I asked said yes 604 71.73%
One. The second doctor I asked said yes 93 11.05%
Two. The third doctor I asked said yes 54 6.41%
Three. The fourth doctor I asked said yes 29 3.44%
Four. The fifth doctor I asked said yes 12 1.43%
Five. The sixth doctor I asked said yes 8 0.95%
Six. The seventh doctor I asked said yes 10 1.19%
Seven. The eighth doctor I asked said yes 4 0.48%
Eight. The ninth doctor I asked said yes 2 0.24%
I asked more than 10 doctors before finding one who said yes 26 3.09%

Childfreedom

Primary Reason to Not Have Children

Reason Participants # Percentage
Aversion towards children ("I don't like children") 1455 28.36%
Childhood trauma 135 2.63%
Current state of the world 110 2.14%
Environmental (including overpopulation) 158 3.08%
Eugenics ("I have 'bad genes'") 57 1.11%
Financial 175 3.41%
I already raised somebody else who isn't my child 83 1.62%
Lack of interest towards parenthood ("I don't want to raise children") 2293 44.69%
Maybe interested for parenthood, but not suited for parenthood 48 0.94%
Medical ("I have a condition that makes conceiving/bearing/birthing children difficult, dangerous or lethal") 65 1.27%
Other 68 1.33%
Philosophical / Moral (e.g. antinatalism) 193 3.76%
Tokophobia (aversion/fear of pregnancy and/or chidlbirth) 291 5.67%
95.50% of childfree people are pro-choice, however only 55.93% of childfree people support financial abortion.

Dislike Towards Children

Figure 4

Working With Children

Work Participants # Percentage
I'm a student and my future job/career will heavily makes me interact with children on a daily basis 67 1.30%
I'm retired, but I used to have a job that heavily makes me interact with children on a daily basis 6 0.12%
I'm unemployed, but I used to have a job that heavily makes me interact with children on a daily basis 112 2.19%
No, I do not have a job that makes me heavily interact with children on a daily basis 4493 87.81%
Other 148 2.89%
Yes, I do have a job that heavily makes me interact with children on a daily basis 291 5.69%

4. Discussion

Child Status

This section solely existed to sift the childfree from the fencesitters and the non childfree in order to get answers only from the childfree. Childfree, as it is defined in the subreddit, is "I do not have children nor want to have them in any capacity (biological, adopted, fostered, step- or other) at any point in the future." 70.29% of participants actually identify as childfree, slightly up from the 2019 survey, where 68.5% of participants identified as childfree. This is suprising in reflection of the overall reputation of the subreddit across reddit, where the subreddit is often described as an "echo chamber".

General Demographics

The demographics remain largely consistent with the 2019 survey. However, the 2019 survey collected demographic responses from all participants in the survey, removing those who did not identify as childfree when querying subreddit specific questions, while the 2020 survey only collected responses from people who identified as childfree. This must be considered when comparing results.
82.25% of the participants are under 35, compared with 85% of the subreddit in the 2019 survey. A slight downward trend is noted compared over the last two years suggesting the userbase may be getting older on average. 73.04% of the subreddit identify as female, compared with 71.54% in the 2019 survey. Again, when compared with the 2019 survey, this suggests a slight increase in the number of members who identify as female. This is in contrast to the overall membership of Reddit, estimated at 74% male according to Reddit's Wikipedia page [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reddit#Users_and_moderators]. The ratio of members who identify as heterosexual remained consistent, from 54.89% in the 2019 survey to 55.20% in the 2020 survey.
Ethnicity wise, 77% of members identified as primarily Caucasian, consistent with the 2019 results. While the ethnicities noted to be missing in the 2019 survey have been included in the 2020 survey, some users noted the difficulty of responding when fitting multiple ethnicities, and this will be addressed in the 2021 survey.

Education level

As it did in the 2019 survey, this section highlights the stereotype of childfree people as being well educated. 2.64% of participants did not complete high school, which is a slight decrease from the 2019 survey, where 4% of participants did not graduate high school. However, 6.02% of participants are under 18, compared with 8.22% in the 2019 survey. 55% of participants have a bachelors degree or higher, while an additional 23% have completed "some college or university".
At the 2020 survey, the highest percentage of responses under the: What is your degree/major? question fell under "I don't have a degree or a major" (20.12%). Arts and Humanities, and Computer Science have overtaken Health Sciences and Engineering as the two most popular majors. However, the list of majors was pared down to general fields of study rather than highly specific degree majors to account for the significant diversity in majors studied by the childfree community, which may account for the different results.

Career and Finances

The highest percentage of participants at 21.61% listed themselves as trained professionals.
One of the stereotypes of the childfree is of wealth. However this is not demonstrated in the survey results. 70.95% of participants earn under $60,000 USD per annum, while 87.85% earn under $90,000 per annum. 21.37% are earning under $15,000 per annum. 1065 participants, or 21.10% chose not to disclose this information. It is possible that this may have skewed the results if a significant proportion of these people were our high income earners, but impossible to explore.
A majority of our participants work between 30 and 50 hours per week (75.65%) which is slightly increased from the 2019 survey, where 71.2% of participants worked between 30 and 50 hours per week.

Location

The location responses are largely similar to the 2019 survey with a majority of participants living in a suburban and urban area. 86.24% of participants in the 2020 survey live in urban and suburban regions, with 86.7% of participants living in urban and suburban regions in the 2019 survey. There is likely a multifactorial reason for this, encompassing the younger, educated skew of participants and the easier access to universities and employment, and the fact that a majority of the population worldwide localises to urban centres. There may be an element of increased progressive social viewpoints and identities in urban regions, however this would need to be explored further from a sociological perspective to draw any definitive conclusions.
A majority of our participants (57.47%) were born in the USA. The United Kingdom (7.6%), Canada (7.17%), Australia (3.58%) and Germany (2.17%) encompass the next 4 most popular responses. This is largely consistent with the responses in the 2019 survey.

Religion and Spirituality

For the 2020 survey Christianity (the most popular result in 2019) was split into it's major denominations, Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, among others. This appears to be a linguistic/location difference that caused a lot of confusion among some participants. However, Catholicism at 30.76% remained the most popular choice for the religion participants were raised in. However, of our participant's current faith, Aetheism at 36.23% was the most popular choice. A majority of 78.02% listed their current religion as Aetheist, no religious or spiritual beliefs, or Agnostic.
A majority of participants (61%) rated religion as "not at all influential" to the childfree choice. This is consistent with the 2019 survey where 62.8% rated religion as "not at all influential". Despite the high percentage of participants who identify as aetheist or agnostic, this does not appear to be related to or have an impact on the childfree choice.

Romantic and Sexual Life

60.19% of our participants are in a relationship at the time of the survey. This is consistent with the 2019 survey, where 60.7% of our participants were in a relationship. A notable proportion of our participants are listed as single and not looking (25.81%) which is consistent with the 2019 survey. Considering the frequent posts seeking dating advice as a childfree person, it is surprising that such a high proportion of the participants are not actively seeking out a relationship. Unsurprisingly 90.13% of our participants would not consider dating someone with children. 84% of participants with partners of some kind have at least one childfree partner. This is consistent with the often irreconcilable element of one party desiring children and the other wishing to abstain from having children.

Childhood and Family Life

Overall, the participants skew towards a happier childhood.

Sterilisation

While just under half of our participants wish to be sterilised, 45.21%, only 12.2% have been successful in achieving sterilisation. This is likely due to overarching resistance from the medical profession however other factors such as the logistical elements of surgery and the cost may also contribute. There is a slight increase from the percentage of participants sterilised in the 2019 survey (11.7%). 29.33% of participants do not wish to be or need to be sterilised suggesting a partial element of satisfaction from temporary birth control methods or non-necessity of contraception due to their current lifestyle practices. Participants who indicated that they do not wish to be sterilised or haven't achieved sterilisation were excluded from the percentages where necessary in this section.
Of the participants who did achieve sterilisation, a majority began the search between 19 and 29, with the highest proportion being in the 19-24 age group (35.85%) This is a marked increase from the 2019 survey where 27.3% of people who started the search were between 19-24. This may be due to increased education about permanent contraception or possibly due to an increase in instability around world events.
The majority of participants who sought out and were successful at achieving sterilisation, were however in the 25-29 age group (37.9%). This is consistent with the 2019 survey results.
The time taken between seeking out sterilisation and achieving it continues to increase, with only 50.46% of participants achieving sterilisation in under 3 months. This is a decline from the number of participants who achieved sterilisation in 3 months in the 2019 survey (58.5%). A potential cause of this decrease is to Covid-19 shutdowns in the medical industry leading to an increase in procedure wait times. The proportion of participants who have had one or more doctors refuse to perform the procedure has stayed consistent between the two surveys.

Childfreedom

The main reasons for people choosing the childfree lifestyle are a lack of interest towards parenthood and an aversion towards children which is consistent with the 2019 survey. Of the people surveyed 67.06% are pet owners or involved in a pet's care, suggesting that this lack of interest towards parenthood does not necessarily mean a lack of interest in all forms of caretaking. The community skews towards a dislike of children overall which correlates well with the 87.81% of users choosing "no, I do not have, did not use to have and will not have a job that makes me heavily interact with children on a daily basis" in answer to, "do you have a job that heavily makes you interact with children on a daily basis?". This is an increase from the 2019 survey.
A vast majority of the subreddit identifes as pro-choice (95.5%), a slight increase from the 2019 results. This is likely due to a high level of concern about bodily autonomy and forced birth/parenthood. However only 55.93% support financial abortion, aka for the non-pregnant person in a relationship to sever all financial and parental ties with a child. This is a marked decrease from the 2019 results, where 70% of participants supported financial abortion.
Most of our users realised that did not want children young. 58.72% of participants knew they did not want children by the age of 18, with 95.37% of users realising this by age 30. This correlates well with the age distribution of participants. Despite this early realisation of our childfree stance, 80.59% of participants have been "bingoed" at some stage in their lives.

The Subreddit

Participants who identify as childfree were asked about their interaction with and preferences with regards to the subreddit at large. Participants who do not meet our definition of being childfree were excluded from these questions.
By and large our participants were lurkers (72.32%). Our participants were divided on their favourite flairs with 38.92% selecting "I have no favourite". The next most favourite flair was "Rant", at 16.35%. Our participants were similarly divided on their least favourite flair, with 63.40% selecting "I have no least favourite". In light of these results the flairs on offer will remain as they have been through 2019.
With regards to "lecturing" posts, this is defined as a post which seeks to re-educate the childfree on the practices, attitudes and values of the community, particularly with regards to attitudes towards parenting and children, whether at home or in the community. A commonly used descriptor is "tone policing". A small minority of the survey participants (3.36%) selected "yes" to allowing all lectures, however 33.54% responded "yes" to allowing polite, respectful lectures only. In addition, 45.10% of participants indicated that they were not sure if lectures should be allowed. Due to the ambiguity of responses, lectures will continue to be not allowed and removed.
Many of our participants (36.87%) support the use of terms such as breeder, mombie/moo, daddict/duh on the subreddit, with a further 32.63% supporting use of these terms in context of bad parents only. This is a slight drop from the 2019 survey. In response to this use of the above and similar terms to describe parents remains permitted on this subreddit. However, we encourage users to keep the use of these terms to bad parents only.
44.33% of users support the use of terms to describe children such as crotchfruit on the subreddit, a drop from 55.3% last year. A further 25.80% of users supporting the use of this and similar terms in context of bad children only, an increase from 17.42% last year. In response to this use of the above and similar terms to describe children remains permitted on this subreddit.
69.17% of participants answered yes to allowing parents to post, provided they stay respectful. In response to this, parent posts will continue to be allowed on the subreddit. As for regret posts, which were to be revisited in this year's survey, only 9.5% of participants regarded them as their least favourite post. As such they will continue to stay allowed.
64% of participants support under 18's who are childfree participating in the subreddit with a further 19.59% allowing under 18's to post dependent on context. Therefore we will continue to allow under 18's that stay within the overall Reddit age requirement.
There was divide among participants as to whether "newbie" questions should be removed. An even spread was noted among participants who selected remove and those who selected to leave them as is. We have therefore decided to leave them as is. 73.80% of users selected "yes, in their own post, with their own "Leisure" flair" to the question, "Should posts about pets, travel, jetskis, etc be allowed on the sub?" Therefore we will continue to allow these posts provided they are appropriately flaired.

5. Conclusion

Thank you to our participants who contributed to the survey. This has been an unusual and difficult year for many people. Stay safe, and stay childfree.

submitted by Mellenoire to childfree [link] [comments]

The Challenges of Designing a Modern Skill, Part 3

Okay, Wendy’s or Walgreens or whoever, I don’t care who you are, you’re listening to the rest.

Introduction to Part 3

Welcome back one last time to “The Challenges of Designing a Modern Skill,” a series where we discuss all aspects of skill design and development. In Part 1, we talked about OSRS’s history with skills, and started the lengthy conversation on Skill Design Philosophy, including the concepts of Core, Expansion, and Integration. This latter topic consumed the entirety of Part 2 as well, which covered Rewards and Motivations, Progression, Buyables, as well as Unconstructive Arguments.
Which brings us to today, the final part of our discussion. In this Part 3, we’ll finish up Section 3 – Skill Design Philosophy, then move on to chat about the design and blog process. One last time, this discussion was intended to be a single post, but its length outgrew the post character limit twice. Therefore, it may be important to look at the previous two parts for clarity and context with certain terms. The final product, in its purest, aesthetic, and unbroken form, can be found here.

3-C – Skill Design Philosophy, Continued

3-12 - Balancing

What follows from the discussion about XP and costs, of course, is balancing: the bane of every developer. A company like Riot knows better than anyone that having too many factors to account for makes good balance impossible. Balancing new ideas appropriately is extremely challenging and requires a great respect for current content as discussed in Section 3-5 – Integration. Thankfully, in OSRS we only have three major balancing factors: Profit, XP Rate, and Intensity, and two minor factors: Risk and Leniency. These metrics must amount to some sense of balance (besides Leniency, which as we’ll see is the definition of anti-balance) in order for a piece of content to feel like it’s not breaking the system or rendering all your previous efforts meaningless. It’s also worthy to note that there is usually a skill-specific limit to the numerical values of these metrics. For example, Runecrafting will never receive a training method that grants 200k xp/hr, while for Construction that’s easily on the lower end of the scale.
A basic model works better than words to describe these factors, and therefore, being the phenomenal artist that I am, I have constructed one, which I’ve dubbed “The Guthix Scale.” But I’ll be cruel and use words anyway.
  • Profit: how much you gain from a task, or how much you lose. Gain or loss can include resources, cosmetics, specialized currencies, good old gold pieces, or anything on that line.
  • XP Rate: how fast you gain XP.
  • Intensity: how much effort (click intensity), attention (reaction intensity), and thought (planning intensity) you need to put into the activity to perform it well.
  • Risk: how likely is the loss of your revenue and/or resource investment into the activity. Note that one must be careful with risk, as players are very good at abusing systems intended to encourage higher risk levels to minimize how much they’re actually risking.
  • Leniency: a measure for how imbalanced a piece of content can be before the public and/or Jagex nerfs it. Leniency serves as a simple modulator to help comprehend when the model breaks or bends in unnatural ways, and is usually determined by how enjoyable and abusable an activity is, such that players don’t want to cause an outrage over it. For example, Slayer has a high level of Leniency; people don’t mind that some Slayer tasks grant amazing XP Rates, great Profits, have middling Intensity, and low Risk. On the other hand, Runecrafting has low levels of Leniency; despite low Risk, many Runecrafting activities demand high Intensity for poor XP Rates and middling Profits.
In the end, don’t worry about applying specific numbers during the conceptual phase of your skill design. However, when describing an activity to your reader, it’s always useful if you give approximations, such as “high intensity” or “low risk,” so that they get an idea of the activity’s design goals as well as to guide the actual development of that activity. Don’t comment on the activity’s Leniency though, as that would be pretty pretentious and isn’t for you to determine anyway.

3-13 - Skill Bloat

What do the arts of weaving, tanning, sowing, spinning, pottery, glassmaking, jewellery, engraving, carving, chiselling, carpentry, and even painting have in common? In real life, there’s only so much crossover between these arts, but in Runescape they’re all simply Crafting.
The distinction between what deserves to be its own skill or instead tagged along to a current skill is often arbitrary; this is the great challenge of skill bloat. The fundamental question for many skill concepts is: does this skill have enough depth to stand on its own? The developers of 2006 felt that there was sufficient depth in Construction to make it something separate from Crafting, even if the latter could have covered the former. While there’s often no clean cut between these skills (why does making birdhouses use Crafting instead of Construction?), it is easy to see that Construction has found its own solid niche that would’ve been much too big to act as yet another Expansion of Crafting.
On the other hand, a skill with extremely limited scope and value perhaps should be thrown under the umbrella of a larger skill. Take Firemaking: it’s often asked why it deserves to be its own skill given how limited its uses are. This is one of those ideas that probably should have just been thrown under Crafting or even Woodcutting. But again, the developers who made early Runescape did not battle with the same ideas as the modern player; they simply felt like Firemaking was a good idea for a skill. Similarly, the number of topics that the Magic skill covers is so often broken down in other games, like Morrowind’s separation between Illusion, Conjuration, Alteration, Destruction, Mysticism, Restoration, Enchant, Alchemy (closer to Herblore), and Unarmored (closer to Strength and Defense). Why does Runescape not break Magic into more skills? The answer is simple: Magic was created with a much more limited scope in Runescape, and there has not been enough content in any specific magical category to justify another skill being born. But perhaps your skill concept seeks to address this; maybe your Enchantment skill takes the enchanting aspects of Magic away, expands the idea to include current imbues and newer content, and fully fleshes the idea out such that the Magic skill alone cannot contain it. Somewhat ironically, Magic used to be separated into Good and Evil Magic skills in Runescape Classic, but that is another topic.
So instead of arguments about what could be thrown under another skill’s umbrella, perhaps we should be asking: is there enough substance to this skill concept for it to stand on its own, outside of its current skill categorization? Of course, this leads to a whole other debate about how much content is enough for a skill idea to deserve individuality, but that would get too deep into specifics and is outside the scope of this discussion.

3-14 - Skill Endgame

Runescape has always been a sandbox MMO, but the original Runescape experience was built more or less with a specific endgame in mind: killing players and monsters. Take the Runescape Classic of 2001: you had all your regular combat skills, but even every other skill had an endgame whose goal was helping combat out. Fishing, Firemaking, and Cooking would provide necessary healing. Smithing and Crafting, along with their associated Gathering skill partners, served to gear you up. Combat was the simple endgame and most mechanics existed to serve that end.
However, since those first days, the changing endgame goals of players have promoted a vast expansion of the endgame goals of new content. For example, hitting a 99 in any non-combat skill is an endgame goal in itself for many players, completely separate from that skill’s combat relationship (if any). These goals have increased to aspects like cosmetic collections, pets, maxed stats, all quests completed, all diaries completed, all music tracks unlocked, a wealthy bank, the collection log, boss killcounts, and more. Whereas skills used to have a distinct part of a system that ultimately served combat, we now have a vast variety of endgame goals that a skill can be directed towards. You can even see a growth in this perspective as new skills were released up to 2007: Thieving mainly nets you valuable (or once valuable) items which have extremely flexible uses, and Construction has a strong emphasis on cosmetics for your POH.
So when designing your new skill, contemplate what the endgame of your skill looks like. For example, if you are proposing a Gathering skill, what is the Production skill tie-in, and what is the endgame goal of that Production skill? Maybe your new skill Spelunking has an endgame in gathering rare collectibles that can be shown off in your POH. Maybe your new skill Necromancy functions like a Support skill, giving you followers that help speed along resource gathering, and letting you move faster to the endgame goal of the respective Production skill. Whatever it is, a proper, clear, and unified view of an endgame goal helps a skill feel like it serves a distinct and valuable purpose. Note that this could mean that you require multiple skills to be released simultaneously for each to feed into each other and form an appropriate endgame. In that case, go for it – don’t make it a repeat of RS3’s Divination, a Gathering skill left hanging without the appropriate Production skill partner of Invention for over 2 years.
A good example of a skill with a direct endgame is… most of them. Combat is a well-accepted endgame, and traditionally, most skills are intended to lend a hand in combat whether by supplies or gear. A skill with a poor endgame would be Hunter: Hunter is so scattered in its ultimate endgame goals, trying to touch on small aspects of everything like combat gear, weight reduction, production, niche skilling tools, and food. There’s a very poor sense of identity to Hunter’s endgame, and it doesn’t help that very few of these rewards are actually viable or interesting in the current day. Similarly, while Slayer has a strong endgame goal it is terrible in its methodology, overshadowing other Production skills in their explicit purpose. A better design for Slayer’s endgame would have been to treat it as a secondary Gathering skill, to work almost like a catalyst for other Gathering-Production skill relationships. In this mindset, Slayer is where you gather valuable monster drops, combine it with traditional Gathering resources like ores from Mining, then use a Production skill like Smithing to meld them into the powerful gear that is present today. This would have kept other Gathering and Production skills at the forefront of their specialities, in contrast to today’s situation where Slayer will give fully assembled gear that’s better than anything you could receive from the appropriate skills (barring a few items that need a Production skill to piece together).

3-15 - Alternate Goals

From a game design perspective, skills are so far reaching that it can be tempting to use them to shift major game mechanics to a more favourable position. Construction is an example of this idea in action: Construction was very intentionally designed to be a massive gold sink to help a hyperinflating economy. Everything about it takes gold out of the game, whether through using a sawmill, buying expensive supplies from stores, adding rooms, or a shameless piece of furniture costing 100m that is skinned as, well, 100m on a shameless piece of furniture.
If you’re clever about it, skills are a legitimately good opportunity for such change. Sure, the gold sink is definitely a controversial feature of Construction, but for the most part it’s organic and makes sense; fancy houses and fancy cosmetics are justifiably expensive. It is notable that the controversy over Construction’s gold sink mechanism is probably levied more against the cost of training, rather than the cost of all its wonderful aesthetics. Perhaps that should have been better accounted for in its design phase, but now it is quite set in stone.
To emphasize that previous point: making large scale changes to the game through a new skill can work, but it must feel organic and secondary to the skill’s main purpose. Some people really disliked Warding because they felt it tried too hard to fix real, underlying game issues with mechanics that didn’t thematically fit or were overshadowing the skill’s Core. While this may or may not be true, if your new skill can improve the game’s integrity without sacrificing its own identity, you could avoid this argument entirely. If your skill Regency has a Core of managing global politics, but also happens to serve as a resource sink to help your failing citizens, then you’ve created a strong Core design while simultaneously improving the profitability of Gathering skills.

3-16 - The Combat No-Touch Rule

So, let’s take a moment to examine the great benefits and rationale of RS2’s Evolution of Combat:
This space has been reserved for unintelligible squabbling.
With that over, it’s obvious that the OSRS playerbase is not a big fan of making major changes to the combat system. If there’s anything that defines the OSRS experience, it has to be the janky and abusable combat system that we love. So, in the past 7 years of OSRS, how many times have you heard someone pitch a new combat skill? Practically no one ever has; a new combat skill, no matter how miniscule, would feel obtrusive to most players, and likely would not even receive 25% of votes in a poll. This goes right back to Section 3-5 – Integration, and the importance of preserving the fundamentals of OSRS’s design.
I know that my intention with this discussion was to be as definitive about skill design as possible, and in that spirit I should be delving into the design philosophy specifically behind combat skills, but I simply don’t see the benefit of me trying, and the conversation really doesn’t interest me that much. It goes without saying that as expansive as this discussion is, it does not cover every facet of skill design, which is a limitation both of my capabilities and desire to do so.

3-17 - Aesthetics

I don’t do aesthetics well. I like them, I want them, but I do not understand them; there are others much better equipped to discuss this topic than I. Nonetheless, here we go.
Since the dawn of OSRS, debates over art style and aesthetics have raged across Gielinor. After all, the OSRS Team is filled with modern day artists while OSRS is an ancient game. What were they supposed to do? Keep making dated graphics? Make content with a modernized and easily digestible style? Something in-between?
While many players shouted for more dated graphics, they were approached by an interesting predicament: which dated graphics did they want? We had a great selection present right from the start of OSRS: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. People hungry for nostalgia chose the era that they grew up in, leading to frequent requests for older models like the dragon or imp, most of which were denied by Jagex (except the old Mining rock models). But which era was OSRS supposed to follow?
Jagex elected to carve their own path, but not without heavy criticism especially closer to OSRS’s conception. However, they adapted to player requests and have since gone back and fixed many of the blatant early offenders (like the Kingdom of Kourend) and adopted a more consistent flavour, one that generally respects the art style of 2007. Even though it doesn’t always hit the mark, one has to appreciate the OSRS artists for making their best attempt and listening to feedback, and here’s to hoping that their art style examination mentioned in June 2020’s Gazette bears fruit.
But what exactly is the old school art style? There are simple systems by which most players judge it in OSRS, usually by asking questions like, “Would you believe if this existed in 2007?” More informed artists will start pointing out distinct features that permeated most content from back in the day, such as low quality textures, low poly models, low FPS animations, a “low fantasy” or grounded profile that appeals somewhat to realism, reducing cartoonish exaggerations, and keeping within the lore. Compiled with this, music and sound design help that art style come to life; it can be very hard on immersion when these don’t fit. An AGS would sound jarring if its special attack sounded like a weak dagger stab, and having to endure Country Jig while roaming Hosidius suddenly sweeps you off into a different universe.
But coming back to skill design, the art, models, and sound design tend to be some of the last features, mostly because the design phase doesn’t demand such a complete picture of a skill. However, simple concept art and models can vastly improve how a skill concept is communicated and comfort players who are concerned about maintaining that “old school feel.” This will be touched on again later in this discussion under Section 5-2 – Presentation and Beta Testing.

3-18 - Afterword

Now we’ve set down the modern standards for a new skill, but the statements that started this section bear repeating: the formula we’ve established does not automatically make a good or interesting skill, as hard as we might have tried. Once again, harken back to the First Great Irony: that we are trying to inject the modern interpretation of what defines a skill upon a game that was not necessarily built to contain it. Therefore, one could just as easily deny each of the components described above, as popular or unpopular as the act might be, and their opinion could be equally valid and all this effort meaningless. Don’t take these guidelines with such stringency as to disregard all other views.

5-0 - The OSRS Team and the Design Process

If you’ve followed me all the way here, you’re likely A) exhausted and fed up of any conversation concerning new skills, or B) excited, because you’ve just struck an incredible skill idea (or perhaps one that’s always hung around your head) that happens to tick off all the above checkboxes. But unfortunately for you B types, it’s about to get pretty grim, because we’re going to go through every aspect of skill design that’s exterior to the game itself. We’ll be touching on larger topics like democracy, presentation, player mindsets, effort, and resource consumption. It’ll induce a fantastic bout of depression, so don’t get left behind.

5-1 - Designing a Skill

Thus far, Jagex has offered three potential skills to OSRS, each of which has been denied. This gives us the advantage of understanding how the skill design process works behind the scenes and lets us examine some of the issues Jagex has faced with presenting a skill to the players.
The first problem is the “one strike and you’re out” phenomenon. Simply put, players don’t like applying much effort into reading and learning. They’ll look at a developer blog highlighting a new skill idea, and if you’re lucky they’ll even read the whole thing, but how about the second developer blog? The third? Fourth? Even I find it hard to get that far. In general, people don’t like long detail-heavy essays or blogs, which is why I can invoke the ancient proverb “Ban Emily” into this post and it’ll go (almost) completely unnoticed. No matter how many improvements you make between developer blogs, you will quickly lose players with each new iteration. Similarly, developer blogs don’t have the time to talk about skill design philosophy or meta-analyse their ideas – players would get lost far too fast. This is the Second Great Irony of skill design: the more iterations you have of a lengthy idea, the less players will keep up with you.
This was particularly prominent with Warding: Battle Wards were offered in an early developer blog but were quickly cut when Jagex realized how bad the idea was. Yet people would still cite Battle Wards as the reason they voted against Warding, despite the idea having been dropped several blogs before. Similarly, people would often comment that they hated that Warding was being polled multiple times; it felt to them like Jagex was trying to brute-force it into the game. But Warding was only ever polled once, and only after the fourth developer blog - the confusion was drawn from how many times the skill was reiterated and from the length of the public design process. Sure, there are people for whom this runs the opposite way; they keep a close eye on updates and judge a piece of content on the merits of the latest iteration, but this is much less common. You could argue that one should simply disregard the ignorant people as blind comments don't contribute to the overall discussion, but you should remember that these players are also the ones voting for the respective piece of content. You could also suggest re-educating them, which is exactly what Jagex attempts with each developer blog, and still people won’t get the memo. And when it comes to the players themselves, can the playerbase really be relied on to re-educate itself?
Overall, the Second Great irony really hurts the development process and is practically an unavoidable issue. What’s the alternative? To remove the developer-player interface that leads to valuable reiterations, or does you simply have to get the skill perfect in the first developer blog?
It’s not an optimal idea, but it could help: have a small team of “delegates” – larger names that players can trust, or player influencers – come in to review a new, unannounced skill idea under NDA. If they like it, chances are that other players will too. If they don’t, reiterate or toss out the skill before it’s public. That way, you’ve had a board of experienced players who are willing to share their opinions to the public helping to determine the meat and potatoes of the skill before it is introduced to the casual eye. Now, a more polished and well-accepted product can be presented on the first run of selling a skill to the public, resulting in less reiterations being required, and demanding less effort from the average player to be fully informed over the skill’s final design.

5-2 - Presentation and Beta Testing

So you’ve got a great idea, but how are you going to sell it to the public? Looking at how the OSRS Team has handled it throughout the years, there’s a very obvious learning curve occurring. Artisan had almost nothing but text blogs being thrown to the players, Sailing started introducing some concept art and even a trailer with terrible audio recording, and Warding had concept art, in game models, gifs, and a much fancier trailer with in-game animations. A picture or video is worth a thousand words, and often the only words that players will take out of a developer blog.
You might say that presentation is everything, and that would be more true in OSRS than most games. Most activities in OSRS are extremely basic, involve minimal thought, and are incredibly grindy. Take Fishing: you click every 20 seconds on a fishing spot that is randomly placed along a section of water, get rid of your fish, then keep clicking those fishing spots. Boiling it down further, you click several arbitrary parts of your computer screen every 20 seconds. It’s hardly considered engaging, so why do some people enjoy it? Simply put: presentation. You’re given a peaceful riverside environment to chill in, you’re collecting a bunch of pixels shaped like fish, and a number tracking your xp keeps ticking up and telling you that it matters.
Now imagine coming to the players with a radical new skill idea: Mining. You describe that Mining is where you gather ores that will feed into Smithing and help create gear for players to use. The audience ponders momentarily, but they’re not quite sure it feels right and ask for a demonstration. You show them some gameplay, but your development resources were thin and instead of rocks, you put trees as placeholders. Instead of ores in your inventory, you put logs as placeholders. Instead of a pickaxe, your character is swinging a woodcutting axe as a placeholder. Sure, the mechanics might act like mining instead of woodcutting, but how well is the skill going to sell if you haven’t presented it correctly or respected it contextually?
Again, presentation is everything. Players need to be able to see the task they are to perform, see the tools they’ll use, and see the expected outcomes; otherwise, whatever you’re trying to sell will feel bland and unoriginal. And this leads to the next level of skill presentation that has yet to be employed: Beta Worlds.
Part of getting the feel of an activity is not just watching, it but acting it out as well - you’ll never understand the thrill of skydiving unless you’ve actually been skydiving. Beta Worlds are that chance for players to act out a concept without risking the real game’s health. A successful Beta can inspire confidence in players that the skill has a solid Core and interesting Expansions, while a failed Beta will make them glad that they got to try it and be fully informed before putting the skill to a poll (although that might be a little too optimistic for rage culture). Unfortunately, Betas are not without major disadvantages, the most prominent of which we shall investigate next.

5-3 - Development Effort

If you thought that the previous section on Skill Design Philosophy was lengthy and exhausting, imagine having to know all that information and then put it into practice. Mentally designing a skill in your head can be fun, but putting all that down on paper and making it actually work together, feel fully fleshed out, and following all the modern standards that players expect is extremely heavy work, especially when it’s not guaranteed to pay off in the polls like Quest or Slayer content. That’s not even taking into account the potentially immense cost of developing a new skill should it pass a poll.
Whenever people complain that Jagex is wasting their resources trying to make that specific skill work, Jagex has been very explicit about the costs to pull together a design blog being pretty minimal. Looking at the previous blogs, Jagex is probably telling the truth. It’s all just a bunch of words, a couple art sketches, and maybe a basic in-game model or gif. Not to downplay the time it takes to write well, design good models, or generate concept art, but it’s nothing like the scale of resources that some players make it out to be. Of course, if a Beta was attempted as suggested last section, this conversation would take a completely new turn, and the level of risk to invested resources would exponentially increase. But this conversation calls to mind an important question: how much effort and resources do skills require to feel complete?
Once upon a time, you could release a skill which was more or less unfinished. Take Slayer: it was released in 2005 with a pretty barebones structure. The fundamentals were all there, but the endgame was essentially a couple cool best-in-slot weapons and that was it. Since then, OSRS has updated the skill to include a huge Reward Shop system, feature 50% more monsters to slay, and to become an extremely competitive money-maker. Skills naturally undergo development over time, but it so often comes up during the designing of an OSRS skill that it "doesn't have enough to justify its existence." This was touched on deeply in Section 3-13 – Skill Bloat, but deserves reiterating here. While people recognize that skills continually evolve, the modern standard expects a new skill, upon release, to be fully preassembled before purchase. Whereas once you could get away with releasing just a skill's Core and working on Expansions down the line, that is no longer the case. But perhaps a skill might stand a better chance now than it did last year, given that the OSRS Team has doubled in number since that time.
However, judging from the skill design phases that have previously been attempted (as we’ve yet to see a skill development phase), the heaviest cost has been paid in developer mentality and motivational loss. When a developer is passionate about an idea, they spend their every waking hour pouring their mind into how that idea is going to function, especially while they’re not at work. And then they’re obligated to take player feedback and adapt their ideas, sometimes starting from scratch, particularly over something as controversial as a skill. Even if they have tough enough skin to take the heavy criticism that comes with skill design, having to write and rewrite repeatedly over the same idea to make it “perfect” is mentally exhausting. Eventually, their motivation drains as their labour bears little fruit with the audience, and they simply want to push it to the poll and be done with it. Even once all their cards are down, there’s still no guarantee that their efforts will be rewarded, even less so when it comes to skills.
With such a high mental cost with a low rate of success, you have to ask, “Was it worth it?” And that’s why new skill proposals are far and few between. A new skill used to be exciting for the development team in the actual days of 2007, as they had the developmental freedom to do whatever they wanted, but in the modern day that is not so much the case.

5-4 - The Problems of Democracy

Ever since the conceptualization of democracy in the real world, people have been very aware of its disadvantages. And while I don’t have the talent, knowledge, or time to discuss every one of these factors, there are a few that are very relevant when it comes to the OSRS Team and the polling process.
But first we should recognize the OSRS Team’s relationship with the players. More and more, the Team acts like a government to its citizens, the players, and although this situation was intentionally instated with OSRS’s release, it’s even more prominent now. The Team decides the type of content that gets to go into a poll, and the players get their input over whether that particular piece makes it in. Similarly, players make suggestions to the Team that, in many cases, the Team hadn’t thought of themselves. This synergy is phenomenal and almost unheard of among video games, but the polling system changes the mechanics of this relationship.
Polls were introduced to the burned and scarred population of players at OSRS’s release in 2013. Many of these players had just freshly come off RS2 after a series of disastrous updates or had quit long before from other controversies. The Squeal of Fortune, the Evolution of Combat, even the original Wilderness Removal had forced numerous players out and murdered their trust in Jagex. To try and get players to recommit to Runescape, Jagex offered OSRS a polling system by which the players would determine what went into the game, where the players got to hold all the cards. They also asked the players what threshold should be required for polled items to pass, and among the odd 50% or 55% being shouted out, the vast majority of players wanted 70%, 75%, 80%, or even 85%. There was a massive population in favour of a conservative game that would mostly remain untouched, and therefore kept pure from the corruption RS2 had previously endured.
Right from the start, players started noticing holes in this system. After all, the OSRS Team was still the sole decider of what would actually be polled in the first place. Long-requested changes took forever to be polled (if ever polled at all) if the OSRS Team didn’t want to deal with that particular problem or didn’t like that idea. Similarly, the Team essentially had desk jobs with a noose kept around their neck – they could perform almost nothing without the players, their slave masters, seeing, criticizing, and tearing out every inch of developmental or visionary freedom they had. Ever hear about the controversy of Erin the duck? Take a look at the wiki or do a search through the subreddit history. It’s pretty fantastic, and a good window into the minds of the early OSRS playerbase.
But as the years have gone on, the perspective of the players has shifted. There is now a much healthier and more trusting relationship between them and the Team, much more flexibility in what the players allow the Team to handle, and a much greater tolerance and even love of change.
But the challenges of democracy haven’t just fallen away. Everyone having the right to vote is a fundamental tenet of the democratic system, but unfortunately that also means that everyone has the right to vote. For OSRS, that means that every member, whether it’s their first day in game, their ten thousandth hour played, those who have no idea about what the poll’s about, those who haven’t read a single quest (the worst group), those who RWT and bot, those who scam and lure, and every professional armchair developer like myself get to vote. In short, no one will ever be perfectly informed on every aspect of the game, or at least know when to skip when they should. Similarly, people will almost never vote in favour of making their game harder, even at the cost of game integrity, or at least not enough people would vote in such a fashion to reach a 75% majority.
These issues are well recognized. The adoption of the controversial “integrity updates” was Jagex’s solution to these problems. In this way, Jagex has become even more like a government to the players. The average citizen of a democratic country cannot and will not make major decisions that favour everyone around themselves if it comes at a personal cost. Rather, that’s one of the major roles of a government: to make decisions for changes for the common good that an individual can’t or won’t make on their own. No one’s going to willingly hand over cash to help repave a road on the opposite side of the city – that’s why taxes are a necessary evil. It’s easy to see that the players don’t always know what’s best for their game and sometimes need to rely on that parent to decide for them, even if it results in some personal loss.
But players still generally like the polls, and Jagex still appears to respect them for the most part. Being the government of the game, Jagex could very well choose to ignore them, but would risk the loss of their citizens to other lands. And there are some very strong reasons to keep them: the players still like having at least one hand on the wheel when it comes to new content or ideas. Also, it acts as a nice veto card should Jagex try to push RS3’s abusive tactics on OSRS and therefore prevent such potential damage.
But now we come to the topic of today: the introduction of a new skill. Essentially, a new skill must pass a poll in order to enter the game. While it’s easy to say, “If a skill idea is good enough, it’ll pass the threshold,” that’s not entirely true. The only skill that could really pass the 75% mark is not necessarily a well-designed skill, but rather a crowd-pleasing skill. While the two aren’t mutually exclusive, the latter is far easier to make than the former. Take Dungeoneering: if you were to poll it today as an exact replica of RS2’s version, it would likely be the highest scoring skill yet, perhaps even passing, despite every criticism that’s been previously emphasized describing why it has no respect for the current definition of “skill.” Furthermore, a crowd-pleasing skill can easily fall prey to deindividualization of vision and result in a bland “studio skill” (in the same vein as a “studio film”), one that feels manufactured by a board of soulless machines rather than a director’s unique creation. This draws straight back to the afore-mentioned issues with democracy: that people A) don’t always understand what they’re voting for or against, and B) people will never vote for something that makes their game tougher or results in no benefit to oneself. Again, these were not issues in the old days of RS2, but are the problems we face with our modern standards and decision making systems.
The reality that must be faced is that the polling system is not an engine of creation nor is it a means of constructive feedback – it’s a system of judgement, binary and oversimplified in its methodology. It’s easy to interact with and requires no more than 10 seconds of a player’s time, a mere mindless moment, to decide the fate of an idea made by an individual or team, regardless of their deep or shallow knowledge of game mechanics, strong or weak vision of design philosophy, great or terrible understanding of the game’s history, and their awareness of blindness towards the modern community. It’s a system which disproportionately boils down the quality of discussion that is necessitated by a skill, which gives it the same significance as the question “Should we allow players to recolour the Rocky pet by feeding it berries?” with the only available answers being a dualistic “This idea is perfect and should be implemented exactly as outlined” or “This idea is terrible and should never be spoken of again.”
So what do you do? Let Jagex throw in whatever they want? Reduce the threshold, or reduce it just for skills? Make a poll that lists a bunch of skills and forces the players to choose one of them to enter the game? Simply poll the question, “Should we have a new skill?” then let Jagex decide what it is? Put more options on the scale of “yes” to “no” and weigh each appropriately? All these options sound distasteful because there are obvious weaknesses to each. But that is the Third Great Irony we face: an immense desire for a new skill, but no realistic means to ever get one.

6-0 - Conclusion

I can only imagine that if you’ve truly read everything up to this point, it’s taken you through quite the rollercoaster. We’ve walked through the history of OSRS skill attempts, unconstructive arguments, various aspects of modern skill design philosophy, and the OSRS Team and skill design process. When you take it all together, it’s easy to get overwhelmed by all the thought that needs to go into a modern skill and all the issues that might prevent its success. Complexity, naming conventions, categorizations, integration, rewards and motivations, bankstanding and buyables, the difficulties of skill bloat, balancing, and skill endgames, aesthetics, the design process, public presentation, development effort, democracy and polling - these are the challenges of designing and introducing modern skills. To have to cope with it all is draining and maybe even impossible, and therefore it begs the question: is trying to get a new skill even worth it?
Maybe.
Thanks for reading.
Tl;dr: Designing a modern skill requires acknowledging the vast history of Runescape, understanding why players make certain criticisms and what exactly they’re saying in terms of game mechanics, before finally developing solutions. Only then can you subject your ideas to a polling system that is built to oversimplify them.
submitted by ScreteMonge to 2007scape [link] [comments]

Binary Option Real Account Tick Trading  99% Winning ... GOD OF INDICATORS - 99,99% work - binary option strategy ... Best Binary Options Trading Strategy 99% Win 2019 - Binary ... 60 Seconds binary options strategy 99 - 100% Winning (100% ... The Simo 2020 Index Binary Option 99% - YouTube Binary Option Loss Recover 99% Accurate Under/Over ... Binary Options Strategy 2018 - 99% WIN GUARANTEED - How to ...

99 binary Review read more. 99Binary offers a lot of great features trough their loyalty programs. Since trading is sometimes hard if there is no support, they made sure they support their clients, either in form of rich bonuses or even one on one sessions that enhance trading skills and chances for profit. All account types they offer include an up to 100% welcome bonus, 24/7 customer support ... Abhängig von Ihrer Einzahlung in Ihr 99 Binary Online-Konto, eröffnen Sie einen von vier Kontotypen. Das Starter-Konto, dessen Mindesteinzahlung $199 beträgt, ermöglicht es Tradern, den 100% 99Binary Bonus in Anspruch zu nehmen und grundlegende Handelstransaktionen durchzuführen. Je höher die Einzahlung, desto attraktiver werden die Vorteile der Mitgliedschaft. Das Pro-Konto startet bei ... 99 Binary – Conclusion. There are a multitude of binary option brokers in the market today, and a small portion of those are located in the United Kingdom, far from some foreign tax haven where banks and regulators do not produce the best result. 99Binary.com is one of the few UK brokers that have distinguished themselves from the pack in a short period of time. Binary Options Trading Tips,Investing in Binary Options,Binary Options and Its Benefits,The Simple Steps of Trading,Binary Options Trading Tips, The complete guide on binary options trading and online stock trading. Follow the tips. Become an expert and reap rich profits. Day trading secrets. Swing Trading: Expert Advice For Novice Traders – Minimize Your Losses And Maximize Your Gains Using ... Im Binary options deutsch Vergleich schaffte es der Testsieger in so gut wie allen Eigenschaften abräumen. Herzlich Willkommen zum großen Vergleich. Wir als Seitenbetreiber haben uns der Kernaufgabe angenommen, Alternativen jeder Variante ausführlichst zu testen, sodass Käufer unmittelbar den Binary options deutsch kaufen können, den Sie für geeignet halten. Um maximale Neutralität zu ... He’s been working for 7 Binary Options since April 2014 and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to his role. He’s played a crucial part in developing the site and helping it grow. In his role as writer and consultant, John’s keen to help others get ahead in the ever-changing world of binary options and forex trading. He’s always happy to advise others, whether it’s complete ... Binary Options Trading Tips,Investing in Binary Options,Binary Options and Its Benefits,The Simple Steps of Trading,Binary Options Trading Tips, The complete guide on binary options trading and online stock trading. Follow the tips. Become an expert and reap rich profits. Day trading secrets. Swing Trading: Expert Advice For Novice Traders – Minimize Your Losses And Maximize Your Gains Using ... Is 99Binary a Good Binary Options Broker? Read Real Reviews, By Traders, For Traders™ Add Your Rating to the Largest Forex Review Database by Forex Peace Army™ >> 7 Binary Options Bewertung. Boni. 99Binary hat Boni für seine Kunden. Jeder Kontotyp hat zusätzliche Boni, die dazu bestimmt sind, den Betrag zu erhöhen, den der Händler zur Verfügung hat, um zu handeln und mehr Geld verdienen. Maximale Gewinne (Auszahlung) Mit den Gewinnen bei 99Binary machen Händler eine Menge Geld, denn erfolgreiche Investitionen haben je nach Vermögenswert eine ... Was es beim Kaufen Ihres Binary options deutsch zu analysieren gilt! Jeder einzelne von unserer Redaktion begrüßt Sie als Leser hier bei uns. Unsere Redakteure haben es uns zur Aufgabe gemacht, Alternativen jeder Variante ausführlichst zu testen, dass Interessenten schnell und unkompliziert den Binary options deutsch kaufen können, den Sie für geeignet halten.

[index] [15975] [14303] [7433] [27004] [26967] [17497] [2818] [8557] [2984] [995]

Binary Option Real Account Tick Trading 99% Winning ...

The road to success through trading IQ option Best Bot Reviews Iq Option 2020 ,We make videos using this softwhere bot which aims to make it easier for you t... pinry option99% All about Trading in Forex and Binary Option Marked. #iqoption#olymptrade#pocketoption#forextime Registration link iqoption https://bit.ly/2W... get trading bots contact with telegram https://bit.ly/3aR8baT get pro or free signals https://bit.ly/2N5PLrp get strategy trading, visit my twitter https://b... 60 Seconds binary options strategy 99 - 100% Winning (100% profit guaranteed) 90 - 95% Winning Binary Options Strategy in case of correct prediction - 1 to 5... Help Me To Rich 20000 Subscriber. #marketanalysis “General Risk Warning: Forex and Binary options trading carry a high level of risk and can result in the lo... Free signals group- https://t.me/BullishKingsignals Get 50% Instant Bonus Join- https://yea.to/YKh1y Contact- https://t.me/Bullishking Join Free Signals Grou... Free signals group- https://t.me/BullishKingsignals Get 50% Instant Bonus Join- https://yea.to/YKh1y Contact- https://t.me/Bullishking Join Free Signals Grou...

https://binary-optiontrade.dialiothesurtels.gq