Recently, people have been able to see more clearly - they've been able to see who's been viewing them as they've been talking in these here Streets.

In the past, everyone knew who'd been talking to people on the Streets.  The very popular Street speakers sometimes got a hundred people weighing in and talking.  Now we get hundreds gathering round, and a few dozen talking.

So what I'd like to ask everyone is this:

Is how many people talk back to you an inidcation of popularity?  Is how many people hang around to view you speaking?  Is both?  Neither?

Mudkip watches as the man he sees makes a small speech and i go to say

I don't believe so , while your popularity COULD increase talking , i think it'd be the topic onhand that would make the masses come and talk.

Gwarble, for example, was one of the most popular speakers to walk these Streets.  Others have an audience, but I wouldn't exactly describe them as popular.

So what's the difference?  How can it be accurately measured?

I could recall one of the best stories was spoken a long, long time ago. By the name of b7gangster. Anyone heard of him? His little story called, "10 days" It reached madness of opinions and love from fellow mobsters. Not a speaker, but a story that reached out that made him pretty famous around these parts.

Just because a street speaker attracts a lot of attention doesn't necessarily mean that they are popular. While yes there are names that will draw a lot of attention more so it is the topic that they are bringing forth that draws the masses. Also what must be taken into account is that some of the spectators may be there more due to the fact the street speaker has attracted the attention of an antagonist. So the spectators may be there for the back and forth rather than the subject matter or the original speaker.

Niko approached Mr_Kuklinski and hands him a piece of paper, on it is written an equation.

Length times Girth over Angle of the Shaft (aka YAW) divided by mass over WIDTH.

Plus

Length times Diameter plus Weight over Girth divided by Angle of the Tip squared.

Divided by 2

Equals

Average Popularity of Speaker

All good points, but where does popularity start and notoriety end?

Interesting question there... Mr.kuklinsky that is? I am The_Genleman, my bloodline has been around these streets before. But i am a humble man and shy at times, i dont intend to come out here to gain popularity. If the subject in hand is interesting however... i may throw in a word or two. Loll, my bloodline has witnessed a lot of debates out here in the streets and like most of us... either my ancestors were loved or hated. Now there is not much i can say about the subject you are mentioning, other that this reminds me of something.

I would love to point it up and find the actualy words that was spoken here. Whatever people have to say about his ancestors or the man himself... the one known as Roman. As Godfather he onced came out here and spoken of his entire career, with the finest detail. Mentioning all of the names and dates of everything that occured during his life. That sir was deffinately the best speach my ancestors has ever witnessed. When i read it in diaries it always set a tear in my eye, as how passionate this man was. Of course, there are other people probably just as passionate or was... but this is just one true example that i remember.

To answer your questions... popularity, is something temporary. It always ends eventually, unless you feed it and are able to keep it alive. And then when you die, it fades out quickly. Because no one speaks of you but still remembers. As for notoriety... that lives as long as people remember. When people stop remembering, that is where notoriety ends.

Infamy and fame are two different things.

One can be famous for their speaking and have a throng of followers and participants in their discussions, while another can be infamous and have people gathering to watch the guaranteed buffoonery that will come as a result of the orator, targeted audience, or a combination of the two.

Both will have active conversations. One will become a discussion, debate, or interactive story and the other will become a venue to act like PJ's monkeys and throw poop everywhere covering everything that is respectable around it in faeces.

It is human nature for a person to gravitate to the poop slinging for childish, cheap entertainment akin to driving past a train wreck looking for bodies and not say anything and then wander farther down the Street and participate in something that is more flattering to their reputation. It's all about appearances.

A lurid example, for sure.  But beyond the unfortunate metaphor, the makings of a point.

Tabloids are more popular than broadsheets.

And therein lies the question that I am asking:

Does audience alone suggest popularity?  Tabloid newspapers are more popular than broadsheets - but does that make them better?

Having a "better" article/story/discussion has nothing to do with the popularity of said piece of writing. In my opinion, it comes back to how controversial a topic is. A story written by what would appear to be a five year old will be talked about, just because it is so badly written. Whereas a great story, however slightly unoriginal, could receive very little feedback/popularity.

It has to have that something that sets it apart, good or bad. And most of all, it has to be controversial.

Last I checked, this isnt high school. Popularity means nothing around here.

Marcus while I agree this isn't high school popularity means more here than you say, allow me to give a little example.

Two guys join a crew at the same time, one keeps themselves to themselves, builds their gun up. Tributes regulary, is the typical well behaved money maker the crew leader relies on.

The second guy does exactly the same, but at the same time gets to know his fellow crew members, spends time in the hq possibly even comes out to the streets to make a name for themselves.

There comes a time when the crew leader has to make and auth, he or she is presented with these two candidates. Both have similar numbers when it comes to earnings and the gun they have built. Who do you think is going to get auth?

The well behaved guy who's kept himself to himself, or the guy who ahs gone out built his reputation and by doing so his popularity?

The most silent person could possibly be the most dangerous. Won't matter at the end of the day. We all die.

I have noticed exactly what you speak of recently. I've noticed that I had many people listening to what I was saying, but few giving their input. I would not assume to know exactly what this means, but I will try to elaborate.

I will not join in a conversation unless I know that I have something pertinant to say. Even though many may be interested in what you and others have to say, they may not feel they have anything to add.

I think interest in a topic, and incentive to add to it are two different things.

If you have a well written, interesting speech, many may want to listen, but few may actually take part.

On the other hand, if you spout a few controversial words, barely making sentences, it could spark a debate that could go on for days, even months possibly.

I think it is up to us, to find a middle ground. I think the right mix of interesting and well written, with a dash of controversy, could no doubt be the recipe we need.

We won't really know until we try.

To answer you original question I think neither shows how popular you are.

For example if I were to come onto the streets and speak about apickpocketing for example, almost everyone has an opinion on that skill in this world, which can spark up quite an intense debate. It wouldn't make me popular it just means I've brought a topic to the streets that most people have an opinion on.

If I then were an excellent story teller I may tell a story that is captivating and everyone wants to hear how it unfolds. That doesn't make me popular either, it just shows that I know how to tell a story that the audience enjoys.

A spin on your question, does someones reputation good or bad affect how many people that listen to their speech?

Money nor Gun stats are reasons to auth someone. There's much more than figures and stats that come into play when you're about to hand someone a fancy bold suit. Some of the greatest leaders this world has ever seen have said less than a few words here and there during their entire run as crewleaders or even godfathers.

My point Marcus is that for them to get auth in the first place they must be known, to at least their godfather or crew leader. Who may also make this decision by consulting their right and left hand. So there fore the person would have by default to be popular amongst at least them. Also once that person sets up recruiting members is going to be a whole lot easier if they are a popular figure. So your statement that popularity has no place here is baseless.

Popularity is important, especially for a leader as politics is essentially just a massive popularity contest.

If all of your fellow leaders like you, then the chances of them shooting you are very much reduced. Take the most recent example of the bloodshed in New York. The other leaders cited their suspicion at Manius breaking his usual habit of keeping his own counsel and instead decided to immediately befriend everyone. Had he befriended them earlier and thus not have raised suspicions with the manner of his doing so at the time, things may have been handled differently.

Similarly, if you're a member and you want to achieve anything like a worthwhile reputation in this world then you would be well served establishing some sort of popular support. As previously stated, the easier authorisation to sell is the one of the guy that people already know.

Also, even as a normal member, it certainly helps if the people like you. It serves as a good way of building relationships and creating contacts both within and outside of your family. I've established many worthwhile contacts by being a particularly amusing bastard in the Streets. It has always served me in good stead down the line and provided a nice easy foundation upon which to build.

I also disagree with the statement that glorified mute leaders. Whilst 'greatness' is largely in the eye of the beholder as there is no true measure of it, I would like to think that most people at least consider someone's ability to deal with the masses somewhere within that criteria.

Anyway, the best indication of popularity is neither how many people respond to your discussions or flock to hear your voice; it is who is prepared to stand up for you. If 5000 people come to hear me speak, but none of them lift a finger when someone is prepared to squash me, then that popularity was pretty pointless. Conversely, if those 5000 people all rise us, then you can pretty certain that no amount of squashing is going to do the trick.