Powerplay Powerplay "meeting" with FD

[Apos]

Why is requesting a link to the information in question 'feeding the trolls'?

All I (and a few others who posted prior) are asking for is a bit of openesss regarding (i) what your meetings agenda is and (ii) what it's final content is.

Telling someone to speak to someone else, and keeping it off the books, rather than simply providing a link is showing the issues I'm raising with this idea.

A link to what?? You have been given the topics directly.

Does it have to be a reddit thread listing them for them to become "official"? What difference does that make?

Should the representatives also get the british government approval and have it personally stamped by the Queen before they are considered legitimate?

 

[SeeZaa]

My guess is to stop rumours of features that may or may not happen causing the usual uproar on the forum.

this exactly! its easier to think openly and talk openly in a conversation where things may be said that are not for public consumption, it isn't a negative thing, it is simply as you say, avoiding problems, and a companies or persons right to protect their business. i worked under many NDA's it is simply a confirmation of trust, underwritten with penalties for stepping outside that trust. in an ideal world we wouldnt need such thing, but as can be seen those who are saying 'why is it needed' those who are paranoid about something being dealt under the table, are frequently also the the sort that would consider be dealt something under the table in that situation.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

A link to what?? You have been given the topics directly.

Does it have to be a reddit thread listing them for them to become "official"? What difference does that make?

Should the representatives also get the british government approval and have it personally stamped by the Queen before they are considered legitimate?

Some topics have been casually mentioned in conversation. I for one would accept nothing less than the complete list of topics which are to be discussed. If that has already been posted then please refer me to it.

 

[Quantrix]

Some topics have been casually mentioned in conversation. I for one would accept nothing less than the complete list of topics which are to be discussed. If that has already been posted then please refer me to it.

And also list the topics that are NOT to be discussed.

Some say that future changes in PP rules will not be discussed; Others say that they might. Lots of opinions with suggestions how to "improve" PP are flying around in those threads. Clarification that rule changes will be off-topic for this meeting is very welcome.

 

[Goose4291]

A link to what?? You have been given the topics directly.

Does it have to be a reddit thread listing them for them to become "official"? What difference does that make?

Should the representatives also get the british government approval and have it personally stamped by the Queen before they are considered legitimate?

There's no need for an OTT reaction. Chap asked for a link to the topics raised, someone else told him he needed to speak to his 'representative' and not 'feed the trolls'. I wanted to know why someone asking for a link to the topics being raised (who might not know what they are) would be told to go speak to someone else, instead of being furnished with the information they were asking for.

this exactly! its easier to think openly and talk openly in a conversation where things may be said that are not for public consumption, it isn't a negative thing, it is simply as you say, avoiding problems, and a companies or persons right to protect their business. i worked under many NDA's it is simply a confirmation of trust, underwritten with penalties for stepping outside that trust. in an ideal world we wouldnt need such thing, but as can be seen those who are saying 'why is it needed' those who are paranoid about something being dealt under the table, are frequently also the the sort that would consider be dealt something under the table in that situation.

But there's the counter argument to that, which is that discussing these things behind walls is not the way to go and will lead to the usual forum uproars, particularly if, as I said before a unconnected change is put in place and someone makes the wild accusation it was connected to this discussion, and there's nothing to show that it's to the contrary.

I'm not being paranoid about stuff being dealt under the table, I'm trying to mitigate the chance of someone, or groups of people making that accusation through a reasonable suggestion (that it's content be made public).

NDA's, official secrets acts et all (which like you I have worked under) are required in the real world. They are not required for ten players trying to hold an official discussion with a Games Developer about issues ongoing with a computer game.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Jezza, why not spare us another twenty pages and just ask Zac what the scope will be? After all we can ask as many questions as we want, it's what FD want to listen to that matters.

 

[Tataboj]

What difference does it make? People will still try to screw you over whether it's in game or in real life, must always have your guard up. Humans suck.

If everyone else around you is wrong and doesn't like you, then maybe you are doing something wrong.

Seriously, this is a completely pointless thread and trying to sabotage the efforts of Frontier to make PP better (the way it's done doesn't matter) wouldn't do anything good.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

Jezza, why not spare us another twenty pages and just ask Zac what the scope will be? After all we can ask as many questions as we want, it's what FD want to listen to that matters.

Zac isn't organising the meeting, unless I'm very much mistaken.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

If everyone else around you is wrong and doesn't like you, then maybe you are doing something wrong.

Except "everyone else" isn't. There are some perfectly nice people in this thread who are looking at it rationally (including some people who disagree with me, which is fine).

Seriously, this is a completely pointless thread and trying to sabotage the efforts of Frontier to make PP better (the style doesn't matter) wouldn't do anything good.

I'm sorry you feel that way, and I completely understand why you will no longer be contributing to my thread.

 

[SeeZaa]

What difference does it make? People will still try to screw you over whether it's in game or in real life, must always have your guard up. Humans suck.

that is a really glum outlook on the world. yes there are scum out there, but there a lot of good people too. not everyone has an angle or is trying to make gains on others backs.

confidentiality and nda's are generally about protecting business interests, it isn't a negative thing, and frontier is a business. if i have to stop and think about every word i say, and figure ways to obliquely work around the truth, it becomes a closed dialogue, and interferes with any productive process. confidentiality just means being free to talk about the problem, not having to talk around the problem.. big diff.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

that is a really glum outlook on the world. yes there are scum out there, but there a lot of good people too. not everyone has an angle or is trying to make gains on others backs.

confidentiality and nda's are generally about protecting business interests, it isn't a negative thing, and frontier is a business. if i have to stop and think about every word i say, and figure ways to obliquely work around the truth, it becomes a closed dialogue, and interferes with any productive process. confidentiality just means being free to talk about the problem, not having to talk around the problem.. big diff.

I'm not saying everyone is a jerk, not at all. But a lot of people are and that's a reason why I am very sceptical of this.

There have been a lot of these similar groups in the past (in Elite and in other games), who claim to represent anyone, or claim to not be doing anything malicious, who have actively worked to screw over certain people, including me, so I am extremely sceptical of anything like that. The people who found these hide behind excuses and refuse to disclose information about their process, just like the organisers of this meeting are, which is a massive cause for concern.

Confidentiality is sometimes important, but it is certainly not in this case. If they're not doing anything malicious, there is no reason not to make everything transparent. Who are they trying to hide from and why?

 

[SeeZaa]

There's no need for an OTT reaction. Chap asked for a link to the topics raised, someone else told him he needed to speak to his 'representative' and not 'feed the trolls'. I wanted to know why someone asking for a link to the topics being raised (who might not know what they are) would be told to go speak to someone else, instead of being furnished with the information they were asking for.



But there's the counter argument to that, which is that discussing these things behind walls is not the way to go and will lead to the usual forum uproars, particularly if, as I said before a unconnected change is put in place and someone makes the wild accusation it was connected to this discussion, and there's nothing to show that it's to the contrary.

I'm not being paranoid about stuff being dealt under the table, I'm trying to mitigate the chance of someone, or groups of people making that accusation through a reasonable suggestion (that it's content be made public).

NDA's, official secrets acts et all (which like you I have worked under) are required in the real world. They are not required for ten players trying to hold an official discussion with a Games Developer about issues ongoing with a computer game.

you know what.. people like you are the problem, because people like you are the ones who get out the pitch forks and start fires. there is so much paranoia in everything you say, it sad and somewhat sickening to see people this fearful of missing out on something, that they will just try and see boogie men behind every corner and a mask on every face.

im out.. this is just altogether saddening, what ever happened to rational thinking and common sense????

 

[Rubbernuke]

But FD agreed to a meeting, and FD are doing the listening. They must also have the parameters set for what will be discussed.

Rather than tear apart the goodwill and work people have put in to get this far, why not just register your concern with FD, and let the company get on with it?

I'm surprised any meeting will go ahead after this.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

But FD agreed to a meeting, and FD are doing the listening. They must also have the parameters set for what will be discussed.

Rather than tear apart the goodwill and work people have put into get this far, why not just register your concern with FD, and let the company get on with it?

I'm surprised any meeting will go ahead after this.

That's what I'm doing. That's why I posted it on these forums.

 

[Cori]

I'm not saying everyone is a jerk, not at all. But a lot of people are and that's a reason why I am very sceptical of this.

There have been a lot of these similar groups in the past (in Elite and in other games), who claim to represent anyone, or claim to not be doing anything malicious, who have actively worked to screw over certain people, including me, so I am extremely sceptical of anything like that. The people who found these hide behind excuses and refuse to disclose information about their process, just like the organisers of this meeting are, which is a massive cause for concern.

Confidentiality is sometimes important, but it is certainly not in this case. If they're not doing anything malicious, there is no reason not to make everything transparent. Who are they trying to hide from and why?

There is a logic failure there: no reason not to do something is not equivalent to a reason to do it.

 

[Tataboj]

Zac isn't organising the meeting, unless I'm very much mistaken.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Except "everyone else" isn't. There are some perfectly nice people in this thread who are looking at it rationally (including some people who disagree with me, which is fine).



I'm sorry you feel that way, and I completely understand why you will no longer be contributing to my thread.

It's great that you understand, but I think it's nice to have another person disagreeing with you and your efforts.

Also, I couldn't help but notice an unbalanced "They like you - They don't like you" ratio.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That's what I'm doing. That's why I posted it on these forums.

So, rather than send one message and register your concern, you pour more petrol onto the fire? I thought you were a diplomat?

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

It's great that you understand, but I think it's nice to have another person disagreeing with you and your efforts.

Also, I couldn't help but notice an unbalanced "They like you - They don't like you" ratio.

Didn't I ask you before to stay on the topic specified in the OP? I feel like you're not at all doing that.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

So, rather than send one message and register your concern, you pour more petrol onto the fire? I thought you were a diplomat?

The only people pouring petrol on the fire here is... well, other people. Mainly people complaining about drama, ironically.

 

[Tataboj]

Didn't I ask you before to stay on the topic specified in the OP? I feel like you're not at all doing that.

Neither did you.

 

[Goose4291]

you know what.. people like you are the problem, because people like you are the ones who get out the pitch forks and start fires. there is so much paranoia in everything you say, it sad and somewhat sickening to see people this fearful of missing out on something, that they will just try and see boogie men behind every corner and a mask on every face.

im out.. this is just altogether saddening, what ever happened to rational thinking and common sense????

You threw rational thinking out of the door when you wrote a paragraph long personal attack on another person because they have a different viewpoint regarding open and private group discussions.

 

[Shar]

You bunch of wannabe Darth Vader's stop picking on the ice princess i,ve read this entire thread and am disappointed to see so many personnel attacks on a single player, problem seems to be she is striking a nerve and you don,t like it, as one of the as you put it "screening multitude" you don,t come across very well.
It,s no wonder power-play is so unpopular if people like this are dominating it. So obvious there are grudges been played out here.