... deleted by me ...
Last edited:
Don't get much more clear than that...
Holy wall of text Batman
They could at least put that bit in blue.Holy wall of text Batman
I agree with what you mean, though I would more so blame Youtube. Why read a few paragraphs when you could watch a 15 minute video clip instead.I blame the advent of text messaging. Ever since then, people stopped reading. Remember when you'd get a letter, you'd read it, you'd think about it, you'd sit down to respond to it, with their letter in front of you, reading and writing at the same time. Ever since texting, reading and responding have become disposable.
As part of my job I have to send formal emails to people, they're mainly templates, I know full well they contain all the information required, but people don't read them. So they email back asking a question, I gently point them, to the second paragraph in the Menai,l they're responding to. People just don't read.
Actually, the INARA CG descriptions cut out the "To earn rewards..." part - the Forum post includes the entire wording from the CG. So you got that the wrong way round.
Maybe the complaint should be that INARA doesn't carry the "have to sign up first" warning?
I found just cutting out the rubbish, making it two or three sentences at most, does the trick. Yes it is abrupt, no it doesn't have the corporate niceties in it but it is at least readable, factual, concise and more importantly for me, understood by the other end.I agree with what you mean, though I would more so blame Youtube. Why read a few paragraphs when you could watch a 15 minute video clip instead.
As for the emails, I feel your pain - I do the same, my emails can be quite wordy (though I try to be as concise as possible but it's not always appropriate), they're mostly an Arx-covering exercise now.
Yeah I do that for short/informal emails, but in my work I sometimes need to roll out communication to a large audience (about say a new process) where you can't leave details out - because if you do people could just turn around and say "why didn't you tell me this". Which brings us back to this threadI found just cutting out the rubbish, making it two or three sentences at most, does the trick. Yes it is abrupt, no it doesn't have the corporate niceties in it but it is at least readable, factual, concise and more importantly for me, understood by the other end.
Do you also get those replies, after spending so much time on the email that simply say?Yeah I do that for short/informal emails, but in my work I sometimes need to roll out communication to a large audience (about say a new process) where you can't leave details out - because if you do people could just turn around and say "why didn't you tell me this". Which brings us back to this thread
Maybe but that assumes that everybody handing in items, bounties, bonds or whatever required by the CG wants to take part in it.I mean, many people forgot or overread this before.
Doesn't speak well of the presentation.
I agree that it is there in game, but I question the need for the application at all.
If the CG would count everything added by CMDRs, without application, wouldn't that be more intuitively?
I'd say it is.
It's way down the priorities list, but it could be addressed imho.
I stand corrected, thanks for the information.
Doesn't really change the fact that lots of people in here are behaving like insufferably smug gits, but you guys go off I suppose. "Damn kids! Nobody reads texts! I 'member when this was all fields!" JFC.
I agree that it is there in game, but I question the need for the application at all.
If the CG would count everything added by CMDRs, without application, wouldn't that be more intuitively?
I'd say it is.
It's way down the priorities list, but it could be addressed imho.
Would that affect the player numbers for the CG and also the amount needed to define the thresholds? I believe at the moment that you have to sign up for the CG to be counted in the 100% Whereas if the top 100% contained 8 million+ Cmdrs that might skew stats a bitThe only limitation there is that they wouldn't be able to host competing CGs at the same station that accept the same thing, and the only example I can think of is the Dangerous Games which could be done slightly differently nowadays.
Automatic sign-up on first delivery if you haven't already seems sensible. (For that matter, automatic signup when the CGs are released wouldn't hurt, I think!)
people only count in the stats once they hand something in, so auto-sign-up would be fine for that.Would that affect the player numbers for the CG and also the amount needed to define the thresholds? I believe at the moment that you have to sign up for the CG to be counted in the 100% Whereas if the top 100% contained 8 million+ Cmdrs that might skew stats a bit
I guess you could start the 100% the first time you hand something in, but you do get some who sign up but never manage to deliver anything.
This is how it currently works - the "top 100%" only counts people who actually deliver at least one thing.Would that affect the player numbers for the CG and also the amount needed to define the thresholds? I believe at the moment that you have to sign up for the CG to be counted in the 100% Whereas if the top 100% contained 8 million+ Cmdrs that might skew stats a bit
I guess you could start the 100% the first time you hand something in, but you do get some who sign up but never manage to deliver anything.
Would that affect the player numbers for the CG and also the amount needed to define the thresholds?