Continued Dev Silence on Continued Dev Silence.

*claps*

I was waiting for the first Parody of that thread. Kudos.

Bonus points, it's an actual Topic. They have been mighty Silent recently.

[ QUOTE ]
Umm... now that the devs have broken silence on the dev silence regarding their silence... where does that leave us?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why, with this translation just delivered from the old home office in Wahoo, NE:

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons why devs might be silent on an issue:

1) We didn't see the issue. There are a lot of threads out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are all spawn camping the pop machine which is currently out of Dew. That and we crank call the City of Hero staff in Korea from time to time. They love that.

[ QUOTE ]
2) We are in the middle of looking at an issue, and saying anything at the time might be invalidated. Even something like "we are looking into it" can be read as "we are going to change it" if we look at it and find it to be fine, we would get blasted for not changing it when we said we would.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Stroller EAT is almost ready to be debuted.

[ QUOTE ]
3) The answer is already being given by a lot of players already

[/ QUOTE ]

Player Questions will be folded down into the PWNZ board in I10.

[ QUOTE ]
4) The answer is obvious (and thus will eventually be given out by a lot of players, see #3).

[/ QUOTE ]

>.>
<.<

*Positron radiation laugh*

Yeah, I know, if we didn't have trolls, know-it-alls, drama kings/queens, and shameless post padders we could probably run the forums on a 300 baud modem and a program written in Logo.

[ QUOTE ]
5) It involves talking about stuff we can't/shouldn't be talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

We surf YouTube and the Forums at work, too. Don't tell States.

[ QUOTE ]
6) The question is a "when" question. We rarely answer these, because even when we put disclaimers on it, our answer becomes taken as gospel, and if we fail to deliver, we look bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

I10 is coming out in the fall for sure. We're just not going to announce which time measurement system we're using.

[ QUOTE ]
There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a dev, but I don't mind having a bit of fun. (And I would really like to turn cell phones on in PvP zones again.)*

*this message brought to you by People Who Want Cell Phones on in PvP Zones Again.

*throws list card at fake window*

*glass breaking sound fx*

Step 6: Comment about not commenting on comments

Step 7: ???

Step 8: Profit!

[ QUOTE ]
- joust Peeps in the microwave


[/ QUOTE ]

Sadako, I can't help but ask what this means, even though I'm certain the answer will frighten me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Venture I'd never use a nuke in a superhero universe. You nuke a city, you kill 1.5 million people minus one. The last guy not only gets superpowers from the explosion, but ones that let him survive a nuke...and wow, is he torqued off

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
- joust Peeps in the microwave


[/ QUOTE ]

Sadako, I can't help but ask what this means, even though I'm certain the answer will frighten me.

[/ QUOTE ]

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Edit : I linked to a website with still photos (of the first documented peep joust too, I think), while Squez is linking to YouTube.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
- joust Peeps in the microwave


[/ QUOTE ]

Sadako, I can't help but ask what this means, even though I'm certain the answer will frighten me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know where I first heard about this practice, but it just shows that people luv microwaves

[ QUOTE ]
7) We do not talk about #7

But while your here Posi, please tell me you know about this thread. Please /e puppydogeyes

As for #2 just add No guarantees in the post and people can't hold it against you.
"We're looking into it, no guarantees though." problem solved but this should only be used for really big issues.
Like this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

They have tried that before. Both for reason #2 and #6.

They still get ripped a new one because people will take anything said in the most "it probably won't happen ever/now/etc" tone/way/included disclaimer as the devs promising to do such.

In other words, #2 & #6 are the fault of the community (as a whole).

[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Reasons why devs might be silent on an issue:

1) We didn't see the issue. There are a lot of threads out there.
2) We are in the middle of looking at an issue, and saying anything at the time might be invalidated. Even something like "we are looking into it" can be read as "we are going to change it" if we look at it and find it to be fine, we would get blasted for not changing it when we said we would.
3) The answer is already being given by a lot of players already
4) The answer is obvious (and thus will eventually be given out by a lot of players, see #3).
5) It involves talking about stuff we can't/shouldn't be talking about.
6) The question is a "when" question. We rarely answer these, because even when we put disclaimers on it, our answer becomes taken as gospel, and if we fail to deliver, we look bad.

There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm... now that the devs have broken silence on the dev silence regarding their silence... where does that leave us?

[/ QUOTE ]



"What's that popping sound I hear?"~ Dilbert
"A paradigm shifting without a clutch." ~Dogbert

Edit: I've been careless about double posts. Sorry!

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons why devs might be silent on an issue:

1) We didn't see the issue. There are a lot of threads out there.
2) We are in the middle of looking at an issue, and saying anything at the time might be invalidated. Even something like "we are looking into it" can be read as "we are going to change it" if we look at it and find it to be fine, we would get blasted for not changing it when we said we would.
3) The answer is already being given by a lot of players already
4) The answer is obvious (and thus will eventually be given out by a lot of players, see #3).
5) It involves talking about stuff we can't/shouldn't be talking about.
6) The question is a "when" question. We rarely answer these, because even when we put disclaimers on it, our answer becomes taken as gospel, and if we fail to deliver, we look bad.

There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]


It's no secret. From the forum rules:

[ QUOTE ]
5. No “I Demand Answers” threads

Threads that make threats or use other combative language will be removed without notice. If you ask a question on the board and it has not been addressed by a moderator, there is a reason for that (or there is not an answer currently available). In the event of legitimate emergencies, or other unprecedented scenarios, we will endeavor to provide comments, even if it is only to state that there is no officially available information. However, this is not always possible.

[/ QUOTE ]


And yet, Positron has indulged two 'calling out' threads.

Forum mods should have locked both down contents unseen just by the thread title alone.

If there are more of them, Posi, it's you're own fault.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm so disappointed ... I thought for sure that contained a secret message regarding the silence of the devs ...

The Horror ... The Horror ...



[/ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]

The sounds, of silence

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome song.

[ QUOTE ]

It's no secret. From the forum rules:

[ QUOTE ]
5. No “I Demand Answers” threads

Threads that make threats or use other combative language will be removed without notice. If you ask a question on the board and it has not been addressed by a moderator, there is a reason for that (or there is not an answer currently available). In the event of legitimate emergencies, or other unprecedented scenarios, we will endeavor to provide comments, even if it is only to state that there is no officially available information. However, this is not always possible.

[/ QUOTE ]


And yet, Positron has indulged two 'calling out' threads.

Forum mods should have locked both down contents unseen just by the thread title alone.

If there are more of them, Posi, it's you're own fault.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a fine line; I took this thread mostly to be a joke, so I'm surprised Posi even replied. But didn't you start the "Set IOs shut off when Exemplared - Feedback" thread? Since the devs didn't ASK for feedback and it wasn't stickied, it's borderline; it doesn't demand a dev response, but by presuming to emulate an official feed it implies they should be reading it, at least, if not responding. The "Devs, I want an answer" threads are just silly because they're presumptuous. I liked your method better, and I posted in the thread a lot not only to make sure all the points had been made but hoping the devs would address the issue, possibly engaging in a dialogue and addressing individual points... the "dev silence" threads are the same thing, just with a neon sign.

Perhaps we need a "Continued Dev Silence on Exemplaring Set Bonus Shutoff" thread.

Be vewwy vewwy quiet. Dev are hunting wabbits.

[ QUOTE ]
Be vewwy vewwy quiet. Dev are hunting wabbits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good thing I'mma Otter.

*Relaxes in a sun chair reading 'A Tale of Two Cities' while sipping a cool glass of lemonade*

=^ ^=

[ QUOTE ]
It's no secret. From the forum rules:

[ QUOTE ]
5. No “I Demand Answers” threads

Threads that make threats or use other combative language will be removed without notice. If you ask a question on the board and it has not been addressed by a moderator, there is a reason for that (or there is not an answer currently available). In the event of legitimate emergencies, or other unprecedented scenarios, we will endeavor to provide comments, even if it is only to state that there is no officially available information. However, this is not always possible.

[/ QUOTE ]


And yet, Positron has indulged two 'calling out' threads.

Forum mods should have locked both down contents unseen just by the thread title alone.

If there are more of them, Posi, it's you're own fault.

[/ QUOTE ]



i think the reason why any dev would answer a post like that were due to the other litigations of the forum rules.
meaning, they looked at the thread, researched the issue, and found the problem, and let you know they found the issue/or found a fix to the issue...

_Castle_ does this quite a bit, weather its a "call out" thread or not, if he looked in the spreadsheets and finds a problem, he lets us know. and he lets us know he fixed it on his own internal build (which means he has already fixed it, it just needs to be implemented into a future patch, along with anything any other dev has found< which requires QA assitance, since when you fix one bug in a build, the change in code might cause another bug, which wont be discovered until the patch is implemented&gt

basicly, even tho they may reply to a 'call out' thread, its because they found a legitimate issue. and/or the concern that others are having the same issue...

take notice, they normaly don't answer a call out thread if its only one person having that issue, not enough documentation to point to what the issue is. but if theres a lot of posts from other people with very similar issues. they may give a heads up about it. (which would also be limited to one other issue, there are only so many devs to read the post, and so many players posting, weather those posts are bug related, or other stuf)



I support the devs!

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons why devs might be silent on an issue:

1) We didn't see the issue. There are a lot of threads out there.
2) We are in the middle of looking at an issue, and saying anything at the time might be invalidated. Even something like "we are looking into it" can be read as "we are going to change it" if we look at it and find it to be fine, we would get blasted for not changing it when we said we would.
3) The answer is already being given by a lot of players already
4) The answer is obvious (and thus will eventually be given out by a lot of players, see #3).
5) It involves talking about stuff we can't/shouldn't be talking about.
6) The question is a "when" question. We rarely answer these, because even when we put disclaimers on it, our answer becomes taken as gospel, and if we fail to deliver, we look bad.

There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really cant see anything in there that would prevent SOME form of comunication onf the Cathedral of Pain trial and Items of Power. The thread on "feedback" was closed recently without saying anything.

Does reason 7 involve sticking fingers in ears, closing eyes and shouting "la la la la cant hear you......."

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's no secret. From the forum rules:

[ QUOTE ]
5. No “I Demand Answers” threads

Threads that make threats or use other combative language will be removed without notice. If you ask a question on the board and it has not been addressed by a moderator, there is a reason for that (or there is not an answer currently available). In the event of legitimate emergencies, or other unprecedented scenarios, we will endeavor to provide comments, even if it is only to state that there is no officially available information. However, this is not always possible.

[/ QUOTE ]


And yet, Positron has indulged two 'calling out' threads.

Forum mods should have locked both down contents unseen just by the thread title alone.

If there are more of them, Posi, it's you're own fault.

[/ QUOTE ]



i think the reason why any dev would answer a post like that were due to the other litigations of the forum rules.
meaning, they looked at the thread, researched the issue, and found the problem, and let you know they found the issue/or found a fix to the issue...

_Castle_ does this quite a bit, weather its a "call out" thread or not, if he looked in the spreadsheets and finds a problem, he lets us know. and he lets us know he fixed it on his own internal build (which means he has already fixed it, it just needs to be implemented into a future patch, along with anything any other dev has found< which requires QA assitance, since when you fix one bug in a build, the change in code might cause another bug, which wont be discovered until the patch is implemented&gt

basicly, even tho they may reply to a 'call out' thread, its because they found a legitimate issue. and/or the concern that others are having the same issue...

take notice, they normaly don't answer a call out thread if its only one person having that issue, not enough documentation to point to what the issue is. but if theres a lot of posts from other people with very similar issues. they may give a heads up about it. (which would also be limited to one other issue, there are only so many devs to read the post, and so many players posting, weather those posts are bug related, or other stuf)



I support the devs!

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, I think the big difference between what's answered and what's forbidden as far as 'call out' threads, does the OP have an underlying tone of really just wanting to know or a tone of wanting the devs to say something so we can bash them and argue over it ad naseum. In other words, intent.

It could be argued that you can't really judge intent without tone of voice and such but I think the mods may be familiar with some of us enough to be able to make an educated guess at intent. Just a guess but after following these forums for awhile, it's fairly easy to see who's usually a jokester, a helpful person or a troll. 'Swhy I can't stand it when ya'll change names or avatars! Grrr.

[ QUOTE ]
There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]

My precious.

*calls out the Devs...for MOOOTAL KOOMBAAAAT!*

I'm pretty sure the OP was joking when he made this thread.......I think......kinda.....wait what are we talking about again?

Really? I thought this thread was SERIOUS BUSINESS.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an internet forum for a game where we dress up in spandex and defeat superpowered villains with names like Nemesis and Lord Recluse - of course it's serious business

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons why devs might be silent on an issue:

1) We didn't see the issue. There are a lot of threads out there.
2) We are in the middle of looking at an issue, and saying anything at the time might be invalidated. Even something like "we are looking into it" can be read as "we are going to change it" if we look at it and find it to be fine, we would get blasted for not changing it when we said we would.
3) The answer is already being given by a lot of players already
4) The answer is obvious (and thus will eventually be given out by a lot of players, see #3).
5) It involves talking about stuff we can't/shouldn't be talking about.
6) The question is a "when" question. We rarely answer these, because even when we put disclaimers on it, our answer becomes taken as gospel, and if we fail to deliver, we look bad.

There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]

7) Busy buying up the supply of Masterwork Weapons and taking bets on the highest bid on them for the day.

8) Currently trying to convince Castle that radiation blast needs a Mag 100 hold just like Ghost Widow's.

9) Designing nineteen more missions to add to my task force.

10) Calculating how much my atomic blast needs to be boosted to be able to one-shot Statesman.

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons why devs might be silent on an issue:

1) We didn't see the issue. There are a lot of threads out there.
2) We are in the middle of looking at an issue, and saying anything at the time might be invalidated. Even something like "we are looking into it" can be read as "we are going to change it" if we look at it and find it to be fine, we would get blasted for not changing it when we said we would.
3) The answer is already being given by a lot of players already
4) The answer is obvious (and thus will eventually be given out by a lot of players, see #3).
5) It involves talking about stuff we can't/shouldn't be talking about.
6) The question is a "when" question. We rarely answer these, because even when we put disclaimers on it, our answer becomes taken as gospel, and if we fail to deliver, we look bad.

There's a secret 7th reason that I am not going to give you because of reason #7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dang, now who be stealin' me thunder Yo!

There can be only 1 Lord of the Lists.
{points to sig}