Damn! At least try to hide your bias and come up with a plausible excuse as to why the list should be ignored.
It's been stated COUNTLESS TIMES by several users, I'm not feeding you further.
This last bit of your post is such bad acting that you couldn't even make it sound believable, trying too hard mate... trying too hard...
Thebonly good reasons were back at the beginning of this thread when there was incorrect info. It has since been corrected for the most part but if you feel the list is pointless then stop posting maybe?
There isn't though. Again, this comes down to context. IF!! We were to say, this was a list of things that CIG eluded to WANTING to put into the game, then you'd have a valid point. However, that's not the case, they actually state on the tracker that "Chris made and continues to make a lot of promises." The bolding is also on the page, it wasn't just me adding it in for dramatic effect. So they are LITERALLY aware that they said promises. What's problematic is that a great deal of these items are simply NOT promises. There are a plethora of links from ATV to 10 Questions to SC HOTAS which are simply not things that were promised or weren't promised by CR. There is plenty of things that were speculated or items which were mentioned as something that would be "cool". If you are actually saying that this is a list of promises and you are unwilling to acknowledge that the vast majority of items were not literal promises, then you're either fucking bonkers, or you haven't actually looked through any of the links.
That being said, I am not saying that there aren't valid items on the list, but the list itself is predominantly comprised of commentary taken off-the-cuff from random videos published by CIG themselves.
And this is said in the same part.
"This crowdsourced endeavour started on April 17th, 2017 and may contain inaccuracies."
Oh! Fuck me! I missed that, sorry. So they can just caveat it and all is forgiven! Ok. Well this is from the Star Citizen Kickstarter page:
Risks and challenges
We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.
There! Problem solved! Zero accountability required!
That's absolute bullshit and you know it. There is a very big difference between inaccuracies and a blatant disregard for the core ideas that you're projecting. Again. They highlight PROMISE. The majority of items on the list are NOT promises. So if they want to fix it, then fix it! However, they seem to be in no rush to do so. So why not just change it? It's no less valid if you simply differentiate between items which were literally promises, which are wants, and which were eluded to. As it stands, the accuracy of the list itself is abysmal.
I have no problem with people holding a developer accountable, but hold them accountable for the RIGHT reasons. Otherwise, you simply look foolish, like this list does, and people defending it look even worse. Just call a spade a spade, admit that the list needs to be changed to be more representative of what was ACTUALLY promised, and leave it at that. I'm sure there are PLENTY of promises that can still be proven to be broken or in jeopardy.
Any parent will tell you that this list is about as solid as one comprised by their 5 year-old. They have really good memories, but don't really understand what a promise is.
the complete fail in this very simple fact.
if I TELL YOU I might not add something = honest
if I DONT TELL YOU I might not add something and then dont added it = dishonest.
there is nothing scammy or evil about a person explicitly telling you exactly what might happen if you give them money
another example:
If I TELL YOU 'this ride is dangerous and here are the dangers' = honest
If I say instead 'the ride is $4 bucks and its awesome' and I DONT TELL you the dangers = being a dick
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Damn! At least try to hide your bias and come up with a plausible excuse as to why the list should be ignored.
It's been stated COUNTLESS TIMES by several users, I'm not feeding you further.
This last bit of your post is such bad acting that you couldn't even make it sound believable, trying too hard mate... trying too hard...
Thebonly good reasons were back at the beginning of this thread when there was incorrect info. It has since been corrected for the most part but if you feel the list is pointless then stop posting maybe?
There isn't though. Again, this comes down to context. IF!! We were to say, this was a list of things that CIG eluded to WANTING to put into the game, then you'd have a valid point. However, that's not the case, they actually state on the tracker that "Chris made and continues to make a lot of promises." The bolding is also on the page, it wasn't just me adding it in for dramatic effect. So they are LITERALLY aware that they said promises. What's problematic is that a great deal of these items are simply NOT promises. There are a plethora of links from ATV to 10 Questions to SC HOTAS which are simply not things that were promised or weren't promised by CR. There is plenty of things that were speculated or items which were mentioned as something that would be "cool". If you are actually saying that this is a list of promises and you are unwilling to acknowledge that the vast majority of items were not literal promises, then you're either fucking bonkers, or you haven't actually looked through any of the links.
That being said, I am not saying that there aren't valid items on the list, but the list itself is predominantly comprised of commentary taken off-the-cuff from random videos published by CIG themselves.
And this is said in the same part.
"This crowdsourced endeavour started on April 17th, 2017 and may contain inaccuracies."
Oh! Fuck me! I missed that, sorry. So they can just caveat it and all is forgiven! Ok. Well this is from the Star Citizen Kickstarter page:
Risks and challenges
We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.
There! Problem solved! Zero accountability required!
That's absolute bullshit and you know it. There is a very big difference between inaccuracies and a blatant disregard for the core ideas that you're projecting. Again. They highlight PROMISE. The majority of items on the list are NOT promises. So if they want to fix it, then fix it! However, they seem to be in no rush to do so. So why not just change it? It's no less valid if you simply differentiate between items which were literally promises, which are wants, and which were eluded to. As it stands, the accuracy of the list itself is abysmal.
I have no problem with people holding a developer accountable, but hold them accountable for the RIGHT reasons. Otherwise, you simply look foolish, like this list does, and people defending it look even worse. Just call a spade a spade, admit that the list needs to be changed to be more representative of what was ACTUALLY promised, and leave it at that. I'm sure there are PLENTY of promises that can still be proven to be broken or in jeopardy.
Any parent will tell you that this list is about as solid as one comprised by their 5 year-old. They have really good memories, but don't really understand what a promise is.
Have I ever held this list up as some kind of shining example of accountability? No you can go back and see I've said you can use it as a jumping off point. Every list is going to contain inaccuracies that play to the bias of whoever wrote it so should we simply dismiss everything out there? Some lists will be better then others of course but to simply dismiss something because it says promise is over reacting and instead of yelling at me about it here how about you submit the change to the sheet to have them change the wording?
Damn! At least try to hide your bias and come up with a plausible excuse as to why the list should be ignored.
It's been stated COUNTLESS TIMES by several users, I'm not feeding you further.
This last bit of your post is such bad acting that you couldn't even make it sound believable, trying too hard mate... trying too hard...
Thebonly good reasons were back at the beginning of this thread when there was incorrect info. It has since been corrected for the most part but if you feel the list is pointless then stop posting maybe?
There isn't though. Again, this comes down to context. IF!! We were to say, this was a list of things that CIG eluded to WANTING to put into the game, then you'd have a valid point. However, that's not the case, they actually state on the tracker that "Chris made and continues to make a lot of promises." The bolding is also on the page, it wasn't just me adding it in for dramatic effect. So they are LITERALLY aware that they said promises. What's problematic is that a great deal of these items are simply NOT promises. There are a plethora of links from ATV to 10 Questions to SC HOTAS which are simply not things that were promised or weren't promised by CR. There is plenty of things that were speculated or items which were mentioned as something that would be "cool". If you are actually saying that this is a list of promises and you are unwilling to acknowledge that the vast majority of items were not literal promises, then you're either fucking bonkers, or you haven't actually looked through any of the links.
That being said, I am not saying that there aren't valid items on the list, but the list itself is predominantly comprised of commentary taken off-the-cuff from random videos published by CIG themselves.
And this is said in the same part.
"This crowdsourced endeavour started on April 17th, 2017 and may contain inaccuracies."
Oh! Fuck me! I missed that, sorry. So they can just caveat it and all is forgiven! Ok. Well this is from the Star Citizen Kickstarter page:
Risks and challenges
We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.
There! Problem solved! Zero accountability required!
That's absolute bullshit and you know it. There is a very big difference between inaccuracies and a blatant disregard for the core ideas that you're projecting. Again. They highlight PROMISE. The majority of items on the list are NOT promises. So if they want to fix it, then fix it! However, they seem to be in no rush to do so. So why not just change it? It's no less valid if you simply differentiate between items which were literally promises, which are wants, and which were eluded to. As it stands, the accuracy of the list itself is abysmal.
I have no problem with people holding a developer accountable, but hold them accountable for the RIGHT reasons. Otherwise, you simply look foolish, like this list does, and people defending it look even worse. Just call a spade a spade, admit that the list needs to be changed to be more representative of what was ACTUALLY promised, and leave it at that. I'm sure there are PLENTY of promises that can still be proven to be broken or in jeopardy.
Any parent will tell you that this list is about as solid as one comprised by their 5 year-old. They have really good memories, but don't really understand what a promise is.
Have I ever held this list up as some kind of shining example of accountability? No you can go back and see I've said you can use it as a jumping off point. Every list is going to contain inaccuracies that play to the bias of whoever wrote it so should we simply dismiss everything out there? Some lists will be better then others of course but to simply dismiss something because it says promise is over reacting and instead of yelling at me about it here how about you submit the change to the sheet to have them change the wording?
Submitted!! Here's the comment:
Which promise: All Promises What's Wrong With It? A promise is a verbal contract or declaration that something will happen. The majority of items on the list aren't promises at all, but wants or nice ideas. So you either need to change the wording of promise or scrub the list of all items which aren't actually promises. Link: https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=define:+promise
Hopefully they'll do something. As I mentioned, I have no issues with the tracker itself, but the relevance of the tracker is effectively zero, since the vast majority of items are simply not promises what so ever. Even if only 100 of the items were actual promises, would that not be enough? Unfortunately, they seem to have submitted to the urge for as big a list as possible instead of having a quality list of actual promises. So their list can be as accurate as they want, but the relevance of the list is approaching null. I really do hope they change it. I'd love to see an actual list of promises made that were not kept.
Damn! At least try to hide your bias and come up with a plausible excuse as to why the list should be ignored.
It's been stated COUNTLESS TIMES by several users, I'm not feeding you further.
This last bit of your post is such bad acting that you couldn't even make it sound believable, trying too hard mate... trying too hard...
Thebonly good reasons were back at the beginning of this thread when there was incorrect info. It has since been corrected for the most part but if you feel the list is pointless then stop posting maybe?
There isn't though. Again, this comes down to context. IF!! We were to say, this was a list of things that CIG eluded to WANTING to put into the game, then you'd have a valid point. However, that's not the case, they actually state on the tracker that "Chris made and continues to make a lot of promises." The bolding is also on the page, it wasn't just me adding it in for dramatic effect. So they are LITERALLY aware that they said promises. What's problematic is that a great deal of these items are simply NOT promises. There are a plethora of links from ATV to 10 Questions to SC HOTAS which are simply not things that were promised or weren't promised by CR. There is plenty of things that were speculated or items which were mentioned as something that would be "cool". If you are actually saying that this is a list of promises and you are unwilling to acknowledge that the vast majority of items were not literal promises, then you're either fucking bonkers, or you haven't actually looked through any of the links.
That being said, I am not saying that there aren't valid items on the list, but the list itself is predominantly comprised of commentary taken off-the-cuff from random videos published by CIG themselves.
And this is said in the same part.
"This crowdsourced endeavour started on April 17th, 2017 and may contain inaccuracies."
Oh! Fuck me! I missed that, sorry. So they can just caveat it and all is forgiven! Ok. Well this is from the Star Citizen Kickstarter page:
Risks and challenges
We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.
There! Problem solved! Zero accountability required!
That's absolute bullshit and you know it. There is a very big difference between inaccuracies and a blatant disregard for the core ideas that you're projecting. Again. They highlight PROMISE. The majority of items on the list are NOT promises. So if they want to fix it, then fix it! However, they seem to be in no rush to do so. So why not just change it? It's no less valid if you simply differentiate between items which were literally promises, which are wants, and which were eluded to. As it stands, the accuracy of the list itself is abysmal.
I have no problem with people holding a developer accountable, but hold them accountable for the RIGHT reasons. Otherwise, you simply look foolish, like this list does, and people defending it look even worse. Just call a spade a spade, admit that the list needs to be changed to be more representative of what was ACTUALLY promised, and leave it at that. I'm sure there are PLENTY of promises that can still be proven to be broken or in jeopardy.
Any parent will tell you that this list is about as solid as one comprised by their 5 year-old. They have really good memories, but don't really understand what a promise is.
Have I ever held this list up as some kind of shining example of accountability? No you can go back and see I've said you can use it as a jumping off point. Every list is going to contain inaccuracies that play to the bias of whoever wrote it so should we simply dismiss everything out there? Some lists will be better then others of course but to simply dismiss something because it says promise is over reacting and instead of yelling at me about it here how about you submit the change to the sheet to have them change the wording?
Submitted!! Here's the comment:
Which promise: All Promises What's Wrong With It? A promise is a verbal contract or declaration that something will happen. The majority of items on the list aren't promises at all, but wants or nice ideas. So you either need to change the wording of promise or scrub the list of all items which aren't actually promises. Link: https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=define:+promise
Hopefully they'll do something. As I mentioned, I have no issues with the tracker itself, but the relevance of the tracker is effectively zero, since the vast majority of items are simply not promises what so ever. Even if only 100 of the items were actual promises, would that not be enough? Unfortunately, they seem to have submitted to the urge for as big a list as possible instead of having a quality list of actual promises. So their list can be as accurate as they want, but the relevance of the list is approaching null. I really do hope they change it. I'd love to see an actual list of promises made that were not kept.
Well at least you took the steps as opposed to some here who just like to complain but not try to change anything so my hats off to you. I hope they change some things as well lol
Well at least you took the steps as opposed to some here who just like to complain but not try to change anything so my hats off to you. I hope they change some things as well lol
I submitted several wrong things and got the response the editor "opinion" is more valuable than accurate information. Especially the broken list one absolute and utter mess.
CrazKanuk said: Unfortunately, they seem to have submitted to the urge for as big a list as possible instead of having a quality list of actual promises. So their list can be as accurate as they want, but the relevance of the list is approaching null.
You'd wish, they won't do that, you'll see the response is going to be something like "anything causes any expectation is legitimate to be there", independent of the solidity of an entry. The point of that list is to indeed have a big list over one accurate relevant list.
That doesn't matter anyway, several community members are developing a new tool to this, to stand and track only about the game's feature set and its status.
Damn! At least try to hide your bias and come up with a plausible excuse as to why the list should be ignored.
It's been stated COUNTLESS TIMES by several users, I'm not feeding you further.
This last bit of your post is such bad acting that you couldn't even make it sound believable, trying too hard mate... trying too hard...
Thebonly good reasons were back at the beginning of this thread when there was incorrect info. It has since been corrected for the most part but if you feel the list is pointless then stop posting maybe?
There isn't though. Again, this comes down to context. IF!! We were to say, this was a list of things that CIG eluded to WANTING to put into the game, then you'd have a valid point. However, that's not the case, they actually state on the tracker that "Chris made and continues to make a lot of promises." The bolding is also on the page, it wasn't just me adding it in for dramatic effect. So they are LITERALLY aware that they said promises. What's problematic is that a great deal of these items are simply NOT promises. There are a plethora of links from ATV to 10 Questions to SC HOTAS which are simply not things that were promised or weren't promised by CR. There is plenty of things that were speculated or items which were mentioned as something that would be "cool". If you are actually saying that this is a list of promises and you are unwilling to acknowledge that the vast majority of items were not literal promises, then you're either fucking bonkers, or you haven't actually looked through any of the links.
That being said, I am not saying that there aren't valid items on the list, but the list itself is predominantly comprised of commentary taken off-the-cuff from random videos published by CIG themselves.
And this is said in the same part.
"This crowdsourced endeavour started on April 17th, 2017 and may contain inaccuracies."
Oh! Fuck me! I missed that, sorry. So they can just caveat it and all is forgiven! Ok. Well this is from the Star Citizen Kickstarter page:
Risks and challenges
We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.
There! Problem solved! Zero accountability required!
That's absolute bullshit and you know it. There is a very big difference between inaccuracies and a blatant disregard for the core ideas that you're projecting. Again. They highlight PROMISE. The majority of items on the list are NOT promises. So if they want to fix it, then fix it! However, they seem to be in no rush to do so. So why not just change it? It's no less valid if you simply differentiate between items which were literally promises, which are wants, and which were eluded to. As it stands, the accuracy of the list itself is abysmal.
I have no problem with people holding a developer accountable, but hold them accountable for the RIGHT reasons. Otherwise, you simply look foolish, like this list does, and people defending it look even worse. Just call a spade a spade, admit that the list needs to be changed to be more representative of what was ACTUALLY promised, and leave it at that. I'm sure there are PLENTY of promises that can still be proven to be broken or in jeopardy.
Any parent will tell you that this list is about as solid as one comprised by their 5 year-old. They have really good memories, but don't really understand what a promise is.
Have I ever held this list up as some kind of shining example of accountability? No you can go back and see I've said you can use it as a jumping off point. Every list is going to contain inaccuracies that play to the bias of whoever wrote it so should we simply dismiss everything out there? Some lists will be better then others of course but to simply dismiss something because it says promise is over reacting and instead of yelling at me about it here how about you submit the change to the sheet to have them change the wording?
Submitted!! Here's the comment:
Which promise: All Promises What's Wrong With It? A promise is a verbal contract or declaration that something will happen. The majority of items on the list aren't promises at all, but wants or nice ideas. So you either need to change the wording of promise or scrub the list of all items which aren't actually promises. Link: https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=define:+promise
Hopefully they'll do something. As I mentioned, I have no issues with the tracker itself, but the relevance of the tracker is effectively zero, since the vast majority of items are simply not promises what so ever. Even if only 100 of the items were actual promises, would that not be enough? Unfortunately, they seem to have submitted to the urge for as big a list as possible instead of having a quality list of actual promises. So their list can be as accurate as they want, but the relevance of the list is approaching null. I really do hope they change it. I'd love to see an actual list of promises made that were not kept.
Well at least you took the steps as opposed to some here who just like to complain but not try to change anything so my hats off to you. I hope they change some things as well lol
Well I understand that it's not your list and I understand that maybe at times you're not specifically thinking of the context under which the list was/is created, but this is mostly what my problem has been with the list since the beginning. Again, it's not that it's a bad list, but if we are wanting to compile a list of things that CR acknowledged as being a cool idea, or something they'd like to try to do at some point, then it's perfect. If we want to do a list of PROMISES, then based on the results I got, the list would be drastically different.
Basically the list is created on false pretenses, and actually propagates incorrect information under that. That pretense being that these are promises, which they most certainly are not, in the vast majority of cases. As I said, I think that the list actually makes itself irrelevant because of it's ambition to show how horrible of a person CR is. If this was a more objective, vetted list, then it could be a great list, even if it is only 100 promises. I know that it's not as flashy, but it's no less significant...... unless you live in America, and then it's unclear how many falsehoods will be tolerated before you hit a breaking point.
Well at least you took the steps as opposed to some here who just like to complain but not try to change anything so my hats off to you. I hope they change some things as well lol
I submitted several wrong things and got the response the editor "opinion" is more valuable than accurate information. Especially the broken list one absolute and utter mess.
I'm curious how you got a response exactly when there isn't a place to leave any contact info nor does it ask you for any?
The bottom line is, that RCI could change direction today and make their game about pink puppies on the moon. There is nothing you are going to do about it. I will just wait till the game is said to be "finished" and make up my on mind at that time.
Well at least you took the steps as opposed to some here who just like to complain but not try to change anything so my hats off to you.
"Some"? Who are you talking about, specifically? If you mean I am among "some" then you're not reading me correctly. I wouldn't dream of submitting change requests to that goon list because it's utterly crap and made in evil intent from the start. I know the goons, after using months to read their "information threads" (which was enlightning but a waste of time). Their nazi flirts and anti-semittism was the factors that persuaded me to finally put them in the helpless case category.
So I simply don't discuss with goons, or about the goons, because, frankly, it's beneath my level. This reply was a one-time exception.
So then how did you get a response that the editors opinion is more important then accurate information or are you just making things up?
When those get contested is when they update their FAQ with the editor description being what drives the list, especially the broken ones where many entries are not broken features but they list as such because the editor predicts such feature won't be delivered, much-misleading entries in broken won't be corrected because they shielded them with that.
As discussed before, stretching definitions leading to misleading information.
Well at least you took the steps as opposed to some here who just like to complain but not try to change anything so my hats off to you.
"Some"? Who are you talking about, specifically? If you mean I am among "some" then you're not reading me correctly. I wouldn't dream of submitting change requests to that goon list because it's utterly crap and made in evil intent from the start. I know the goons, after using months to read their "information threads" (which was enlightning but a waste of time). Their nazi flirts and anti-semittism was the factors that persuaded me to finally put them in the helpless case category.
So I simply don't discuss with goons, or about the goons, because, frankly, it's beneath my level. This reply was a one-time exception.
If you feel that comment was directed at you that's on you. But I mean you did just admit that you'd rather complain on here then try to submit any changes because the list is "evil". How a list is evil is beyond me since a list can't comprehend good and bad but that's a different discussion.
Also if you don't discuss about goon stuff then why are you posting here in this thread specifically?
Well I understand that it's not your list and I understand that maybe at times you're not specifically thinking of the context under which the list was/is created, but this is mostly what my problem has been with the list since the beginning. Again, it's not that it's a bad list, but if we are wanting to compile a list of things that CR acknowledged as being a cool idea, or something they'd like to try to do at some point, then it's perfect. If we want to do a list of PROMISES, then based on the results I got, the list would be drastically different.
Basically the list is created on false pretenses, and actually propagates incorrect information under that. That pretense being that these are promises, which they most certainly are not, in the vast majority of cases. As I said, I think that the list actually makes itself irrelevant because of it's ambition to show how horrible of a person CR is. If this was a more objective, vetted list, then it could be a great list, even if it is only 100 promises. I know that it's not as flashy, but it's no less significant...... unless you live in America, and then it's unclear how many falsehoods will be tolerated before you hit a breaking point.
The thing is there are plenty of examples from the 10ftC episodes where Chris gives an emphatic yes to question after question, it is one of the reasons people used to laugh at him so much, fans and non-fans alike would be telling him to stop adding stuff to the game, birds being a prime example.
I'm sure some of the list gives too much weight to non-commital comments but that shouldn't be used to imply the whole of list is created on false pretenses.
So then how did you get a response that the editors opinion is more important then accurate information or are you just making things up?
When those get contested is when they update their FAQ with the editor description being what drives the list, especially the broken one where many entries are not broken features but they list as such because the editor predicts such feature won't be delivered, much-misleading entries in broken can't be contested.
As discussed before, stretching definitions leading to misleading information.
Ok so then your original comment was just a poor attempt at trying to discredit something. At least you cleared it up so thanks
Ok so then your original comment was just a poor attempt at trying to discredit something. At least you cleared it up so thanks
Dear lord, your narrative is so hateful... you so emotionally vested in this, at least the fans have a game they want to play, you don't care about the game. --'
I'm sure some of the list gives too much weight to non-commital comments but that shouldn't be used to imply the whole of list is created on false pretenses.
So much for the "neutral standpoint", the manipulation of information, the stretching of definitions and the intent to mislead... Check it!
I'm sure some of the list gives too much weight to non-commital comments but that shouldn't be used to imply the whole of list is created on false pretenses.
So much for the "neutral standpoint" when you can't see the obvious, the manipulation of information and the intent to mislead...
Open your eyes!
Excuse me? Is this response really necessary especially when there is evidence to back up my assertions and I also concede that some of the information may be twisted.
Excuse me? Is this response really necessary especially when there is evidence to back up my assertions and I also concede that some of the information may be twisted.
A tool that was purposely endorsing DS and trolling the visitors, a tool that was used as one weapon to provoke and troll the community of backers (so it was), yet you got yourself to defend and throw doubt that the list wasn't created under false pretenses?
Ok so then your original comment was just a poor attempt at trying to discredit something. At least you cleared it up so thanks
Dear lord, your narrative is so hateful... you so emotionally vested in this crusade of yours, at least the fans have a game they want to play, you don't care about the game. --'
It's all acting, anyone with eyes can see what you are doing!
I'm sure some of the list gives too much weight to non-commital comments but that shouldn't be used to imply the whole of list is created on false pretenses.
So much for the "neutral standpoint" when you can't see the obvious, the manipulation of information, the stretching of definitions and the intent to mislead... Open your eyes!
You know it's not a hateful narrative if you post that you got a response when in fact you didn't since you later clarified it was a edit to the FAQ. Just because you don't like people pointing out when you are caught in a lie doesn't make it hateful.
You know it's not a hateful narrative if you post that you got a response when in fact you didn't since you later clarified it was a edit to the FAQ. Just because you don't like people pointing out when you are caught in a lie doesn't make it hateful.
We've been through this MANY times before, you play dumb and "forget" about it so you can instigate and restart this entire loop all over again.
Check the Hull Breaches: > So you defend this is a broken promise because it is not currently working or in progress? What are the categories "Not Started" and "Stagnant" for? That response shows lack of objectivity. > Their update> [We are working on a page to clearly define each status and methodology. Thanks]
What did they do? They added "editor discretion" on the FAQ and didn't change anything! Like that there are many others in that list!
The standard is their opinion and not the facts, they manipulated the definitions to prevent changing the broken list and the promises that ain't promises. That's that.
Excuse me? Is this response really necessary especially when there is evidence to back up my assertions and I also concede that some of the information may be twisted.
A tool that was purposely endorsing DS and trolling the visitors, a tool that was used as one weapon to provoke and troll the community of backers (so it was), yet you got yourself to defend and throw doubt that the list wasn't created under false pretenses?
I think you are misunderstanding the conversation. It is not about the motive for creating the list.
The comment I replied to postulated that the information within the list was false because it was taking non-committal comments as though they were set in stone. But as I posted prior, there are plenty of examples within the 10ftC series where Chris emphatically agrees to question after question about ideas being put in Star Citizen. If he is emphatically agreeing then he is not being non-committal.
I think you are misunderstanding the conversation. It is not about the motive for creating the list.
The comment I replied to postulated that the information within the list was false because it was taking non-committal comments as though they were set in stone. But as I posted prior, there are plenty of examples within the 10ftC series where Chris emphatically agrees to question after question about ideas being put in Star Citizen. If he is emphatically agreeing then he is not being non-committal.
I hope that clears things up.
There are indeed plenty of examples where he states something will indeed happen, either by likeness or certainty, there's many others where he is simply going on design ramblings about what may or may not be. And they grabbed that and clashed it all under promises. And that is what proves the point here is making a big list of entries independent of relevancy and accuracy and defeats the informative purpose the list could have. What this list is, is resume of 10ftc.
Do you want a proper list of promised things? Then we'll have to get another list going because this ain't it.
Well I understand that it's not your list and I understand that maybe at times you're not specifically thinking of the context under which the list was/is created, but this is mostly what my problem has been with the list since the beginning. Again, it's not that it's a bad list, but if we are wanting to compile a list of things that CR acknowledged as being a cool idea, or something they'd like to try to do at some point, then it's perfect. If we want to do a list of PROMISES, then based on the results I got, the list would be drastically different.
Basically the list is created on false pretenses, and actually propagates incorrect information under that. That pretense being that these are promises, which they most certainly are not, in the vast majority of cases. As I said, I think that the list actually makes itself irrelevant because of it's ambition to show how horrible of a person CR is. If this was a more objective, vetted list, then it could be a great list, even if it is only 100 promises. I know that it's not as flashy, but it's no less significant...... unless you live in America, and then it's unclear how many falsehoods will be tolerated before you hit a breaking point.
The thing is there are plenty of examples from the 10ftC episodes where Chris gives an emphatic yes to question after question, it is one of the reasons people used to laugh at him so much, fans and non-fans alike would be telling him to stop adding stuff to the game, birds being a prime example.
I'm sure some of the list gives too much weight to non-commital comments but that shouldn't be used to imply the whole of list is created on false pretenses.
Well it is false pretenses because the actual word "Promise" is used extensively throughout the site. So if you're creating a site revolving around promises, then you can't give credence to these non-committal responses.
This is what I mean about false pretenses. You can't use "Promise" and then be like, "well, I guess that could be interpreted as a promise by some." The biggest problem is the level of commitment actually varies quite wildly. As humorous as it is, and I agree it's humorous, if we wanted to compile a comedic list of things that CR ho-hummed about and then agreed he'd love to see in the game some day, then create that list. If you want to create a serious list about committed features or things that were specifically promised, then do that, but don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining! On a serious note, if you wanted, you could create a site with a "Promise Slider" which allows the user base to select what "level of promise" was made. However, I tend to think that would probably work as well as user reviews in Metacritic.
The list has an identity crisis, which actually makes it either a work of parody, or a work in which the relevance of the data is actually obscured by the lack of discipline in the vetting process. It's not a question, it's a reality. Unless we're to take it as a work of parody, which in and of itself it does quite well. It is very amusing to watch some of the videos that are linked. So if this is like the Colbert Report of Star Citizen, then cool. However, I don't think that's the intent. So in that case, the app IS creating a false pretense, grouping all of these items as Promises, never mind promises that came, specifically, from CR. Don't even get me started on the Accuracy %.........seriously....
You know it's not a hateful narrative if you post that you got a response when in fact you didn't since you later clarified it was a edit to the FAQ. Just because you don't like people pointing out when you are caught in a lie doesn't make it hateful.
We've been through this MANY times before, you play dumb and "forget" about it so you can instigate and restart this entire loop all over again.
Check the Hull Breaches: > So you defend this is a broken promise because it is not currently working or in progress? What are the categories "Not Started" and "Stagnant" for? That response shows lack of objectivity. > Their update> [We are working on a page to clearly define each status and methodology. Thanks]
What did they do? They added "editor discretion" on the FAQ and didn't change anything! Like that there are many others in that list!
The standard is their opinion and not the facts. That's that, and I stand by the hateful.
Holy shit I didn't even know about that page lol. My sincere thanks Max for giving me the link though.
Now with that said I still don't see how me playing dumb has anything to do with you making a false statement about how you received a response
Comments
if I TELL YOU I might not add something = honest
if I DONT TELL YOU I might not add something and then dont added it = dishonest.
there is nothing scammy or evil about a person explicitly telling you exactly what might happen if you give them money
another example:
If I TELL YOU 'this ride is dangerous and here are the dangers' = honest
If I say instead 'the ride is $4 bucks and its awesome' and I DONT TELL you the dangers = being a dick
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Which promise: All Promises
What's Wrong With It?
A promise is a verbal contract or declaration that something will happen. The majority of items on the list aren't promises at all, but wants or nice ideas. So you either need to change the wording of promise or scrub the list of all items which aren't actually promises.
Link:
https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=define:+promise
Hopefully they'll do something. As I mentioned, I have no issues with the tracker itself, but the relevance of the tracker is effectively zero, since the vast majority of items are simply not promises what so ever. Even if only 100 of the items were actual promises, would that not be enough? Unfortunately, they seem to have submitted to the urge for as big a list as possible instead of having a quality list of actual promises. So their list can be as accurate as they want, but the relevance of the list is approaching null. I really do hope they change it. I'd love to see an actual list of promises made that were not kept.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
You'd wish, they won't do that, you'll see the response is going to be something like "anything causes any expectation is legitimate to be there", independent of the solidity of an entry. The point of that list is to indeed have a big list over one accurate relevant list.
That doesn't matter anyway, several community members are developing a new tool to this, to stand and track only about the game's feature set and its status.
Well I understand that it's not your list and I understand that maybe at times you're not specifically thinking of the context under which the list was/is created, but this is mostly what my problem has been with the list since the beginning. Again, it's not that it's a bad list, but if we are wanting to compile a list of things that CR acknowledged as being a cool idea, or something they'd like to try to do at some point, then it's perfect. If we want to do a list of PROMISES, then based on the results I got, the list would be drastically different.
Basically the list is created on false pretenses, and actually propagates incorrect information under that. That pretense being that these are promises, which they most certainly are not, in the vast majority of cases. As I said, I think that the list actually makes itself irrelevant because of it's ambition to show how horrible of a person CR is. If this was a more objective, vetted list, then it could be a great list, even if it is only 100 promises. I know that it's not as flashy, but it's no less significant...... unless you live in America, and then it's unclear how many falsehoods will be tolerated before you hit a breaking point.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Let's party like it is 1863!
If you mean I am among "some" then you're not reading me correctly. I wouldn't dream of submitting change requests to that goon list because it's utterly crap and made in evil intent from the start. I know the goons, after using months to read their "information threads" (which was enlightning but a waste of time). Their nazi flirts and anti-semittism was the factors that persuaded me to finally put them in the helpless case category.
So I simply don't discuss with goons, or about the goons, because, frankly, it's beneath my level. This reply was a one-time exception.
Viking
As discussed before, stretching definitions leading to misleading information.
If you feel that comment was directed at you that's on you. But I mean you did just admit that you'd rather complain on here then try to submit any changes because the list is "evil". How a list is evil is beyond me since a list can't comprehend good and bad but that's a different discussion.
Also if you don't discuss about goon stuff then why are you posting here in this thread specifically?
The thing is there are plenty of examples from the 10ftC episodes where Chris gives an emphatic yes to question after question, it is one of the reasons people used to laugh at him so much, fans and non-fans alike would be telling him to stop adding stuff to the game, birds being a prime example.
I'm sure some of the list gives too much weight to non-commital comments but that shouldn't be used to imply the whole of list is created on false pretenses.
It's all acting. --'
So much for the "neutral standpoint", the manipulation of information, the stretching of definitions and the intent to mislead... Check it!
Excuse me? Is this response really necessary especially when there is evidence to back up my assertions and I also concede that some of the information may be twisted.
And I found the graph: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1filYl5XipGHrbggNDPMp-dHYVo8CaOOatVVeeQwaNhs/edit#gid=594609067
Check the Hull Breaches:
> So you defend this is a broken promise because it is not currently working or in progress? What are the categories "Not Started" and "Stagnant" for? That response shows lack of objectivity.
> Their update> [We are working on a page to clearly define each status and methodology. Thanks]
What did they do? They added "editor discretion" on the FAQ and didn't change anything! Like that there are many others in that list!
The standard is their opinion and not the facts, they manipulated the definitions to prevent changing the broken list and the promises that ain't promises. That's that.
I think you are misunderstanding the conversation. It is not about the motive for creating the list.
The comment I replied to postulated that the information within the list was false because it was taking non-committal comments as though they were set in stone. But as I posted prior, there are plenty of examples within the 10ftC series where Chris emphatically agrees to question after question about ideas being put in Star Citizen. If he is emphatically agreeing then he is not being non-committal.
I hope that clears things up.
Do you want a proper list of promised things? Then we'll have to get another list going because this ain't it.
Well it is false pretenses because the actual word "Promise" is used extensively throughout the site. So if you're creating a site revolving around promises, then you can't give credence to these non-committal responses.
This is what I mean about false pretenses. You can't use "Promise" and then be like, "well, I guess that could be interpreted as a promise by some." The biggest problem is the level of commitment actually varies quite wildly. As humorous as it is, and I agree it's humorous, if we wanted to compile a comedic list of things that CR ho-hummed about and then agreed he'd love to see in the game some day, then create that list. If you want to create a serious list about committed features or things that were specifically promised, then do that, but don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining! On a serious note, if you wanted, you could create a site with a "Promise Slider" which allows the user base to select what "level of promise" was made. However, I tend to think that would probably work as well as user reviews in Metacritic.
The list has an identity crisis, which actually makes it either a work of parody, or a work in which the relevance of the data is actually obscured by the lack of discipline in the vetting process. It's not a question, it's a reality. Unless we're to take it as a work of parody, which in and of itself it does quite well. It is very amusing to watch some of the videos that are linked. So if this is like the Colbert Report of Star Citizen, then cool. However, I don't think that's the intent. So in that case, the app IS creating a false pretense, grouping all of these items as Promises, never mind promises that came, specifically, from CR. Don't even get me started on the Accuracy %.........seriously....
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Now with that said I still don't see how me playing dumb has anything to do with you making a false statement about how you received a response
Viking