Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneYoung
I always read Dave's posts 3 or 4 times (minimum and initially) to absorb the full impact/implications/effect. He has given us enough information to know that there is a process in place that addresses your concerns and that there has been.
|
And I read Jane's 4 or 5 times
The initial post was of the form "I have identified a cause for a problem, here is a solution to that cause". Dave's reply was "The solution you recommend is already in place."
However, you believe that the
effect of that cause is still happening. Can we talk more about the effect, without talking about gritty details or making sweeping generalizations? I know it is a fine line.
For example: "I believe that penalties are a recurring shortcoming. The GDC/GAC should work to ensure that accidental penalties are minimized, so that penalties only occur when someone intentionally violates a rule." The example is pie-in-the-sky (we can't install intent monitors on the players) and is by no means perfect. However, it is a more accessible form of "Breaking the plane last year" AND provides a line in the rubric that the GDC can use to determine how well they are weighting your needs.