[EricH]

With regards to alpha/beta testing the KOP, 1) they've been doing that with the control system as best they can, and 2) doing that with less than every team gives certain teams an advantage, and doing it with every team means releasing most of the KOP well before the kickoff. If you can come up with a middle ground, send it on to the GDC.

With regards to the rules, indicating that a rule will be retained would be nice, but seeing as the GDC probably doesn't know that it will be, counterproductive. It's easy to guess which rules will be retained, but not with a 100% accuracy. All teams have access to the Inspection Manual. It's better known as Section 8 of the Manual. The Inspection Checklist is also released, and is what the inspectors go by.

I can understand the request for the intent behind the rules, in cases where it is not clear. Much of the time, it is clear. (And they've gotten much better: More blue boxes next year too would be nicer).

With respect to the administration and feedback, there is a channel. You email them at an address that Bill is more than happy to post in his blog, or you go to the "Contact Us" portion of their site and let them know.

I think that it was partially helpful to briefly show the 5-year plan. It tells us that yes, they are working on it, but no, they aren't done with it (and they would rather not have somebody see it and make it really, really hard for them to carry it out.)

Transparency to you seems to be, "Tell us everything except the game."

Transparency to me is, "Tell me what I need to know, when I need to know it (usually as early as possible), or tell me that you can't tell me. If you can't tell me everything, tell what you can tell, and when I can expect to get the rest." (Oh, and tell if there's nothing to tell--like Updates 17 and 19.)