Moderator: Community Team
Your right, I have no explaination. also again thou, I never much ventured into early development so I can't offer you any more explaination than I already have. I can only assume you idea didn't stick out or grab anyones intrest.Woodruff wrote:So then how does that explain my point regarding the complete non-interest in even telling me that my map idea sucked? It's been almost three months...if it was that bad of an idea, shouldn't someone have said it by now? (Someone's probably racing to the thread now. <laughing out loud>). You didn't seem to address it.gimil wrote:I think with new people it is a case of you win some you loose some ruff. I never was a regular in the early development (my role was to check graphical standards later on) but I could probably list of good bunch of maps that went through the foundry just fine with first time map makers. Actually at the moment (I think) most maps in development are under production by first time map makers. Dont cite me though I would need to double check. If that doesn't show a good attitude to new map makers I don't know what does.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Are you implying that I am arrogant? Only someone of my own massive intellect could be able to handle the depth of my humbleness.gimil wrote:Of course some are right, the foundry does have its fair share or arrogant Cartographers. Isn't that right mibi.mibi wrote:Can't we all just have a banana.![]()
![]()
<laughing> I love it!mibi wrote:Are you implying that I am arrogant? Only someone of my own massive intellect could be able to handle the depth of my humbleness.gimil wrote:Of course some are right, the foundry does have its fair share or arrogant Cartographers. Isn't that right mibi.mibi wrote:Can't we all just have a banana.![]()
![]()
Seriously? That's awesome!mibi wrote:btw, August 6th you can catch me on Penn and Teller's Bullshit. It airs on Showtime.
Really?mibi wrote:August 6th you can catch me on Penn and Teller's Bullshit.
Yes I talk about taxes and stuff. I cannot confirm that I do not get made fun of, but I think I am on their side. Who knows what they do in editing though.Timminz wrote:Really?mibi wrote:August 6th you can catch me on Penn and Teller's Bullshit.
Cool beans!mibi wrote:Yes I talk about taxes and stuff. I cannot confirm that I do not get made fun of, but I think I am on their side. Who knows what they do in editing though.Timminz wrote:Really?mibi wrote:August 6th you can catch me on Penn and Teller's Bullshit.
That was not the Foundry's fault, that was the original artist's fault. Marvaddin put a laundry list of restrictions on Rj's version, things that COULD NOT change or he would veto the revamp. I suppose that's an object lesson in how one person can frame the perception of an entire group.jiminski wrote:They blew it royally and nearly lost one of the finest artists on the site in the process. Now if they could get it right in the future, it was a beautiful blueprint for how things could work in a more mainstream format.. maybe.
In the most recent issue of the Foundry Newsletter, 2 of the 4 Recently Quenched, 14 of 27 Main Foundry, and all 3 Preliminary Reviews are by first timers. In essence, over half of the foundry is by first-timers.gimil wrote:Actually at the moment (I think) most maps in development are under production by first time map makers. Dont cite me though I would need to double check.
I know I am not alone in the following two things, but I only speak for myself: I never visit Ideas, and I hate telling someone their idea has no hope. I tried being a part of Ideas numerous times over the past year and a half, but every time I had to contend with tons of calls for the latest Star Wars map (some people never understand copyright) and tons of decent ideas with no structure behind them (no graphic artist is going to pick up an idea that has one sentence worth of thought put into it). It got old. So if your idea DIDN'T fit into the above two cases, I didn't know as I don't check Ideas.Woodruff wrote:So then how does that explain my point regarding the complete non-interest in even telling me that my map idea sucked? It's been almost three months...if it was that bad of an idea, shouldn't someone have said it by now? (Someone's probably racing to the thread now. <laughing out loud>). I'm not complaining that my map idea wasn't liked. I'm complaining that it wasn't worth anyone's time (other than yeti_c) to say anything at ALL about it. You didn't seem to address that.
TaCktiX wrote:That was not the Foundry's fault, that was the original artist's fault. Marvaddin put a laundry list of restrictions on Rj's version, things that COULD NOT change or he would veto the revamp. I suppose that's an object lesson in how one person can frame the perception of an entire group.jiminski wrote:They blew it royally and nearly lost one of the finest artists on the site in the process. Now if they could get it right in the future, it was a beautiful blueprint for how things could work in a more mainstream format.. maybe.
We learnt after this that we would rather a revamp didn't happen than allow any veto-power to anyone (other than lackattack himself of course).jiminski wrote: I agree of course that Marv was at the heart of this taking 9 months more than it should have.
But think of it this way - in the event of another Revamp, if the Foundry allowed the original artist a super-veto again, in your opinion, would it still be solely the original artists fault if the same problems arose?
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:We learnt after this that we would rather a revamp didn't happen than allow any veto-power to anyone (other than lackattack himself of course).jiminski wrote: I agree of course that Marv was at the heart of this taking 9 months more than it should have.
But think of it this way - in the event of another Revamp, if the Foundry allowed the original artist a super-veto again, in your opinion, would it still be solely the original artists fault if the same problems arose?
I never did say that it was totally marvs at fault you stuck up tea drinking snob!jiminski wrote: iiiii know ya drunken, whiskey-breathed brawler ..![]()
I agree with that too and know the foundry learned, i was just addressing the point Tac made about it solely being Marvs fault. (along with unfair perception by association) It took no responsibility on to the Foundry. What use is that?.. process must allow for even the smallest minded Herbert, made crazed by maternal instinct for their creation.
i understand Marv's instinct actually but the ability for a mother bear to commit a frenzied attack on random kagool-wearing map-makers in hiking boots must be limited
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:I never did say that it was totally marvs at fault you stuck up tea drinking snob!jiminski wrote: iiiii know ya drunken, whiskey-breathed brawler ..![]()
I agree with that too and know the foundry learned, i was just addressing the point Tac made about it solely being Marvs fault. (along with unfair perception by association) It took no responsibility on to the Foundry. What use is that?.. process must allow for even the smallest minded Herbert, made crazed by maternal instinct for their creation.
i understand Marv's instinct actually but the ability for a mother bear to commit a frenzied attack on random kagool-wearing map-makers in hiking boots must be limited
What I am saying is that in the original set up of the revamp we didn't think any problems would arise with the conditions marv put down. We were ultimately wrong and learnt from it.
You are correct jim, you rotten toothed bastard!jiminski wrote:Now if that image is (rightly or wrongly), xenophobic and intransigent, you are missing a trick.
If the outsiders perception is "Not goin there! they made me feel unwelcome and that my opinion was crap!" then facilitating Marv's behaviour absolutely reinforced that belief.
that may be very unfair but it may also be the reality.
Top Score:2403natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
It definitely did not. But if you'd like, you can check it out at:TaCktiX wrote:I know I am not alone in the following two things, but I only speak for myself: I never visit Ideas, and I hate telling someone their idea has no hope. I tried being a part of Ideas numerous times over the past year and a half, but every time I had to contend with tons of calls for the latest Star Wars map (some people never understand copyright) and tons of decent ideas with no structure behind them (no graphic artist is going to pick up an idea that has one sentence worth of thought put into it). It got old. So if your idea DIDN'T fit into the above two cases, I didn't know as I don't check Ideas.Woodruff wrote:So then how does that explain my point regarding the complete non-interest in even telling me that my map idea sucked? It's been almost three months...if it was that bad of an idea, shouldn't someone have said it by now? (Someone's probably racing to the thread now. <laughing out loud>). I'm not complaining that my map idea wasn't liked. I'm complaining that it wasn't worth anyone's time (other than yeti_c) to say anything at ALL about it. You didn't seem to address that.

natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
It is an opinion segment being run by the CC Newsletter. All Newsletter activities will now take place in this forum, and since they all have their own dedicated place to exist, readership will likely go up, at least of the Foundry and Tournament Newsletters. With the reorganization people who "don't read" the Newsletter will at least check the forum out, and might start reading.Woodruff wrote:Why was this thread moved to NEWSLETTERS? It seems far more appropriate to the General Discussion to me. This thread isn't going to be seen by those who don't read the newsletters...so I guess their opinions aren't important?
I did in fact "race to the thread" (even before you added this link: advanced search is a wonderful thing) and realised that I had seen this and not commented. My bad. I will now (over there, so as not to hijack this thread).Woodruff wrote:It definitely did not. But if you'd like, you can check it out at:TaCktiX wrote:I know I am not alone in the following two things, but I only speak for myself: I never visit Ideas, and I hate telling someone their idea has no hope. I tried being a part of Ideas numerous times over the past year and a half, but every time I had to contend with tons of calls for the latest Star Wars map (some people never understand copyright) and tons of decent ideas with no structure behind them (no graphic artist is going to pick up an idea that has one sentence worth of thought put into it). It got old. So if your idea DIDN'T fit into the above two cases, I didn't know as I don't check Ideas.Woodruff wrote:So then how does that explain my point regarding the complete non-interest in even telling me that my map idea sucked? It's been almost three months...if it was that bad of an idea, shouldn't someone have said it by now? (Someone's probably racing to the thread now. <laughing out loud>). I'm not complaining that my map idea wasn't liked. I'm complaining that it wasn't worth anyone's time (other than yeti_c) to say anything at ALL about it. You didn't seem to address that.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 63&t=80593
I actually suspect the opposite will be the case (less people will see opinion pieces like this, rather than people going to the Newsletter area for the opinion pieces), but I realize that's said without having anything but my opinion to back it up. Hopefully, that won't be the case...but I've found that underestimating the natural laziness of people in general is a sure way to failure.TaCktiX wrote:It is an opinion segment being run by the CC Newsletter. All Newsletter activities will now take place in this forum, and since they all have their own dedicated place to exist, readership will likely go up, at least of the Foundry and Tournament Newsletters. With the reorganization people who "don't read" the Newsletter will at least check the forum out, and might start reading.Woodruff wrote:Why was this thread moved to NEWSLETTERS? It seems far more appropriate to the General Discussion to me. This thread isn't going to be seen by those who don't read the newsletters...so I guess their opinions aren't important?
this thinking is so flawed, it is actually hilarious.-0TaCktiX wrote:It is an opinion segment being run by the CC Newsletter. All Newsletter activities will now take place in this forum, and since they all have their own dedicated place to exist, readership will likely go up, at least of the Foundry and Tournament Newsletters. With the reorganization people who "don't read" the Newsletter will at least check the forum out, and might start reading.

I guess time will tell. I did go back and read some of the early Tournament Newsletters to see what was there, format etc.owenshooter wrote:this thinking is so flawed, it is actually hilarious.-0TaCktiX wrote:It is an opinion segment being run by the CC Newsletter. All Newsletter activities will now take place in this forum, and since they all have their own dedicated place to exist, readership will likely go up, at least of the Foundry and Tournament Newsletters. With the reorganization people who "don't read" the Newsletter will at least check the forum out, and might start reading.
No it is not flawed. Lemme highlight a few things in that post.owenshooter wrote:this thinking is so flawed, it is actually hilarious.-0
There's a difference between naivete and optimism, you apparently missed it, and I for one am getting sick and tired of your sarcastic attitude about everything around this reorganization.TaCktiX (emphasis added) wrote:It is an opinion segment being run by the CC Newsletter. All Newsletter activities will now take place in this forum, and since they all have their own dedicated place to exist, readership will likely go up, at least of the Foundry and Tournament Newsletters. With the reorganization people who "don't read" the Newsletter will at least check the forum out, and might start reading.
as andy pointed out, it is only phase one, and he is asking for patience... sooo, i'm giving him some patience, since he has made some serious and positive changes... i have to trust the monkey.. however, i still think it is naive to think that moving the foundry's physical position will improve traffic, when one of the main reasons the foundry is not visited is due to the atmosphere created by the regulars and the style of moderation within that forum.. you know, kind of like your response to my post. again, the foundry regulars and a few of their mods never disappoint with continually showing why people do not venture into it, with their actions and comments in other forums... you know, kind of like what most of this thread states from non-foundry regulars.TaCktiX wrote:There's a difference between naivete and optimism, you apparently missed it, and I for one am getting sick and tired of your sarcastic attitude about everything around this reorganization.
