Ivan38Rus wrote:You people overestimate how much is going on in QC forums.
Here's a screen of the current state of QC subforums:
It's not ideal for representing the general picture, so let's group the forums by their actual role:
Ready For Implementation
This forum is for items that are ready to be implemented or are already on the server for private or public use and testing. So, the role is:
Bug reports
Spell Rebalance
This is a subforum for old project from 2011 that had since been completed. So, the role is:
Archive
Closed Issues
This subforum consists of items that have passed through all stages of team review and have since then already been fixed or added. It is kept around in case anyone ever needs to come back to it. So, the role is:
Archive
Archived
Random stuff that is no longer relevant be it technicalities for QC access or process, sub-forum related stuff or the stuff that is out of team's area of expertise (server hosting, for ex.) So, the role is:
Archive
Crafting
Feedback on the Crafting project: conceptualizing, prototype testing all the stuff associated with it. So, the role is:
Dev Feedback
Feats, Spells
Discussions about adding/reviewing/changing various feats, out of the scope of adding new PRCs. So, the role of both is:
Content Concept
PRCs
Discussions about adding/reviewing/changing various classes, complete with class - only Feats and Spells. So, the role is:
Content Concept
Area
Subforum for feedback to devs who sumbit their areas for a fresh look before adding it to the server. So, the role is:
Dev Feedback
Bugs & Exploits
Reports of bugs and exploits. Consists of its own
Closed Issues subforum in case some bugs ever resurface again. So, the role is:
Bug reports (most of it is archive though)
Framework Projects
Discussions and feedback about a large-scale project. The role is:
Dev Feedback
Items
Conceptualization and creation of new itemsets, stores, etc. So, the role is:
Content Concept
So, in the end here's the actual spread of posts:
(
Interactive version)
And out of all this stuff how much do you think can really be open to everyone?
Content conceptualization is out of the question just because of the sheer amount of flame it would cause from the vocal few. And as much as I want to, I don't believe in community self moderation over the internet.
Bug reports are obviously out of the question.
Dev Feedback requires insight into inner workings of the engine and is mostly filled with technicalities.
Archive, could be opened, sure, but that's not exactly worth it, in my opinion just because the info there can be terribly out of date.
I can see area testing being done by everyone actually working.
In conclusion: I am not against openning up a portion of QC forums in read-only mode to everyone, but as I see it, there is not much content that actually can be reviewed by everyone. If you can come up with a working scheme, by all means.
At the same time, QC members aren't special, they are players like everyone else and their role isn't a privilige, if you are technically sound and can actually find yourself working out a compromise that benefits majority, and not yourself, then by all means you are welcome to participate in the dialogue.
P.S.: having worked in different manufactoring enviroments, QC reviews are never open to the consumer without some heavy editing. Just food for thought.
