Yobai wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 10:32pm:



let me add that I find Rubenesque women highly attractive, so that was not necessarily meant as an insult.  excepting that it was directed at you so probably meant as an insult.

I'll peruse that over another scotch.  Oban.  18 year single malt.

yabb

Yobai wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 10:24pm:


I resent that.

And I don't think the current crop of PC members are going to let bad ideas pass without raising a hell.
I know I won't.
As I already wrote : the discussions on several topics are lively.

is lively one of the talking points too? to go with "healthy"

Yobai wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 12:32am:


Secret.... Squirrel... Shhh !

NDA, etc.

HairyO wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 4:43am:


My fear as well. We all know the first week things are good and healthy to show us how "awesome" Turbine is.

Are those discussions under NDA? I missed that.

Shuy wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 5:38am:


the specific dicsussion about Transparency doesn't seem to be. ( otherwise several of us would have already been warned ).

We have been asked what we see in the term transparency.

Most of the answers were obviously that there was a need to communicate between us and the rest of the players so that it doesn't look like a ML Redux.
Yes there's a NDA and there's good reasons for it, but we are all advocating for being able to actually say general things.
But it's not easy since, contrary to what was ML, we are going to be show things that are still at the idea stage ( so that are not coded yet ), and an idea can be scrapped for many reasons between the time we see it and the time it should go live.

So if we say that we have been shown ideas for new character races and Turbine does not deliver any races in the 3/4 following updates people are going to be unhappy and start looking for us with torches and pitchforks.

rest wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 10:22am:


Read by a Player Counsel member

Ironclan wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 9:18am:


That's so cute. 2 post's did you come here to defend your honor?

He just needs counseling.

OnePercenter wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 10:20am:


Councillor, approach?

Flav wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 7:26am:


That is not a good reason for an NDA.  It is a stupid reason for an NDA.  It's not there to protect you guys from blowback from the player base. You already sound like a Turbine employee...all worried about people being mad at you.

It is really there to protect trade secrets...ie stuff that competitors actually might give a damn about like new xpacks NOT the details of some new quest which no competitor really cares about.

It has a useful and important secondary purpose also...to make sure the player council does not raise hell when Turbine ignores them or when individual members get pissed off and want to post about the stupid things Turbine does.

Bill Z Bubb wrote on Feb 1^st, 2014 at 12:17pm:


There *could* be certain as-yet-unpublished WoTC properties and tie-ins and such.  If there aren't, I'm sure the NDA is there just to allow for the possibility.