6 hours ago, DerBaer said:For a long time, it was my job to create surveys, that get the results I wanted (or my customer wanted). Asking the questions in the right way, choosing the right participants. Choosing the right threshold values. A lot of math noone understands. Stuff like that.
You're selling this survey as a big success. "TL,DR, everything we did was approved." For me ... I think you asked the right questions to the right people.
The Chinese Government gets full approval on every election, too. Do you think, that is good or bad?
Being pretty good in math, let me tell you, that some of of your fixes are not even on your own power curve. (I don't even like your reference points.) From everyone, that is able to use a calculator, you shouldn't have gotten full approval. At least some of the fixes shouldn't have been approved.
All those "*sigh*"- and "Jeez"-comments e.g. by Majushi got rid of many of your critics. They killed any real criticism.
All those "Yeah, we're doing that behind closed doors. Just wait and see."-comments got rid of some more critics.
Let me tell you: The critics are your most important feed back group. You got rid of them.
And then, you asked the right questions in the right way.
These results are not the approval of THE community, but of YOUR community. Actually, they prove nothing.
That makes me a little sad. I had high hopes for IACP project.
As someone who has no affiliation whatsoever with the IACP, I have to ask - um, what?? Is this comment at all helpful?
You seem to be implying that the IACP steering committee intentionally designed this survey in such a way that it told them what they "wanted" to hear. Just think about that for a second. Why would they do that?
Secret IACP Steering Committee Master Plan (Confidential)
Step 1: Change imperial assault skirmish in a way that suits us
Step 2: Convince the dozens, nay, perhaps SEVERAL HUNDRED people worldwide who might play IA without FFG support that we are correct by posting nefariously misleading surveys. (Insert evil laugh here)
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit? World domination???
Haha I'm not trying to make light of your comment (well, not completely) but I seriously just don't understand where you're coming from. What do you mean by "YOUR" community vs "THE" community? Since before this began they've done nothing but ask for feedback over and over. Here, on the big facebook group, on every IA podcast under the sun. Exactly how do you propose that they reach THE community at large that they haven't already tried? ****, they have asked the community for suggestions on how to improve the surveys themselves . This does not sound like the work of madmen bent on total IA domination, but rather a group of people taking real time out of their lives to do the best they are able to keep the game we love alive.
As for smothering criticism, if someone who's not even affiliated with the project saying "*sigh*" on a message board is enough to counter whatever point a person is making, I'd have to ask how good a point it was to begin with. Not to mention the fact that this voter feedback survey had a place at the bottom for comments about what you might like to see, and the IACP published each one of those suggestions in their feedback report. If there are any great ideas out there waiting to be found, wouldn't that have been a great place to put them so that the community could later vote?
So if you have suggestions for how to fix IA, let's hear them! If you have suggestions for how to better solicit or tally community feedback, let's hear those! And sure, I guess if you just want to complain and be sad, you're welcome to do that, too