Eric Chiang's Transparency as IC Storyline Coordinator

echiang wrote:

The thing is, I realize that with you so set on me and my "sinister agenda," even if I answer your questions you won't be satisfied. You'll just jump to something else, or say "oh but you didn't cover that."

The irony, it burn. If it could be converted to electricity, USA would not need no stinkin' coal plant.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

- If you feel that you don't have the time or energy to go into all these details, why do you expect Pascal to go into all these details? Do you presume that he has more time or energy to answer questions than you do?

Whether or not Eric feels he has the time, the fact is that he *did* put in the time.

- I don't argue that the VEKN is very transparent. I argue that their PROCESSES are very transparent.

From your perspective, perhaps. But, then why did you make such a fuss about "Commercial in Confidence"? Again, because the two are intertwined makes it impossible to have the amount of transparency that I personally think should be in a volunteer non-profit organization (which is what I also think the V:EKN *IS*). Part of the problem is that the V:EKN does not have a charter. They are not a legal entity. They actually don't even care to make themselves such.

You keep harping on "Why did the IC do what it did to you, Eric?" Seriously, ask the IC.

As for answering just about all the other questions you keep posing...

They were already answered months, even years ago.

vekn.net/index.php/forum/5-generic-vtes-discussion/24351-important-facts-about-the-first-vekn-set-in-development

vekn.net/index.php/forum/5-generic-vtes-discussion/28248-stepping-down-from-the-design-team

vekn.net/index.php/forum/30-expansion-sets-a-card-ideas/36285-guardians-of-the-faith-a-pdf-vtes-set-by-pck

Anyone who wanted to playtest Guardians of the Faith was able to and would have known its approximate contents well before we released the PDFs.

Another awesome thread!

*pops open a bag of popcorn and a beer*

Eric you missed in your timeline

Oct-11-Feb12 "designed bad cards and ignored majority playtester feedback"

Ohlmann wrote:

echiang wrote:

The thing is, I realize that with you so set on me and my "sinister agenda," even if I answer your questions you won't be satisfied. You'll just jump to something else, or say "oh but you didn't cover that."

The irony, it burn. If it could be converted to electricity, USA would not need no stinkin' coal plant.

Well, you'd still have assess and compare the rate of carbon emissions!