Quote:
Originally Posted by froglok23
I have to agree :( We need to get input from them and we need to to move the project forward, with each day that passes by without them posting the information we need, makes it that much harder to continue without appointing a new dev team :(
Sorry guys, but we need active develoeprs who, not only code, but be an active member of the community.
- froglok
|
Frog, I don't want to get into a piss fight with you, as I think that we are in agreement about 99% of our points.
In fact, I think the only difference I see between us right now is that I've given up on the idea of feedback from the devs (after about the 5th day of this thread, with no input from FNW and Doodman). My post was not to be taken as "Hey guys, I've got a great idea", but rather "They are not going to acknowledge this, then we need to move on it without them."
Granted, as they say: “There's no reason to replace one tyrant three thousand miles away with three thousand tyrants one mile away”, and I don't think we should be rash and shoot ourselves in the foot; however, I think we need to start planning and move on this with the concept that the devs are NOT going to all come out and say "omg, afk, sorry". They clearly don't care about this, and aren't going to acknowledge it.
I don't think we need two versions of the source, but the community is the project, not man behind the curtain. At this point, saying "Let's wait for the devs" is like saying "don't worry, God will sort it out for us." Sorry guys, but if I thought the
power of prayer was going to set this project free, I wouldn't be posting to these forums.
With that said, I don't see any need in hijacking the code, and claiming the SourceForge in the name of France or anything like that. In fact, there's really no reason to involve the current dev team if they don't choose to be included. Instead, as I said before, let's just set up shop next door, elect a new dev team and move on. If for some reason the devs decide that they'd like to be involved with what we're doing, then dandy! If they choose to stay silent, then whatever. I just don't think getting this far then saying "wait, you didn't say we were going to actually do anything" shows a lot of commitment. If we're going to go, let's go. If we're just going to sit on our thumbs and wait for the devs to say something, then I'll go find something else productive to do (like gnaw through an artery).
If all the devs decided that they never wanted anything to do with this project again, what would our course of action be? That's where I think we are. When the devs don't give us input, even when we are questioning their existence, I say they're done with us. Since we are the project, I say they're done with the project.
By all means, if I'm wrong, then let the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, The Toothfairy, or the Devs come in and explain why I'm wrong.
If we don't move on this, then this thread is just going to reach 15 pages, and we'll still be saying "Hellooooo, can one of the devs hear us?” At that point, we've only validated the opinion that the community is incapable of running itself, and that this project and all decisions to be made come exclusively from an iron curtained totalitarian oligarchy. If we mobilize, and say, "Fine, if you don't want to be involved in the decisions, then that doesn't prevent the decisions from being made", then they'll either choose to start communicating or drop out.
We have enthusiasm and excitement right now, if we drag this on without acting on it, that enthusiasm will die out and people will be cynical to the concept of anything changing, if this comes up again.
Like I said before:
Quote:
|
Let's get this thing started. What other items need to be handled?
|
Dax