rubikscube, you are pushing the limits here. Others are mostly reacting to your negativity and argumentativeness in your posts, not that everyone else is blameless either. But I'm not really interested in hearing excuses or explanations from any parties: this is a nonproductive thread, through and through. If people keep discussing this further, there is only going to be more blame and frustration all around. So let's just leave it that a variety of people got frustrated with one another and said some things that they may not have fully meant, and that things said in a fit of temper aren't really indicative of much.
That said, let's try also to keep tempers in check, as well.
And as for the original topic here: Keith summed it up nicely: "Basically if it's something that rises to the top of a DLC poll, we're happy to take that as a "this really *is* that important" message from the community and invest the necessary time (at least for those nodes that make sense as options). Unless and until that happens..."
And regarding my stance on the energy reactor management, my feelings on that have not just mysteriously changed, and no new arguments were presented in this post.
Thus, making this whole topic entirely redundant, and frankly a waste of my time -- hence my not responding until now. I am happy to discuss the game with people, everyone I think knows that, but when a post is argumentative and simply rehashing prior arguments that I already said no to (with great explanation), that's nonproductive. It's one thing if it's a new community member who simply doesn't know that the discussion has already been had -- then the polite thing on our end is simply to point them to the other discussion, and there's no harm done. But when the post is by someone who has been around for a while, and even makes reference to the original posts, but then doesn't offer anything new... well, it feels like that person is trying to convince us to do something by simply loudness. "If I repeat my argument enough, they'll give in."
It doesn't work like that. We give all ideas fair consideration, and will even reconsider ideas in the light of new arguments, but I refuse to spend hours and hours responding to the same arguments repeatedly. I want everyone to feel like they have a voice, and are able to contribute to the game, but bludgeoning us with the same arguments repeatedly is not going to be well received. Sometimes people disagree. And in this case, when there is an unresolvable disagreement, we go with our best judgment, as that's all we have.
Anyway, let's not escalate this any further. The length of my response is to explain why this isn't a topic I'm willing to discuss at length for the second time. I'd just be restating past posts, which is a pretty pointless thing to be spending time on. Let's move on to other discussions, and let the flames cool down a bit here.
