User talk:HH LEADER/Archive 2009-04-21a

Option No. 5: in game feedback collection

→ moved from User_talk:Mike_O'Brien

Hello Mike,

Before final decision is made I am (as a software architect) tempted to offer an 'in game feedback collection' option for your review and consideration:

• ArenaNet creates a separate database for gathering input/feedback/ideas on-line while player is in a game (or after login on a character selection screen where the in-game store is located). (This could be only a privilige of owners of all 3 campaigns)
  • Pros:
    • No changes to any Wiki or setting a new Wiki required
    • No competitor has this feature that shows that ArenaNet cares, especially to current GW users while they are awaiting GW2 release
    • Simple change to current End User Agreement will accommodate collecting all feedback and ideas by giving to ArenaNet the ownership from such submissions
    • Users who submitted an idea are easily identified and spam is not possible; any 'unproductive' users can be warned or stopped from submitting
    • Users may be encouraged to submit ideas because their names / character names will be attached to their idea (if accepted) and displayed in Hall of Fame (or alike) or earning special title(s) or item(s), thus increasing players' engagement and in game immersion. A list of all ideas (by area) with their status (under consideration/declined/etc) could be displayed on a Guild Wars site to minimize duplicate submissions (daily extract generating Web pages). A link to it can be implemented on F1 key as a help page on idea submission screen
    • Optionally skill related ideas/bug reports/etc can be implemented on skill selection screen and items related ideas on items handling screens, etc. and stored in special format databases/tables (pending design consideration)
    • No discussions will happen on submitted ideas saving reading time to ArenaNet staff who will be working with submissions by their schedule off-line
    • This will work for current GW, GW2 or any next GW releases and for any ArenaNet on-line game as well because it can be designed as a re-usable component further increasing its value
  • Cons: New database and its online interface have to be developed similar to report feature, but potentially more profitable and with great ROI (pending CBA)
  • Other cons will be added by you architecture/development teams

HH LEADER talk 03:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure this is not meant as a joke. Surely you cannot think the massive development and maintenance costs this would cause is a good thing, as you claim? Backsword 11:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet doesn't want to create a place dedicated for suggestions (like an extra wiki or forum) and you come up with such an idea...? poke | talk 13:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Quoting: "...We’re willing to setup a separate feedback wiki if that turns out to be the best solution. --Mike O'Brien 22:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)". Even so, this idea in particular doesn't look feasible in the middle term, so is not really an option.--Fighterdoken 18:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Gentlemen, don't be hasty in your negative responses. Let's sort out our differences in view of this problem in general.

1) My proposal was directed to Mike and ArenaNet as a company and you do not need to answer on company's behalf. I said that the solution is pending Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) including its Return On Investment (ROI). I am not going to perform it here and you should neither. Money will come in play but not on this discussion board. All you have to say that as a player would you like or not having an 'in game feedback' capability and if it was available to you would you use it or not and why

2) I was always saying that I am against community being involved in a process of delivering their vision of the particular contributor idea to the ArenaNet, because the Wiki community is not qualified doing so. It is understandable that Wiki regulars like yourself got used to chatting 7x24 about how ArenaNet is not listening to you and not balancing skills/game right, etc and always have your opinion as a last word to be taken by those who visiting not so often. This is exactly what I do not want to be happening anymore with any suggestions going to ArenaNet - the middle men are not needed.

3) Do not attempt to discuss the problem with 'massive development' if you are unfamiliar with this game architecture and its development team abilities. I am 100% sure that their code is well organized, they follow methodologies when developing their software and have plenty reusable components and libraries that can be utilized for this development. You can take for granted that multiple databases are being populated during on-line play and there are GUI, socket, etc libraries that can be re-used. Do not attempt to predict whether it is short-term, mid-term or long-term solution. The estimate of this effort will come from the development group if this option will be considered by the company for implementation.

4) I do not care about the timing when this gets implemented and you should neither because as the community you already have given up on the ideas once and were all saying to me that it does not worth your time. It paid by few more grey hair and many hours to prove you wrong. Problems with short memories, I guess.

5) I want to see solid results backed up by the processes in ArenaNet and not by the community, because I can see that company will benefit from it. The company will save time and money by doing something right first time, every time. Work for big corporations and Six Sigma training has taught me that.

What are the benefits:

1) Ideas and feedback go directly to qualified personal and there is no delay which will happen if discussion is opened on Wiki or elsewhere. As a result that qualified personal' time is saved. And how exactly do you think to organize the discussion on Wiki: what is the duration time? Besides, the casual Wiki visitors will never win a fight for their interpretation of the idea with Wiki regulars. If ArenNet personal will moderate the Wiki it is a waste of their time.

2) The classification of the ideas is done by qualified personal and first hand. It will be not 'Wiki categorized' or "contributor categorized", thus easier for players. Their time is saved to enjoy the game.

3) Only handful of regulars sitting on Wiki but all players are playing. It would be disadvantageous for a company to redirect all the players to Wiki from the game. Most of people are lazy, they would not want to go somewhere to register, study the rules how to submit their idea, go check on it, etc. But if it is in a game screen will likely to use it. If it is not in game interface many possible opportunities to harvest an idea will be lost.

4) And again if company will implement such database and interface to it as a re-usable component(s) it will quadruple the benefits by implementing the same in other games on top of what they can possibly get from the ideas and the competitive advantage this solution will create for them in a game market.

The company has to think like players do if it is to win them over from competitors.

HH LEADER talk 19:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

1. Good that you say this now.. Before, when I asked for a bit time until ArenaNet has time to answer, you decided to start with another text walls in that section. And now you don't want other's opinions?

2. Well, the initial start of this discussion was about changing the wiki licensing. And from the beginning, ArenaNet wanted the community to decide about the wiki, so we all are involved with this.

3. Don't make it sound as if you know how Guild Wars was developed, or how many people are still working on it (actually most of the people at ArenaNet are working on GW2, so they probably won't have the time about such a thing)

Benefit 1 & 2: Oh great, all that unqualified comments by players gets directly, unfilted, uncategorized and uncontrolled directly to ArenaNet!? Do you actually have any idea of what some players are actually suggesting, or of what quality we are talking about? ArenaNet most probably won't waste the time and money to develop such an interface for GW, and then to hire some more people that are actually doing the first revision of those "suggestions" (or flame?). poke | talk 20:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I doubt Anet would want to invest the resources necessary to make this work. In addition to the coding changes (you say we don't know how complex it is, well, neither do you), Anet would have to have people monitoring all those suggestions. And that means, when they get flooded, well, there goes the usefulness. --JonTheMon 20:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Gents, stay focused. Just answer the question: Do you or don't you want to have the capability of in game feedback as players and why? Nothing else is really matters at this point. We always will have differences. Forget the Wiki for a moment, which does not exist for many (millions of) players. Leave the details for later. HH LEADER talk 11:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't want that feature. It's a waste of resources I would rather see them spend on things that aren't pointless. If they waste their resources that is wasting the money I gave them when I paid for the game. Misery 12:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I did not ask a money management question. The money paid for a game already have been used to support the features that were included in current release. Stop worrying about the money. They have (quote from ArenaNet Web site): "Sustained, long-term financial backing; no “funding milestones”. http://www.arenanet.com/jobs/default.php

If there is no solid process at ArenaNet behind any possible implementation of feedback that is being gathered it will not achieve the goal niether for company nor for players. So, if it is not the question of how to spend your 200 dollars on support of a new feature that will bring the company competitive adavantage on the market and pump up its shares, but the question if it was available to you, would you rather go to Wiki to chat? Talking about chat: one of the implementations of gathering feedback can be simply implementation of a new chat channel (opening new port and assigning new log files) that will be hosted in a separate window which will not allow multiple players participation, just you with your ideas (no ArenaNet live staff team answer either). Special chat rules for this channel will allow to achieve the same even without building the database because chat logs are being recorded anyway. The technical implementaion is not more complex as to open new chat channel and provide a form, so the logs can be more structured than it is for any other channel (that potentially can be loaded in the database (when ready) or analysed in a 'raw' format). End user agreement will take care of spam. How about that? HH LEADER talk 13:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Ironically this is exactly the kind of ridiculous and over the top ideas that show how players making suggestions to Arena Net is often a bad thing. I would fear for Arena Net's sanity if they had to every day read piles of suggestions like this. By making it hard to give Arena Net suggestions, there is at least some degree of control over the quality of said suggestions, something that would be lost with this crappy idea. Erasculio 13:46, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry HH Leader, but there is absolutely no basis to ignore cost-benefit analysis regardless of whether I work for Arenanet or not. At the moment they don't have the resources to add new content such as new arenas, game modes or explorable areas to GW, if they used resources to implement in game feedback they would have even fewer resources for actual content, so no, I don't want them to waste time and effort on something with very little benefit. You seem to think Arenanet should take all suggestions and filter them at their end, what you probably don't realise is that someone about as qualified, probably even less so, than members on this wiki would end up doing the shortlisting. There are far too many suggestions, most of them bad, most of them repeats, for developers to directly read and respond to every single one. Misery 14:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Misery, development group does not need to respond, ever. The good suggestions can be rewarded somehow later on (like giving the player a title, emote or something, but it is for later). All it's need to be done in a first phase is to establish some way 'of one way direct communication'. This first phase may be done at any time. We are not in a fire fighting situation. People who have their ideas on current Wiki under current licence can wait a little can't they?

It is not up to us to do the CBA or detailed design or resource management. All I gave are just few possibilities but actual implementations are limitless.

Think like a customer and a player and not a Wiki mediator for a moment. Forget about your perception that Wiki community has a better understanding of anything. All the suggestions are the wishes on some one's wish list. If communications between ArenaNet and their customers are direct, it is their decision. They will not respond back from the pipe: 'My friend you submitted today ridiculous and over the top idea that is entirely crappy.' The Wiki community does exactly that. See Erasculio reaction above to which I won't even respond.

If filtering is up to the current Wiki community it will lead to a bias filtering. It actually was all the time done this way before. This should not happen again. The Wiki community does not have enough people skills and understanding of the game architecture to do that.

About control: Yes Wiki community will lose it and it is a positive thing from my prospective and ArenaNet will have full control over the suggestions that intended for them and not to the Wiki community. It is a positive thing too. Wiki commnity will not upset players by marking some suggesting 'crappy'. Wiki community <> Players community. It is a small part of it that spends most of the time on Wiki. The time most players do not have. It is also can change at any time.

About load to ArenaNet: first of all there is no need to respond online and secondly number of feedback items may be limited in some way. There could be many interesting marketing schemes built around this feature later on that will increase revenue. Spamming is impossible because of the End User agreement.

About Wiki itself: There is very little number of users who use it in comparison with the total number of players. All Wiki options will force players to open an account, register, remember password, etc. It is a lot of hassles. Most likely people will not bother doing this. Many of them will not be returning. A lot of opportunities for ArenaNet will be lost. However all users who continue to play are already registering in the game. Who want to contribute an idea will be playing too and not wastining time on Wiki boards arguing whose idea is best and whose idea is crappy. It is much less hassles for players.

You gave me reasons why it could be bad for ArenaNet, but missing main advantages for them. It is alwasy easier to say why we should not be doing something because it is requires effort

You still did not answer my question: if direct submission of your own ideas was available to you, would you rather go to Wiki to chat? HH LEADER talk 16:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't your question, that's a new question. I would probably rather go to the wiki and have a chance to discuss my ideas with others and have it refined into something useful rather than be one more idea in a sea of stupidity. Even just READING every suggestion would require an enormous amount of time, especially if it were made easier to submit suggestions. It should be difficult to suggest something because then you might actually think about it first instead of just "/suggest Koalas are cool, can we have koalas as a pet or minipet?" every time something trivial popped into your head. Misery 16:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I think we know this isn't going to happen, and that HHLeader will continue to defend this idea despite being shown over and over again how it would not work. I suggest to everyone else just to ignore this issue and leave this discussion alone, in order to prevent (more) pointless walls of text to take over Mike's talk page. Erasculio 21:09, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Mike, I am sorry that this topic seem clattered now, and if you have read this far, this is the demonstration of how this Wiki community reacts to the idea that is not without a merit, but does not support the goal of the community controlling the communication channel to ArenaNet The idea is labeled 'over the top', 'ridiculous' and 'crappy' and finally being offered to be ignored. This is exactly what has been happening with the suggestions that were scratched by this community efforts before and as a result contributors were leaving feeling insulted and frustrated. This will happen again if discussions are to continue.

Mike, before I disconnect from this discussion, let me demonstrate on the example of 'stupid' idea given by Misery that was not supposed to reach ArenaNet in his opinion, how it could generate revenue for ArenaNet while increasing players satisfaction form the product, if used creatively by ArenaNet staff:

• Player request: "/suggest Koalas are cool, can we have koalas as a pet or minipet?"

ArenaNet creative staff associated ideas:

• • Koalas are 'national' animal in Australia -> can we give players a minipet associated with their country, so they can display it in GW2 when fight in the persistent Universe areas to indicate that they are from same country/continent? -> Need to think more about that. Maybe include as a question in players opinion poll?
  • Our marketing is looking at launching a campaign in each country promoting GW2 and they need to know how many players from each country are considering to buy it. They are planning to spend their advertisement funds proportionally to the number of active players in each country and thus save a company money, while achieving they sale targets more effectively. -> Can we reward a country bound minipet to anyone who participate in a game survey? -> Perhaps. Need to check.
  • Can we award a country bound minipet to our beta testers from particular country ? -> No.
  • Can we award a country bound Minipet to first 5000 customers pre-order GW2 on-line? -> Maybe. Need to check with marketing if this can be used in marketing strategy.
  • We need to know right now for our Wiki localization project how many players in each country play GW. Can we have them disclose their country of residence to us by offering free country bound minipet? High priority task. -> Action.

Marketing department check: Love the idea with country bound minipet and would like to use for marketing research. Development group check: Possible, but not right now, because of the number of minipets to be created.

Solution: for the purpose of localization project offer to current players to disclose their country of residence in exchange to minipet of their choice selecting from available minipets. -> Implementation: To online store add new item - minipet. Cost - free if country is disclosed (and perhaps @varied price depending on the rarity if not). Add a message about this new item to character selection screen.

To be reviewed later: Can we build country bound pets/minipets and use them as the incentive in future markeing campaigns or free gift to special edition of GW2 as a part of localization package for the game?

Though, a hypothetical example derived form hypothetically 'stupid' idea, it demonstrates that there are no 'stupid' or useless ideas that need to be filtered out before they reach ArenaNet. There could be ideas that unrelated to the game, but each of them is just piece of information that, if combined with other pieces in a creative way, can generate new ideas and serve both players and the company.

Thanks for reading. HH LEADER talk 13:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I lol'd. Misery 13:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I forgot to put default option: "by default, if no associations, stop thinking from customer prospective and whether a customer request can be accomodated while meeting company objectives and choose one of two: what is important from company prospective: "You going to love what we'll give you" or what is important for handful of Wiki regulars: "We going to give you what current Wiki community thinks you going to love". HH LEADER talk 16:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

HH Leader, you really have no idea about the game or the community, do you? Please look around on fansite forums, or visit some places in-game where a lot players are on. You seem to have absolutely no idea how unqualified and unrealistic the ideas or wishes of the most players are. They absolutely don't think about how the game works or what kind of work is required to implement some ideas. And not to forget the number of suggestions; if there was a public in-game possibility to suggest things, ArenaNet would probably get hundreds of "suggestions" per hour. And if they need to evaluate all those text lines in the same way you did with Misery's line, then they need to hire 10 more people just to have the lines read and evaluated.. Not to mention the actual implementation of that feature, it is not worth the work. poke | talk 19:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Poke, this commuinity is not on the position to judge suggestions either. It also niether has the knowledge of how GW2 will be working nor does it know the ideas that are in works currently at ArenaNet and if any particular suggestion will be in line with them or not and can be accomodated, nor it marketing and business plans. This missing information prevents any outsiders including members of this community to do the filtering.

About number of suggestions: it can be limited to one a week per account. Easy. Any spam,- and channel closed for this account. And stop working as HR or accounting for ArenaNet. There is no such thing as a free launch. Who wants to do something cheap pays 2-3 times more in the end. Ideas are free only as long as the company ready to consume them, which requires investment in the infrastructure, process and creative work force. This community is no substitute for that.

Another thing we have not talked about is language. Are the ideas accepted in English only on this particular Wiki? Me thinks no fair this is. Me speaks no english, wants to give me idea to z game. There should be Wikis set for all languages that are supported in GW. So, who is going to push their ideas to ArenaNet through this Wikis,- the regulars on them, of course. You can do it in German too. Ich wünsche Sie nicht es für mich tun. Verstehen Sie? Comprendre? If the Wiki is a choice, I would rather learn Korean. Take a look at the Guilds: many people are only post in their language, they do not know English. Don't they have their ideas, you think?

Remember my last suggestion to open a new chat channel for suggestions with no broadcasting? The logs are already being created in all languages. There are already people who look at them to ban those who are spamming or use inappropriate language (in this particular language). So, if this approach is used, then from process prospective these people can take care of the new logs as well. These people should be able to translate these logs to the language used by creative team. Again, because they will not be massive logs, since limitations of one a week suggestion is set, the players will think before they post and there will be no overflowing of ideas.

You see, you trying to find the obstacles, and I am trying to find a solution. So help me and yourself to be more productive and start thinking positively.

Thanks. HH LEADER talk 13:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I've been trying to think positively about your idea and realised that it is positively a suggestion for a new in-game feature. If you had been reading the current discussion you would have positively realised that due to licensing issues Arenanet staff are unable to accept, comment upon or implement positive ideas for commercial products that are positively suggested on this wiki. As such, Mike O'Brien cannot positively comment upon this section and it is basically a useless wall of text in the middle of a highly active discussion. I would like to positively suggest that this section be moved to HH Leader's talk page where the positive contributions that Arenanet cannot acknowledge can positively continue without a large positive amount of irony. Thanks and have a lovely day ^________^ Misery 13:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that. I knew that from the start when I was posting (it's how it all started, isn't it) and am glad that you caught up on that too. See, thinking positively is good: it gives you new ideas. The only purpose to place this idea at this particular time and on this particular page was to demonstrate that there are always multiple solutions to the problem if one starts thinking outside of the box. That is why it is not useless as you indicate.

I directed my messages to Mike in hope that you guys would not put so much negativity as you did, but you could not hold yourself back even on Mike's page. Besides, if Mike wanted he could leave me a message on unrelated to the idea subject on my user page or have some other person from ArenaNet to do that.

As for me, I am am willing to give the company release/waiver to use this idea in any form they would wish. And this is not the last idea I could potentially give them.

If this particular idea or its implementation is of any interest at this particular time, they could provide me with the text of the release on my user page and a fax number where I can send it. I am sure that they have some form of waiver already to have their employees to sign, so they just can reuse something from it, I guess.

Assotiated idea about this release form (on which Mike can comment): all Wiki accounts for registerd users should have their email adresses, which can be used to ask such users to sign the waiver if they wish to donate their ideas by attaching them to the waiver form.

Keep thinking positively and have a great day too. HH LEADER talk 14:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Just a FYI, if you check histories I didn't move the discussion. I suggested it, but ultimately Erasculio moved it. Misery 14:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I already removed your name. You hope Mike did not read it? HH LEADER talk 15:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I just generally discourage the spread of misinformation. If I was worried about Mike reading it I would have said something there. It was merely a notification, the correction wasn't demanded, requested or necessary, but is appreciated, so thanks. Misery 15:12, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh and just as a way of clarification, I think you think I want to keep the suggestions on the wiki so that there is some degree of control and I can influence them or something. This is actually incorrect, I want the suggestions to get off the wiki completely, preferably as part of an official forum like most game companies use so that I don't have to be involved, I don't have to see them and I don't have to deal with them. I just think your idea is far too much work for very little benefit. Misery 15:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Not sure what you meant by misinformation and not really care at this point. I am really curious as to what the company would eventually do. And I started from the idea of forum too, but quickly understood that all these discussions on Wiki or a forum are waste of time. The ultimate question here is who decides what is in and what is out and any mediator not from ArenaNet is not qualified for a job (read again my last answer to you). It takes less time to read 10 'unworthy' suggestions without discussion than 1 'unworthy' suggestion with the discussion about how it qualifies as 'unworty' and why. Any gatekeeping is a way of saying: I know better then you are what to do. And it what you were saying to me: "I do not know the game and I do not go to forums, etc.". FYI: I am playing since 2005 and on one character colose to "People Know Me", and have other characters with various titles. You cannot know if I go to the forums, So, it is a simple indication that you are willing to say anything just to prove that you are worthier than I. That's what's happening. And this will always happen on the forums. Someone is more 'senior' than the other.

I have answered all your concerns as to how implement direct fedback submission with no spam and overflow for qualified personal and you did not answer. It's OK. I do not want to be seen as trolling you to the discussion.

If ArenaNet is interested in the ultimate solution, I am ready to help and sign a waver. If not, well ... let them think. HH LEADER talk 16:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not rebutting your points because I don't see any need to. I personally think your example of the koala bear did more to hurt your case than much I could have said, but I'm further unconcerned because I see implementation as highly unlikely. I only have two maxed titles, Protector of Tyria and Legendary Spearmarshall, so I guess you know more about the game than me ^______^ Misery 16:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it would take a miracle for a corporation to go this far, but I am a believer. The fact that Mike has opened a discussion tells me that he is a progressive thinker.

If they go any other way they will deprive themselves from many suggestions that they otherwise might have. And any missed suggestion could be millions worth. You see, if they do it with forums or Wikis, they have to set up them in as many languages as they support in GW and have as many mediators from their staff. They would have either participate or read all the discussions which will take enourmous amount of time or rely on the forum or Wiki community delegating them decision portion, to those who do not have all the information to make a proper judgement. My Koala example was just s a funny way of showing how any idea may produce another, that's all. Main transformation was from 'Koala is cool' to 'Koala is a 'national' animal in Australia, so let's make a country bound animals. Of course, they won't be doing this.

With Wiki or forum they also will deprive most of the players of the ability to make suggestions without fear of being mocked. And millions of users will not go to forums. They never do. You have mentioned that you want to do the 'filtering' to help ArenaNet. This is a fulltime job and technically it could lead to a fulltime job at ArenaNet if they rely on that process for a long time. I believe that you and all who on this Wiki are smart peole and understand this. One way or another to be involved in the process means making connections with ArenaNet staff with visible benefits.

My proposal eliminates this kind of posibility in principal making everybody equal in their ability to submit their suggestions bad or not and be recognized individually. I never expected that the community will be enthusiastic about that.

As they say: if there is a will there is a way. But I am swimming against the stream, as always. It is how I am. ;-)

HH LEADER talk 18:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you are incorrect again. I don't want to filter the suggestions, I want them gone off of this wiki and then I want nothing further to do with them ever again. That's why I wanted them in the user space, there they belong to one user and I have no responsibility for their content and no right to touch them so I don't have to care about them. Moving them off-site also meets this goal. You'll notice I am also arguing the case for a separate namespace, that isn't the option I want, but I think it is better than some of the other options Mike has put forwards, but if that happens Arenanet will have to come and do some of the maintenance themselves because the wiki community has already indicated (after lengthy discussions) that they don't really want to do that. I will also state for the record that I have no interest in working for Arenanet, I live on the other side of the globe and I like my job and current career path. You should really stop assuming other people's motivations, you are wrong most of the time and people ridicule you for it off-site. It makes it difficult to make a point when no one takes you seriously. Misery 18:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Then you should be supporting my option for it has nothing to do with Wiki and ArenaNet will have to do all the maintenance themselves. You vote against because even though you have no interest in working for ArenaNet, you arguing how to save their time and money for setting up a forum, in which you would like to participate because you like forums in general and it is also the reason why you participate in this Wiki. Did I get it right this time? Thanks. HH LEADER talk 19:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I oppose your option because it is a massive waste of resources that I would rather they spend elsewhere developing new content or fixing problems with existing content. I also have no interest in participating in a suggestion forum or wiki, thanks, please try again. Misery 19:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)