qwert wrote:Oaktown i whas sailing 2 month in dangerous water of Forge sea,and notorious PIrate Captain Andy want to sunk mine ship,but i manage to came in Quench Harbour
right, I honestly don't care how long it takes, as long as I feels as if I'm actually doing something. I wouldn't mind spending the next two months if it made the map better, but over the past nine days I've had exactly 8 pixels worth of changes suggested... not even a pixel a day!
If you were being serious, Spin, I can throw up some samples with the text outlined, but with the smiley I'm thinking maybe you were kidding? Because I started with stroke around the text/other elements and dropped it weeks ago, so maybe you're just messing with me.
Oh well, back to Bert the Turtle I guess.
Kinda a half suggestion, sould make it clearer but not needed and probs wont fit in with the theme of the map
spinwizard wrote:Kinda a half suggestion, sould make it clearer but not needed and probs wont fit in with the theme of the map
Spinwizard....you know that a map is awaiting quench....so why make half-baked suggestions at a time like this. If you are going to comment at this stage of the mapping process, make it a serious suggestion that will improve the map and make it worthwhile the mapmaker doing.
Andy looks for serious debate at this time to determine if there is any further reason for not quenching a map.
Your "half suggestion" can only serve to hold up the process.
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
spinwizard wrote:Kinda a half suggestion, sould make it clearer but not needed and probs wont fit in with the theme of the map
Spinwizard....you know that a map is awaiting quench....so why make half-baked suggestions at a time like this. If you are going to comment at this stage of the mapping process, make it a serious suggestion that will improve the map and make it worthwhile the mapmaker doing.
Since where onto this subject i never really liked this map, its bland boaring and really doesnt "do it" for me.
only kidding mate. quench
I agree with cairnswk here. Unless your intent is to filibuster a map with suggestions please only post things you are absolutely convinced need to change.
When there are outstanding suggestions we have to twiddle our thumbs until the map maker can handle them, either by doing them or giving a good reason not to.
This causes maps to take a long time to quench, and when maps take a longer time to quench then members think it should, we are the ones that get yelled at most of the time.
yes but putting little bits into the quench equation like this and hidding them by making them so small, gimil, i think isn't necessary.
If you're going to say something like a map needs quenching, thne do it openly so andy can also read the text and see what is going on.
I'm sorry, but horse-play isn't needed at this time.
cairns i understand where your coming from but i feel youve over reacted a little. Im sure even andy would understand its m sence of humor and that i wasnt acctually serious.
gimil wrote: cairns i understand where your coming from but i feel youve over reacted a little. Im sure even andy would understand its m sence of humor and that i wasnt acctually serious.
Gimil...i know you're only having a "sense of humour" but please keep things in perspective...
Coleman and I are trying to get maps quenched for the mapmakers sakes. Your "sense of humour" sometimes doesn't help the situation at this "business" end of the process. there is plenty of time otherwise for "sense of humour" to be expressed.
by placing a "just kidding" remark in small text that can be missed by someone reading it, doesn't help the process.
and ask youself, wouldn't you be pissed off if Coleman or I missed a small bit like that and took the rest of the comment as an objection, and your map got held up by a couple of weeks from being quenched.
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
gimil wrote: cairns i understand where your coming from but i feel youve over reacted a little. Im sure even andy would understand its m sence of humor and that i wasnt acctually serious.
Gimil...i know you're only having a "sense of humour" but please keep things in perspective... Coleman and I are trying to get maps quenched for the mapmakers sakes. Your "sense of humour" sometimes doesn't help the situation at this "business" end of the process. there is plenty of time otherwise for "sense of humour" to be expressed. by placing a "just kidding" remark in small text that can be missed by someone reading it, doesn't help the process.
and ask youself, wouldn't you be pissed off if Coleman or I missed a small bit like that and took the rest of the comment as an objection, and your map got held up by a couple of weeks from being quenched.
i would of expected that such a comment wouldnt be taken as a valid piece of feedback (even without te small type) because it doesnt have any real detail involved, but if you want me to drop the sence of humor in FF thats fine.
gimil wrote: cairns i understand where your coming from but i feel youve over reacted a little. Im sure even andy would understand its m sence of humor and that i wasnt acctually serious.
Gimil...i know you're only having a "sense of humour" but please keep things in perspective... Coleman and I are trying to get maps quenched for the mapmakers sakes. Your "sense of humour" sometimes doesn't help the situation at this "business" end of the process. there is plenty of time otherwise for "sense of humour" to be expressed. by placing a "just kidding" remark in small text that can be missed by someone reading it, doesn't help the process.
and ask youself, wouldn't you be pissed off if Coleman or I missed a small bit like that and took the rest of the comment as an objection, and your map got held up by a couple of weeks from being quenched.
i would of expected that such a comment wouldnt be taken as a valid piece of feedback (even without te small type) because it doesnt have any real detail involved, but if you want me to drop the sence of humor in FF thats fine.
Gimil...u don't have to drop the sense of humour....but make all your comments clearly visible in legible size text so that everyone can see what you're saying. That's the gist of what i ma syaing here.
* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
spinwizard wrote:Kinda a half suggestion, sould make it clearer but not needed and probs wont fit in with the theme of the map
Spinwizard....you know that a map is awaiting quench....so why make half-baked suggestions at a time like this. If you are going to comment at this stage of the mapping process, make it a serious suggestion that will improve the map and make it worthwhile the mapmaker doing.
Um, lost in all of this debate is that after Spin posted his "half suggestion" about the font (which wasn't the first such concern) I went in and increased the point size of all of the titles on the small map. I accepted the suggestion, the suggestion was addressed, the map has been made better, but the change seems to have gone unnoticed.
As for Gimil... I've been having a bit of fun in this thread as myself, so I've set the tone. It's been a week since the last real suggestion, so I consider any bump a good bump.
oaktown wrote:As for Gimil... I've been having a bit of fun in this thread as myself, so I've set the tone. It's been a week since the last real suggestion, so I consider any bump a good bump.
i think there will be a quench anyday soon. Seems to be a few maps ready, and we know andy pefers to do it in batches.
