|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:35 pm
I was so glad with the turnout at the convention this past weekend.
I know the panel didn't go exactly as we had hoped, but it was a good one.
I hope that the things we all discussed helped open people's eyes, and we can get some changes done.
We can use this thread for ideas of things that we want to bring to Gaia's attention. Please just put your ideas for improvements here.
If you need help with anything, you can PM me directly
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 7:25 pm
I'd like to see where Gaia claims to own Tektek. Anyone have any proof on that? Dev quote? Tekton quote?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:17 pm
Lady Kayura I'd like to see where Gaia claims to own Tektek. Anyone have any proof on that? Dev quote? Tekton quote? I would like to know this as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:15 pm
Is it really that important? O_o
The domain is owned by Jason Schwen as of a few days ago... I have found nothing that points to 'Tektek' having any affilliated with Gaiaonline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:05 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:57 am
That doesn't say that Gaia owns Tektek. o_O;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:38 pm
I spoke with some of the people in the audience following the panel. Needless to say, they weren't happy.
There was a fair bit of misinformation transmitted during the panel. I realize Ohayocon is a large convention but it is not in our best interests to use that, or this guild, as a crutch to hound Gaia to come and run a panel, event, or what not. As a consequence, I plan on taking more of a direct hand in running the guild.
Personally, I think we should remember that panels are supposed to be fun and enjoyable, not our own personal pulpits to lambast Gaia for this or that.
Also, just like Kayura says, the about link says nothing of the sort about tektek being owned by Gaia. Perhaps some fact checking is in order for next year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:52 pm
it doesnt matter if gaia owns it or not. the whole reason we brought tektek up was to talk about lairing the items in differnet orders. if a person who plays gaia has a site that shows you can do that then gaia itself should be able to do it. that was the whole point of the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 6:28 pm
ZeroDie it doesnt matter if gaia owns it or not. the whole reason we brought tektek up was to talk about lairing the items in differnet orders. if a person who plays gaia has a site that shows you can do that then gaia itself should be able to do it. that was the whole point of the conversation. Then it comes back to the idea that this guild is not really an acceptable vehicle for that, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:55 am
ZeroDie it doesnt matter if gaia owns it or not. the whole reason we brought tektek up was to talk about lairing the items in differnet orders. if a person who plays gaia has a site that shows you can do that then gaia itself should be able to do it. that was the whole point of the conversation.
So there's nothing wrong with sharing incorrect information? No, that's not okay. Tektek being apart of Gaia isn't a huge deal. But there were other things discussed. Errors should be corrected so people aren't getting false information.
And since Gaia doesn't own Tektek, then one must question, as far as layering goes, are they using different coding? Likely. And how hard would it be for Gaia to convert their coding? What kind of resources would it require to switch over? Is it going to be cost effective? Is it going to break other features on the website? What kind of time frame would this require?
This can be discussed until we're blue in the face but without dev input, nothing's going to be answered or come about. And if you want to suggest this to Gaia, then visit Site Feedback and suggest it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
