Loren spaketh:
> Evenin' all!
> I'd like to give a general "your welcome" to everyone who sent
>us messages of thanks in the last few weeks. Anybody remember a
>couple of years ago when there was a debate as to if it would be
>a good thing for GDW to have acess to the list? Some felt it
>might inhibit discussion...that does not seem to have been the
>case.
I for one am glad to have your interaction. I feel closer to
the product you're developing, and it's effect on your bottom line
is that you're getting a customer who otherwise wouldn't be buying
anything new.
Speaking of being a customer, I ordered T:TNE through your email
offer in June, and haven't heard anything since. There was a rumor
about running out of first printings, so I've been patiently waiting
on a second printing. Is this the truth? (Or is this complicated
by the fact that I subscribed to Challenge at the same time and that
has arrived okay).
FF&S: Loren, what's your thoughts on a "beta test version" to be
passed around to some of the gang that have been saying "This errata
could have been caught if they delayed it for a week and let me
review it"? I'd imagine GDW could include all sorts of legal and
logistical hoops to jump through with a "beta test" and you'd still
get volunteers off of TML.
Think about it: free proofreading and play testing at a moment's
notice. Yes, there's the arugment that it's another delay and
hassle toward making an impossible deadline, but there is a point
about getting it right the first time. It can be organized and
collated quickly across the TML in the same manner as the T:TNE
errata was.
Keith Thoms
Lexington Park, Maryland