I do too, and yet as someone with a vested, uncompensated, interest I read it.
It is highly unlikely there would be 137 pages of discussion if someone would get in there and answer questions and provide information to stop the conjecture and arguing as there would be comprehension of why this should be done specifically what is attempting to be measured or corrected.
They are too far removed from their audience and it shows with items I pointed out a
bit back on this thread.
Please note, I'm not attempting to indicate community managers hide negative feedback, but rather it can be restructured in such a way that intended meaning is lost and the solution to correct the negative feedback misses the mark. For an example I'd use the rather common negative feedback about the frequency of events. Personally I think it's a bit much and this year seems to have even more, but at the same time I know we can ignore them if we so choose. Now we can presume (since we are not in a fully interactive conversation) that no one on the dev team has ever heard that some players find it stressful to have "so many" events a year. I doubt it, but it's a fair assumption considering that this year is seeing a record number of events. Granted the reality is probably that the events are the largest diamond sinks in the game and they probably drive spending actual money to have enough diamonds for the upcoming event. But then we haven't been told that either. I for one want FOE to be successful and remain the top game for Inno. Personally I don't see how it would hurt Inno to share what their top priorities are and why.
@Leones @Juber Again, I ask: "Would it be in bad taste to ever share what is filtered up at some point? Just a curiosity thing. I could see a high level post of "recent feedback shared" with not everything you share, but highlights of what was sent to the devs. Could potentially quell repeated questions as folks would see that their concern was added to the bridge."
If, in a thread, every once in a while there was a post from community managers stating "a, b, and c, have been sent to the devs for consideration" don't you think points a, b, and c would have less discussion in the ongoing thread? This would demonstrate you all are listening and bubbling. It's not that we don't think you do, it's that we have no idea what you are taking back to the devs. I can't speak for everyone, but if the devs had an immediate reaction of "I don't think that would ever be feasible; ROFL, nope; or hmmm, we'll discuss that sometime" it would go a long way to calm the beta forum versus just relying on the announcement and "we are gathering feedback."