RHS Change Rules Notice
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:10 pm
AK Warrior - sponsor of the RHS web site - posted a comment in a thread that "the problem with CHS and RHS and all other mods is that volunteers have no control over wether what they submit is accepted or rejected"
[Paraphrase]
Now in a sense he must be right: imagine if ANYONE could force ANY change on a mod? It would be horribly unstable and unpreditable.
Nevertheless, he appears to have missed a several times notice which is now repeated on its own for clarity:
RHS is an OPEN mod. It is NOT a "one man mod." Only one of the original RHS scenarios (CVO) I originally proposed has been implemented. The others are responses to forum comments. We NOW have a TINY number of expressions of interest in 1942 (etc) scenarios - for the first time.
YOU decide if you are on the RHS team. NO ONE can say you are not. IF you like the concept - you are a member. EVEN IF YOU don't regard yourself as a member,
ANY eratta you report will be fixed - period
ANY change you suggest will be considered - period
ANY change you work out in detail that is better than what is present - perfection is not required - will be in any or all appropriate scenarios -
in principle.
ANY change you want you don't know how to make yourself that for any reason is not appropriate for official inclusion will STILL be made for you - just ask. [You want RHSBBO with the USS whatever it is - you got it]
Problems with algorithms or data are ALWAYS subject to review. OPEN review. Get a consensus and it is in. The coordinator is not outvoted by the forum: everyone who does not propose "kill RHS in concept" has a voice. The Me-264 was added by forum negotiation. I did not believe in an early war 4 engine bomber - even in the Japan enhansed EOS scenario - so it was not in there. The proposal to make the G5N1 was negotiated to something more effective - and it was added - against my better judgement - to please users of RHS. Those who want better history don't have to play EOS - they have five other scenarios. Even a far out idea can be put in RHS - if not in every scenario.
RHS has an art coordinator - not because I asked for one - but because one appeared an volunteered. I was buying tools to do the job - and intended to learn art - but never got to do that. EVERY other task is equally open - and I would love to - say - be a test manager - if someone wants the central coordinator's chair. This is a forum product - and it is open. It will go where the forum wants.
[Paraphrase]
Now in a sense he must be right: imagine if ANYONE could force ANY change on a mod? It would be horribly unstable and unpreditable.
Nevertheless, he appears to have missed a several times notice which is now repeated on its own for clarity:
RHS is an OPEN mod. It is NOT a "one man mod." Only one of the original RHS scenarios (CVO) I originally proposed has been implemented. The others are responses to forum comments. We NOW have a TINY number of expressions of interest in 1942 (etc) scenarios - for the first time.
YOU decide if you are on the RHS team. NO ONE can say you are not. IF you like the concept - you are a member. EVEN IF YOU don't regard yourself as a member,
ANY eratta you report will be fixed - period
ANY change you suggest will be considered - period
ANY change you work out in detail that is better than what is present - perfection is not required - will be in any or all appropriate scenarios -
in principle.
ANY change you want you don't know how to make yourself that for any reason is not appropriate for official inclusion will STILL be made for you - just ask. [You want RHSBBO with the USS whatever it is - you got it]
Problems with algorithms or data are ALWAYS subject to review. OPEN review. Get a consensus and it is in. The coordinator is not outvoted by the forum: everyone who does not propose "kill RHS in concept" has a voice. The Me-264 was added by forum negotiation. I did not believe in an early war 4 engine bomber - even in the Japan enhansed EOS scenario - so it was not in there. The proposal to make the G5N1 was negotiated to something more effective - and it was added - against my better judgement - to please users of RHS. Those who want better history don't have to play EOS - they have five other scenarios. Even a far out idea can be put in RHS - if not in every scenario.
RHS has an art coordinator - not because I asked for one - but because one appeared an volunteered. I was buying tools to do the job - and intended to learn art - but never got to do that. EVERY other task is equally open - and I would love to - say - be a test manager - if someone wants the central coordinator's chair. This is a forum product - and it is open. It will go where the forum wants.