Thread:LOTRMod/@comment-26172435-20160611063133

LOTRMod wrote: I do sometimes update the FAQ if I notice it needs updating, but it looks pretty accurate at the moment. And if I remember rightly that page is open to the public for editing anyway. I know people have added a fair few useful FAQ beyond what I originally wrote.

If I were to list every 'planned feature', by which I'd mean anything that has ever been discussed by the mod team with at least a decent amount of sincerity, there would be hundreds, maybe even thousands of bulletpoints on that list. A lot of which would be self-evident things from the LOTR Canon, but also there would be many appropriate general game-improvement and new content ideas too. I have to ask, is it really worth it? I know I don't particularly want to sit and type for hours listing everything we've ever thrown around as a possibility and then rack my brains for more. And what's more: I wouldn't want to deter people from posting suggestions for things that are on the 'Planned Features' list as if they were all closed and finished topics, because the great majority of it would still be open to new ideas and discussion.

What not to suggest - that looks like a few particular no-gos and a restatement of some things from Planned Features. Perhaps it could be added as a subsection under the Planned Features page? It would probably get more exposure there, at least, and be more conveniently placed. It could be updated with other particular no-gos at such time as they are discussed.

I have simply always considered these 3 pages to be your responsibility only. Except for the fact that we could add FB announced features to the Planned Features list (but not change anything in its content's core). Hence, my requesting admins, and later mod team members to take action towards you and your team to update them. This lead to nothing in past 2 months sadly so I was already on the verge of poking you directly instead ... and seized this opportunity.

As you explain it here, you leave me and my colleagues more room for taking action into our own hands.

I understand you wouldn't want to rule out suggestions on 'planned features', that's why in past half year we left plenty of room for (original, specific and concrete) speculation on how these could be filled in, in the future. This lead to more inflow of serious 'how to implement' planned features related suggestion threads, but also to over-speculating leading to far-fetched stuff and an increase in premature suggestions (assuming a planned feature is implemented). Both categories are hard for us to judge, but I incline to put a brake on them as they lead to very false hopes and blur. But, there's no rule basis to close threads for that reason yet. I propose to add 'not too far-fetched' and 'not premature, speculating on implementation of already planned features' to the list of WhatNotToSuggest', but these would be hard to judge, both for the community and us. It could help us if you'd add some more info on the planned features list. I cannot judge whether you can. I've requested two FB mods to take action on this, but they simply even fail to answer in any way.

Regarding the WhatNotToSuggest list: 1) I'll consider the option to merge it in the planned features list, but they're essentially two different things. 2) From now on I'll just add obvious new realizations to that list as they pass by. We've had quite a few of them in past half year, and I'll try to recall them as much as possible. I'll see if I can get the little FB team (WarPig, Ithilion, Grievous, 2 FB mods and me) working on that ...

The FAQ will remain be yours to edit. How do you wish to be informed of proposals to modify the FAQ if we have them? 