Seleene: The question is, how do you [make the minutes more transparent] without literally doing a transcript.I'm only about 15 pages in, so I'm not sure I agree with CCP Xhagen. Yet. ;-)
Two step: If it were up to me, I'd hire a court stenographer, and then X out the stuff that's NDA, and then you'd have your minutes.
CCP Xhagen: That would be horrible reading material.
Anyway, needless to say, I'm reading the thing today between my other responsibilities.
Oh, in other CSM news, there's this goofy little accusation leveled at Hans Jagerblitzen. Short version: the poster is accusing Hans of exploiting a badly-designed game mechanic that allows you to avoid getting tackled in a low-sec PvP situation by using factional warfare site acceleration gates to break the tackle. The poster is then attempting to judge Hans guilty of exploiting game mechanics for personal gain in direct violation of CCP Sreegs's request that players not do that.
OK granted, I've made jokes about this before. Well, Garth has, anyway.
That said, "tempest in a teapot" doesn't even begin to characterize this accusation. If I had a dollar for every time some FW player exploited some badly-designed, little-understood game mechanic for gain in PvP, I'd be a very rich man. Hell, I'd venture to say that a good percentage of FW PvP relies solely on one side or the other's ability to manipulate game mechanics for personal gain. Is it right? You could argue it either way, but at the end of the day it's not worth getting into a tizzy over except in a joking way.
Most players with a sense of humor cheerfully say "You know, that's bullshit! But I'm sure the logs show nothing." and then they go on with their lives. This guy decided to take it seriously. Fine, that's his right. But this ain't exactly Watergate, you know?
End of speech, back to reading.