CSM December 2010 Summit, Minutes Part 2 of 3
Here's part 1 for those who might have missed it:
CSM December 2010 Summit, Minutes Part 1 of 3
And just for completion's sake, here's the full minutes of the June summit:
CSM June 2010 Summit, Minutes
Pardon me, while I settle in to read the latest stuff (it's a 20-page document).
OK, right, interesting stuff. Here's some things that jumped out at me:
Hilmar responded that while he still believes that diversifying into microtransactions is an important step, the guidance and feedback from the CSM was extremely helpful.Uhhh... huh. OK, so CCP definitely hasn't given up on micro-transactions. They're coming. The only question is when and how. The how question is only partially answered in the minutes: "only vanity items, no game-changing effects" using "fractional PLEX".
EVE QA cannot veto the deployment of a feature, but does provide risk assessments and recommendations that carry significant weight in those decisions.::blinks:: Wait. So if a new feature is completely broken, and QA reports it's broken, QA's position that it's completely broken only carries "significant weight" on the delivery decision. This... explains a lot. I was glad to see the CSM ask a couple of follow-up questions about this, but the follow-up should have been pursued a little more strongly still.
CSM asked how much “passing around of the hot potato” happens when a bug, for example, occurs that is not clearly identifiable as a Core or EVE software responsibility.I would love to know who asked this question. What a fantastic question. Not surprising at all that CCP side-stepped it. Again, should have been followed-up more strongly.
So far, the December minutes seem much more thoroughly white-washed than the June minutes.