the increasingly inaptly named cB rev 2.0, (By- laws or something like it) |
the increasingly inaptly named cB rev 2.0, (By- laws or something like it) |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
![]() dripping destruction ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 ![]() |
yea. no changes, no complaints. so this should not be in feedback.
a thread to comment about the new staff selection. (ok so this is a complaint, this part, but it's not the main part of the thread) i for one don't like the practice of deleting applications after the new staffers are announced. i think some of us would like to be able to see who's application was better. of course, it could open up the selection people to criticism (if people think the application sucked), but sometime public criticism is a good thing. right. now on to the main part. were you suprised at any of the selections, or who wasn't selected? i was quite expecting michael to be people staff. maybe his app sucked, the world will never know... |
|
|
![]() |
*mzkandi* |
![]()
Post
#2
|
Guest ![]() |
Notice I said "factor much" in the modding process. How much of this factor it plays in the actually modding process, I dont know. Why dont you ask Jusun? All I know is, how well a application is written is not the most important in the modding process, thus not essential to keep open after the modding process is over.
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |