Well, quite frankly, we could avoid a whole lot of bias issues if the topic of adverts and internal server policy was ruled entirely out of scope. This shouldn't be about telling sever ops how they should run and fund thier servers. Adverts and Quickplay are two different issues in my view – especially as HTML motds are disabled on Quickplay connects and will likely remain so regardless of whatever outcomes are achieved.
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Rowedahelicon < theoneando...@rowedahelicon.com> wrote: > I'm open to either idea, but I think the bottom line should that we strive > for an outcome both preferable to us and the TF2 player base as well, so as > long as we're doing that then we're doing good? > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Matthias "InstantMuffin" Kollek < > proph...@sticed.org> wrote: > >> I don't see any reason why someone needs to be a non-server op to >> represent the interests of server ops. The idea is to pick decent >> representatives that are server ops, and are willing to represent a >> consensus, with the added experience and expertise they have to properly >> recognize and understand point of views. The politics analogy isn't >> misplaced. You don't have a member of another party representing the other. >> Why? Conflict of interest. (How absurd I know) >> Maybe pick one non op and 5 server ops. It's still ridiculous. >> >>
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds
