technoir wrote: forar wrote: technoir wrote:
They HAVE made an announcement, the Con is going on AS scheduled right now.
I keep seeing this over and over "Gen Con needs to make an announcement" THEY HAVE! There are, as of right now, no changes. If something changes they will say it then.
Until then if you mean "I want Gen Con to cancel" simply cancel your hotel(with a fee)/refund your badge, ete. You don't need to wait.
As a counterpoint, that announcement was made 26 days ago, dated April 3rd.This is a situation where things are changing week to week, if not day to day.
Then why make regular updates? If you're right and it changes day to day, they should post every week until the state is shut down? Until there's a major change there's no point in saying "We're still where we are" everyday they DON'T say "we've changed to X" it means "we are where we are".. so you are getting your update weekly by them saying nothing
PS-there was an update today, events are delayed
When I say "update" I mean literally "change the Updated On April/May/Whatever __nd/rd/th/whatever" tag.
That's it. And lo, they did! And a hair of info! And that's great! I don't see why some take umbrage with the suggestion.
If they think it's a good one (and while likely a coincidence, maybe someone did think it was reasonable), that's better information going out to more people. If they don't, they won't, and we're left with the status quo.
It doesn't need to be done by committee. I had an idea, and shared it. If you don't like it, cool, we've both given our perspectives, but I really think the ask it being blown out of proportion in a baffling manner.
They could "Update" it next week to say "Updated May 7th: no current changes to policy or expectations, please wait for further information" and little time or effort has been wasted, but those who swing by the site know that the staff are on the ball regularly.
Very few of any community swing through the forums. Back when WoW had its peak userbase, Blizzard noted that something like 5% of the userbase ever logged into them, and less than 1% were active/regular lurkers or posters. Providing a hair of info on a public facing side of things does no harm and likely at least a little good, so why the issue with a net beneficial risk/reward balance?