Quote Originally Posted by Sapience View Post
Several players were added to the council this year based on EXACTLY the comment you quoted.

...

I believe about 20 - 25% of the new council is made up of players we asked to apply (because members of the team recognized their specific contributions over the past year) or nominated(because others recognized them and thought highly enough of them to submit a nomination).
This basically hammers home the point I'm trying to make.

You picked numerous people and ask them to apply because "members of the team recognized their specific contributions." And yet, it seems spelunker is not one of them (I'm taking your post as confirmation of this?). This is what I'm saying is a problem. The fact that the hands down most intelligent poster was not recognized by the 'team' as being a desirable Council Member speaks volumes about what kind of people you are looking for to be on the Council, as well as the judgment of those on the 'team.'

And this is why I say that who the new members are will be very telling. If you are serious about fixing the game, spelunker would have been picked. It takes a short breeze through the important threads about balance and gameplay to recognize this.

Though you ready to lay blame and question the validity of the whole process as a result. I think that does say a great deal indeed.
I don't question the validity of the whole process, just your decision making when it comes to who should be on the Council. I don't mean that as an insult. I just disagree with your choices. And that's fine...I'm just another customer, and you're the one making the decisions. But the people making the decisions haven't been making very good decisions, and that's been the case for a very long time around here.