Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Posky dynamics forum - NO discussion

Recommended Posts

Hello..As a frequent poster to Usenet sim groups and other web-based forums.. I was shocked to find posts deleted and / or locked on the Opensky Dynamics forum. Posky has a number of technical problems such as engine power and especially landing gear breaking.Posts addressing these issues are deflected by the administrators such that NO tuning discussion can take place. It's as if Posky considers editing the CFG file as `unauthorized FDE editing' or even `hacking'.This is very bad to have such an attitude.I will continue to download, configure, and enjoy the Opensky models, but don't bother posting there unless you want to say: ouuu .. ahhh .. kewl .. excellent .. !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Seems to be a developing trend ..... ever been to the DreamFleet Forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know there are problems, learn how to fix them yourself... How much did you pay for the POSKY aircraft? I hate to raise this question every time someone complains about their support, but what it comes down to is they provide support on their own time. And reading some of the flak they take, the comments are often rude. I'd get fed up and start deleting posts too, if someone gladly accepted a freebie of mine and said in a public forum, "I like it, but...."As for the Dreamfleet comment, whole different story. A price was paid for their product. I learned the hard way though that a negative post in a public forum they host costs them customers, at their own expense. Better to make private suggestions and keep the results private. You just can't win any empathy, especially at the Dreamfleet forum, by pointing out flaws. The hosts are as human as any of us--and the $20-30 bucks we pay them for their products won't buy them an instant course in customer relations. They are often learning as they go... Not an excuse, but considering the end result, I'm willing to enjoy their product and get on with life...-John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi John,I completely agree with your post, although I also understand Edwinn's point. Constructive criticism should be seen as something of benefit to both the consumer and the developer. Unfortunately, there has been an avalanche of negative posts of the 'your plane sucks' quality especially on the POSKY forums (even threads that started out with polite criticism quickly degenerated into name-calling) , that the Posky members' attitude is entirely understandable.As for commercial developers, e-mail is also in my experience the most reliable way to get problems solved. I had excellent e-mail support from both PSS and SimFlyers in the past. Dreamfleet and Flight One, however, do no longer offer e-mail support, so the only way is to use their forums. I got no reply to posts in both forums outlining a serious problem I have with running the DF 737, so in desperation, I sent an e-mail to Flight One sales. I finally got a response, outlining the procedure to apply for a refund. So this is what I'm going to do and I'll steer clear of DF products in the future. It is time, commersial developers realised that the quality of support is just important for the success of a product, as the quality of the product itself. Dreamfleet have just lost a customer due to the lack of support offered...Cheers,Gosta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this subject needs to be addressed in two separate situations: freeware and payware.Freeware: While I agree that constructive criticism is a desirable aspect of the development of anything, I also can understand that what one person sees as constructive is not necessarily interpreted as such by another (particularly when text is the only form of communication available, as is the case in forums). Because freeware developers do what they do without compensation from the users of their creations, they also retain the right to accept or disregard any criticism of their creations. It is not hard to get a feeling for how particular groups feel about criticism. Don't like their position? Tough luck. No need to get all sarcastic and contemptuous about it in another forum.Payware: These developers need to provide the necessary support for their customer base. Yet here the consumers definitely have more of an impact. If the support is too poor you can request refunds, boycott product lines/companies, etc. You can even spread via "word of mouth" your personal experiences with regard to the lack of support, etc (although I believe this should be done truthfully and without exaggeration). Still, there's always the everlasting rule of thumb, "buyer beware". Just because you gave some money for it, does not necessarily mean you are going to get what you think you paid for, more often it means you get what the developer thinks you paid for and notthing more.Sorry for ranting. Just my opinions. Take them or leave them.:-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is of course also a huge difference in the way you word your posts.Say you find a flaw in the climb performance.Some people would say something like "the climb performance isn't accurate. It does this (...) which IMO should be more like that (...)".Those persons would probably be listened to and their suggestions taking into consideration for an update.Other will say something like "your product is crap, the climb performance is completely wrong. I demand my money back and will by from Ariane/Peter Tishma in the future" (yes, I've heard that right on these forums (which aren't even the support forums for the product at hand).Those persons will most likely be completely ignored or at the least not be taken seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.. just so you know.. my posts on the `Project Brokensky' Flight Dynamics forum consisted of replying to another post about "how to install the new FDE files". In addition, I mentioned a number of CFG entries that should be changed such as plane and wing geometry. Posky personnel deleted this stating that it was "unauthorized editing of the FDE'. Since when is editing the CFG file `FDE hacking' or a violation of FDE copyright?? This post was gutted and replaced with a scathing warning message.I stated that ALL models require CFG editing..!!The second deletion case was of a comprehensive review on the CRJ-200 including engine power and cruise pitch. This post was completely `wiped' from the dynamics forum. The main question was.. " why is the thrust scalar set at 1.1625 and when I set it to 1.000 the jet can barely make 240 kts at FL310..!!p.s. will make these deleted posts available here soon...Cheers..!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosta, Personally, I'm sorry to hear about anyone that has been unhappy with the support they have received at DF, especially if it means that somebody intends to boycot future releases!In fact, even though I had no input into the 737 whatsoever, I just spent the last 15 minutes trying to find your requests for help that resulted in your statement in an effort to help resolve an outstanding issues.Sadly, I could only find 2 posts by you on the Dreamfleet forum and only one of those was a request for help. Perhaps you could be kind enough to give me the links to the others?Thanks.http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Gosta, >>Personally, I'm sorry to hear about anyone that has been >unhappy with the support they have received at DF, >especially if it means that somebody intends to boycot >future releases! >>In fact, even though I had no input into the 737 whatsoever, >I just spent the last 15 minutes trying to find your >requests for help that resulted in your statement in an >effort to help resolve an outstanding issues. >>Sadly, I could only find 2 posts by you on the Dreamfleet >forum and only one of those was a request for help. Perhaps >you could be kind enough to give me the links to the others? >>Thanks. >Paul..I regret that Dreamfleet somehow got `dragged' into this thread. I have no issues with Dreamfleet and am largely unfamiliar with their work. The objective of most of the content that I create involves flight testing and flight characteristics. You will find many graphics, animations, illustrations, and charts included in these posts.Although I'm not a pilot, I have somewhat of a `textbook' or mathematical understanding of flight. Some are defensive when an issue is brought into the light. On the other hand, I receive many emails with encouragement to "keep posting Sim topics". You may find statements that are made which in actual experience are incorrect, and I welcome anyone to correct these posts.Cheers and keep up the good work..!!Gregory Abbey - Edwinnengineering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you do post that... No matter what, no one can tell us what we can and can't do to text files on our own systems. You are quite right about the FDE editing....there's many dynamics that may very from system to system. For example, I have a very small (and sensitive) joystick. I usually tone down elevator and roll response in the FDE's to compensate, as MS's joystick settings alone only partially compensate.So as far as I'm concerned, if that's the response you got, I stand corrected. What you do on your own system, and any suggested changes you make, is your right. If you were redistributing the FDE, that's another story. Can't wait to see your post, and the response.As far as the review is concerned, I'd have to read it to perceive whether it might have been taken in the wrong light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Project Brokensky -- What does it accomplish to say this? Is this your idea of constructive criticism?I saw your more recent posts in this forum "flight testing" the POSKY CRJ-200. If you used the same subject heading in POSKY's forum, I'm not surprised that it was removed. I have no problem with someone submitting a "flight test" (aka review) to a site like Avsim.com or Flightsim.com, but it is rather presumptuous for you to post something like that to POSKY's own forum. I can see how they may not have seen it as constructive criticism about their creation. Probably could have just saved yourself a lot of problems by emailing Warren privately to suggest changes and/or request permission to post your "improvements" to the POSKY FDE forum.:-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,here are the links to my posts. I got a few responses from other users (note: not developers) on the Flight One forum, but nothing that solved by problem. http://www.flightsimnetwork.com/dcforum/DCForumID3/7396.htmlFlight One ForumThere shouldn't really be a need for repeat posts, I assume that all posts are read by the developers, as it is a support forum replacing e-mail support. And a single e-mail sent to the support address at other developers was sufficient to generate a positive response. Cheers,Gosta.EDIT: edited second link in HTML to get rid of horizontal scrollbar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, even if this doesn't have anything to do with the POSKY subject, I though I'd post my feelings about this whole "constructive criticism" thing.Freeware seems to be covered by an untochable veil that says "you can't complain because you got it for free". Well, this isn't all true. If we couldn't complain about something that's been given for free, we wouldn't be allowed to comment a concert, or an art gallery, or anything, as we can see it for free. However, people that critize musci and/or art do exist, and let's face it, we are all free to express our opinion and we do. Some of us even don't like Christina Aguilera! There will always be those kinds of people. And I undertsand POSKY for being upset sometimes, it's really hard to hear (read) someone that isn't happy with your work, your pride gets hurt, even if you won't admit it.But, if we all shut up, and stop saying what we think just becasue we freely downloaded the prodcut, then there wouldn't be any possibility of improvement.I agree that some people have to stop complaining about everything too, but my point is, freeware is NOT untouchable. I think we should stop using that as an excuse.My two cents only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Constructive criticismI'd like to express my apologies for the `steam' that was perhaps let-off in this last series, but it was extremely aggrevating (the 'P' word) to spend 30-45 mins creating virtual web pages with test results and then a few hours later, find them gone, especially while trying to get some issues resolved.This forum doesn't allow the user to go back and edit after 60-mins so I cannot now `soften' the remarks made. Some boards allow unlimited editing and even deletion of you own posts, and I have deleted many (of my own) which were either inaccurate or offensive.One thing is for sure, I'm not one to post a trite `aww kewl' message!! { smile } [/p]p.s. we haven't even gotten to the landing gear issues..Gregory Abbey - Edwinnengineering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freeware certainly isn't untouchable, but showing the utmost respect for the way critiques are given I think is a prerequisite for participation in any forum hosted by a freeware provider, or in these forums. I've received emails and public comments from people, the content of which you wouldn't believe. And you know what? I'm not paid to take it, and neither are the freeware groups. Once someone starts mocking a name (using the "Project BrokenSky" example), I think a line gets crossed. Yet someone always comes in and says we shouldn't treat freeware with kid gloves. Why is that? What if the shoe were on the other foot, and I referred to AFG by another combination of those three letters? That's what I'm talking about, and that's the type of commentary that had better stop in our community.-John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The post at DF got not a single response, so it looks like it may well have slipped off the page and not been seen. My suggestion would be to 'bump' it to at least make sure it gets read.Having said that, you state that all was well initially which indicates that something about your setup is the cause of the problem and as you can imagine, that's a very hard one to provide support for.I'd still bump it a few times though.All the best,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They only lock/remove posts that involve questions that have been discussed a thousand times and do not be brought up again. These questions usually involve issues people have with the FDEs, and that have been achknowledged by POSKY.Of course they don't want you to modify their FDEs. How would you feel if someone took all of your work, altered it a bit, and then redistributed it as though it were yours? Sure, more people would be honest and give POSKY the credit, but there will always be a few terrible people that come along, alter the FDE, and then claim it to be theirs. I don't blame POSKY for not wanting to take that risk.With all due respect Gregory, you're arugment has no basis, and should have never been brought up in the first place. POSKY works their butt off to produce FREEE aircraft for out Flight Sim community. And this is what you give them in return? :-rollRyan-Flightpro08 :-cool VATSIM Pilot/ControllerZLA ARTCC Senior Controller (C-3)SAN TRACON Lead ASRC (Advanced Simulated Radar Client) Beta Tester-----------------------------My "Home Made" System Specs:Intel Pentium 4 2.2GHz ProcessorTurbo Gamer ATX Mid-Tower with 420W Power SupplyEPoX 4G4A Motherboard with Intel 845G ChipsetVisiontek XTASY GeForce4 128MB Ti4600 (Det 30.30 Drivers)512MB PC2100 DDR RAM40GB Matrox 7200RPM Hard DriveWindows XP Home Edition SP1*No CPU or GPU Overclocking*3dMark2001SE Score: 11298-----------------------------Click [link:ftp.avsim.com/library/esearch.php?DLID=&Name=&FileName=&Author=Ryan+Fretwell&CatID=Root]Here to Download my New American Eagle POSKY CRJ-200!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you say, but that is NOT with I am talking about...I talk about the many times a person says "this plane is modelled wrong or has a crappy FDE" and people answer "don't complain, you got it for free." Insulting is a totally different subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Of course they don't want you to modify their FDEs. How >would you feel if someone took all of your work, altered it >a bit, and then redistributed it as though it were yours? >Sure, more people would be honest and give POSKY the credit, >but there will always be a few terrible people that come >along, alter the FDE, and then claim it to be theirs. I >don't blame POSKY for not wanting to take that risk. >>With all due respect Gregory, you're arugment has no basis, >and should have never been brought up in the first place. >POSKY works their butt off to produce FREEE aircraft >for out Flight Sim community. And this is what you give them >in return?>>Ryan-Flightpro08has no basisWell Mr. Ryan, and with all due respect to you, I think it just might because the basis is in the statement that `editing the CFG file' is NOT `unauthorized FDE editing' as they put it, and there's nothing wrong with asking about issues that may be wrong or backwards.I think what turned them off the most was not that I posted a CRJ report (on their site) or engaged a question from another user, but the elaborate formatted content that I presented.Also interesting to note is that more than twice as many avsim.com users would rather join in what looks like a `hot arguement' here than view the actual CRJ flight report!!Cheers to you... { smile }Gregory Abbey - Edwinnengineering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I talk about the many times a person says "this plane is modelled wrong or has a crappy FDE" and people answer "don't complain, you got it for free." "And that's one of my major beefs, because most often, that's how the critiques are presented. I'd rather see someone come in and say "I have improvements with the flight model, here they are" and leave it at that. No gloss, no overblown presentation, no insults. And by all means, people who get something for free but take such issue with flight dynamics should learn how to contribute more. I can't change a broken visual model--but anyone can open up notepad and start learning why flight dynamics are the way they are.If you look in the A/C design forum, you'll also see I have no problem offering suggestions if such information is solicited, or even if it isn't. :) The difference is in trying to take an assertive, rather than an aggressive approach. Coming into a forum and saying "This is modelled wrong" doesn't carry as far as coming in and saying "I've observed these things with a CRJ. Here's my improvements. What do you think?" or "Comparing the aircraft to photos, I noticed the window looks a little low. You might want to consider moving it". Give the freeware author some ownership by saying, "what do you think". And if people really think it might embarrass the author, keep it private. That's the least we can do considering what a gift freeware is.It's a fine line, and most often what I hear is "What do you mean, we can't criticize freeware?" Far from it, but remember that these authors work long hours, whether it be in a business, in school, or both. Look at Yannick's Robin. Lord knows how many hours were put into that. And you can bet, if I see someone come into the forum and say "this plane is modelled wrong or has a crappy FDE", I'm going to bash away. Because I've been on the receiving end of such B.S.... And it feels good to give back what I've been given :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I see you're not only content with posting this on newsgroups, you have to let it spill into here too.Like I replied on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim:Providing information on 'tuning' FDEs only causes trouble from thoseinexperienced users who end up trying to change things they really don't know about. Obviously you're entitled to tweak and tune your own settings until your heart is content, however encouraging others to do so isn't wise. I guess Warren took exception to your posts. If you have suggestions for his FDEs, then why not email him about it? We can only benefit from constructive criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, I totally agree with what you said, and what I said was an example, if I were to "criticize" a freeware plane, I wouldn't present my critique that way, that's for sure.I'm not saying you're the one that says "no complaints-free", there are lots of people that act that way, but without explaining or acting like you do...Of course we do have to count the hours of work, and there's no need to bash and insult a creation, but my point is we can give advices. Sometimes (and again, it's not you) people try to give advices and are interpreted the wrong way by developpers and then get bashed by a certain amount of people with the freeware argument.And about the FDEs, I thinbk John (the other one :() is right. FDEs and aircraft.cfg's tweaks can make the a/c work improperly, and unexperienced users might find it hard to undo the changes, or d/l the plane again..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I've received emails and public comments from people, the >content of which you wouldn't believe. And you know what? >I'm not paid to take it, and neither are the freeware >groups. Once someone starts mocking a name (using the >"Project BrokenSky" example), I think a line gets crossed. >Yet someone always comes in and says we shouldn't treat >freeware with kid gloves. Why is that?John...I cannot agree with you more. Unfortunately, too often we see freeware "discussions" go downhill very quickly, and far too many of them haven't got far to go before they're a lost cause.Yes, you're within your right to make comment on a freeware title. I've always thought that with ANY title (free/share/pay ware), the first line of support is a (polite) email to the author or vendor. Find out if they're already aware of, able to fix, or even willing to help. If that doesn't have legs, post (again, politely) to the boards.The one thing that I hope people keep in mind is that you really do get what you pay for in a lot of ways. If you want 24-hour support from a professional helpdesk, you can't expect it from a guy who spent his free time building a groovy new airplane and has a wife, kids, job, and maybe a master's program to work on. You want that, buy the software from a software shop... and pray that the publisher offers it.I've always thought that Freeware authors, more than their payware counterparts, have to be a pretty thick-skinned lot. It takes some fortitude to put forth the effort to produce an aircraft, scenery, or repaint and then turn around and say "Here you go, lads and ladies. Have at it." From what I can see on the boards here and elsewhere, the negative comments come almost immediately.With alarming regularity, there are people posting things like "This airplane rolls about as well as my gran who died in 1974. The author is either insane or a crack addict. I'll only ever download another of his aircraft just so as I can delete it!" rather than something more constructive like "This plane doesn't seem to have a crisp enough response in the roll axis. Anybody have thoughts or a fix?" Often, shortly a post relating to a freeware title (being of either the first or the second variety), you get a series of posts saying "This author is the man!" followed by rounds of "No he isn't. He's a dope."As to POSKY's models...I've thought that the landing gear are a shade too prone to collapse, but I've also seen the readme files that say "Sure, they may not be the most accurate FDEs in your minds, but we like them and that's what counts." I think that disclaimer goes a long way in this case... and since I spend a load more time flying light aircraft than I do the commercial ones, I simply removed the POSKY jets. Perhaps if I was more of a heavy pilot, I'd have made an issue of it, but that's neither here nor there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this