• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Do you think T5 will be out while Mongoose has a license?

Wow.

WTFO?

Spoiler:
What the F***? Over.
Holy Cows! I thought I was like the last person on Terra to use that expression.

Fo Shizzle A phrase in the Old Terran Anglic dialect of Ebonics, signifying complete agreement, believed to have descended from the phrase, "for sure". :p
 
Getting back to the topic at hand, who believes that T5 will ever be officially released at all? I am skeptical myself. I do not think that Mr Miller will ever stop tinkering with it.
 
Holy Cows! I thought I was like the last person on Terra to use that expression.

I've had to enter WTFO on a commo log...

One of the pilots during a SAR didn't understand his orders, relayed by me as mission communicator, and shot back with it. I then paraphrased them, and got a less troublesome response, then had to inform him I couldn't say why on an open comm.... It involved another aircraft, a stop for lunch, a beer at lunch, and failure to notify anyone that lunch was happening...

As for T5... I hope it releases sooner than later... and If I could afford it, I'd get the CD. I really neither want nor need a dead tree version.
 
I've had to enter WTFO on a commo log...

When I was a US Army MP, a colorful Sergeant once got upset over what someone on his patrol shift was up to and came clearly on the net to say, "What the F***, Over!" He threw the "over" in I guess to make it proper radio procedure.
 
People must realize perfection is never realized. I am a software engineer by trade. The fact that the engineer fields exist is proof that the perfect design is never achieved. If it was then you could never improve it. When I look back at code I did a year ago, I wonder why I did it that way.

I used to work for Boeing and one of the things they drilled into our heads was not to make changes unless the existing system did not work. Us designers would look at some of our past work and think, damn I better change this because this is not the correct way to do this. We did not want somebody to look at our work and wonder what an idiot we were for doing it that way. The way it was done worked fine but could have been done better.

One of the major problems with constant changes is that it invalidates past assumptions. You might look at the change and say; this is a real minor change and is low risk. You implement the change and later realize that it totally changes this other assumption and now you need to change this other section to work with it. Now this new section change changes an assumption over in this other section and you get a cascading set of changes that grossly changes the scope of the original minor change.

I work at Airbus now and I cannot decide what is better. Having the cascade of changes that you mentioned or the bureaucracy of incredibly complex processes that no one understands let alone follows! In short, I know exactly what you are talking about!! I think the end result is the same. Somehow they muddle through! = )
 
Back
Top