I join Michat's Voice of Protest!~!

[IAHM-COL]

I join Michat's Voice of Protest!
#SaveKSFO

http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.p ... 45#p278297

1. I'm pro SFO.

2. From the user point of view. I don't like the new FG release nomenclature. It's not economic using chat or speaking, because the repeated mantra is so long. Also because it breaks the normal "numberology" we used to.*

3. It seems the decision to change the default airport have been taken on dev's scale. * For sure there should be some reasons by consensum. ??

4. Having number #2 and #3. I see some economy advantages (fom the user POV). Answering the regular question, What version of Flightgear do you use? "FlightGear Rio" or "FlightGear Barcelona" etc etc. Sounds good. Still not economic. But a good platform for a specific promotion of FlightGear (need more than an specific screen splash included).

5. Been #1 I mean point one I vote SFO. But as a spaniard guy I should vote to Barcelona, for scenery like I should vote Rio Janeiro. If for lag reasons I shouldn't vote any. If for tradition and fun I should vote San Fran. If for event tradition only I should vote Oskosh. If by merit and complexity I should vote LOWI. But if I voted for any of the list I'll kill my own 5 FPS. Still in Sanfran I can fly around a lot of little airports, grass, dirty, asphalt, and deck, with a lot of ambience around. We were newbies once in SFO. Do you? I love newbies, they are our present and future.

6. Hoping to get repaired sfo terrain (flood when drought). Still SanFran has more to offer than the other airports areas. I dare you to list the activities you can have in your liked airports vs sf.
Still SanFran wins

7. A popular votation of a consensed dev group decision doesn't legitimate a break of the tradition, just another reason For what I appeal to the first amendment.

8. Having #7 I've started a series of expontaneous protests (no party here) in order to spread out my concern about loosing our sim tradition, under the tag #saveKSFO.

9. Been not the fist protest in FG, we protagonized a big one in SanFran with anti sopa pipa specific callsigns, I post you here how it looked likes yesterday's protest in sfo, with a lot of old sfo friends expontaneously connected (no party here) who love KSFO since forever, they were really concern about to break tradition.

https://goblinrefuge.com/mediagoblin/u/aepcam/m/fg-protest-saveksfo/

#saveKSFO.

Save our sim traditions. Or go Meighs x1x.

[LesterBoffo]

I vote "Like!"

[legoboyvdlp]

I vote nay. Time for change.

[Lydiot]

Time for a change indeed.

[Octal450]

I vote Like!

http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=28927&p=278623#p278623

I vote keep KSFO.

KSFO area has 4 airports (KSFO, KNUQ, KOAK, KSJC) that are in close range of each other. That is where I first learned FlightGear. Having the airports close is great for testing planes, learning to fly, etc.

Also alot of noobies won't update thier FlightGear, or keep using KSFO, and they won't change, so what is the point?

They also create traffic for fighter jets to practice firing aim, since the KSUU only about 30-50nm away.

Keep KSFO as the default!!!

[legoboyvdlp]

KSUU doesn't fire at planes randomly

Besides you had a chance weeks ago. It has been decided already.

[J Maverick 16]

Anyway, it's not a tragedy if for a release KSFo isn't the default airport. You can always add it to the next poll .
Regards, Mav

[KL-666]

Looking at the voting options, it looks rather silly. There are only two viable options: Barcelona and Rio. The others have too small aprons for the amount of aircraft.

On another aspect it also looks like no one has activated his brain when starting this vote. A very important question is: Which airport and environment do we want to pollute with planes crashing into each other. If you ask me i'd say the South Pole. Not anywhere in Europe, which is currently known for being an area with many well behaved pilots.

I disagree with having been a newbie at KSFO. In fgrun there was an option to choose your airport, and i used it. How stupid disinterested can you be if you miss that option. Better go to the South Pole then.

Kind regards, Vincent

[Octal450]

Looking at the voting options, it looks rather silly. There are only two viable options: Barcelona and Rio. The others have too small aprons for the amount of aircraft.

On another aspect it also looks like no one has activated his brain when starting this vote. A very important question is: Which airport and environment do we want to pollute with planes crashing into each other. If you ask me i'd say the South Pole. Not anywhere in Europe, which is currently known for being an area with many well behaved pilots.

I disagree with having been a newbie at KSFO. In fgrun there was an option to choose your airport, and i used it. How stupid disinterested can you be if you miss that option. Better go to the South Pole then.

Kind regards, Vincent

Very well said Vincent, very well said.

[Lydiot]

Looking at the voting options, it looks rather silly. There are only two viable options: Barcelona and Rio. The others have too small aprons for the amount of aircraft.

On another aspect it also looks like no one has activated his brain when starting this vote.

I think this shows the importance of having a discussion of parameters before having a poll.

I agree btw that it should be a larger airport.

A very important question is: Which airport and environment do we want to pollute with planes crashing into each other. If you ask me i'd say the South Pole. Not anywhere in Europe, which is currently known for being an area with many well behaved pilots.

I disagree with having been a newbie at KSFO. In fgrun there was an option to choose your airport, and i used it. How stupid disinterested can you be if you miss that option. Better go to the South Pole then.

Kind regards, Vincent

Ok, but I guess the other issue is if there's a good reason for starting players at "nice" places. I can see at least three valid reasons for it:

1: It exposes "new" players to new areas, which means more participation in more locations, which is a good things in and by itself.

2: IF there's a problem with "newbies", or "disinterested" players just spawn at the default location, then it makes sense to rotate that to 'relieve' areas which have been "polluted" for some time.

3: I also think it is nice to promote locations for more experienced players as well as promoting FG in general.

And, not directed at you KL, but some will complain about "pilot-pollution" and want to protect their beloved airports - BUT - at the same time say to keep this at KSFO: I don't think that's fair, I think it's rather selfish. Some of us like the KSFO area, and getting some relief from nonsense there could be nice.