>>18449976Those polls suffer the same thing SEQguy's earlier ones did. As in, they're leaning towards certain options. Rather than a Simple and helpful options of:
Q: What is your opinion on the ____ starter?
-I like it
-I like the design but not the concept
-I like the concept but the design
-I do not like it
Instead, the yes/no options have the added retorts (of it's terrible against it's good - it's terrible is a stronger posited than it's good)
With the options of "I like it but not as a starter" (we've already had multiple polls on this, if we keep going back like this we'll just keep entering a vicious loop cycle and never get anything done) and the pointless last (hopefully) joke option are no help at all and shows the surveyer's obvious bias.
I see an anon's already mentioned, only 2 of the 3 starters are been quality checked - there is an obvious flaw here.
>>18450051That's not your decision to decide. Who made you the boss?
>>18450201I personally would do a Quality check. If we completely redo everything, as I mentioned before, we'll keep on entering the vicious cycle of never getting anything done.
Which is why for now, I'm mostly keeping a low profile without my trip. If everything continues in the fashion of this thread and the last, I fear the project's dwindling lifespan. 