Keen, Please forgive me for making this thread.

Before I start with the subject matter I am making this post about, I want to make my position clear. I love Space Engineers and I refuse to play any other game, but the company that makes it needs to make a few changes for the game to get to where it deserves to be. Also please not that I do not intend to offend anyone whether they are a player, an employee at Keen, or Marek himself. Please treat this post as constructive criticism.

Okay, enough with the terms and conditions for reading this post, lets get to it. I have chatted with the same group of people (Whom I will not name) for a long while and have had the chat on our opinions of Keen multiple times where we will talk about the subject for hours on end. The main opinion that we all share is that Keen Software House is very uncoordinated, and that there is a hierarchy system to it. I know from Update Man himself that Joel and Marek and a few other people do have weekly meetings, but it seems that those meetings bring in no input from the community. Perhaps this is a bad way to start off, but this thread is going to be pretty unorganized as it is months worth of chat about the subject put into one thread and I feel like I'm trying to build a sandwich with five buns and three pounds of turkey without toothpicks.

Okay, lets try this thread again. Remember the good days of Space Engineers? Remember when you can build crazy scissor-arm rotor-piston contraptions to open doors and do real engineering and it WORKED? well, this was one thing that we talked about in our chats, and we came across the discovery that Marek was not actually at keen during those days, he was busy with his little project of GoodAI. Tomas Psnicka was really in charge during those days (Sorry Tomas, your little story claiming Marek was not away never sold to any of us) anyways, Marek comes back around the release of planets and starts getting his hands a little too indulged into Keen. He also starts streaming. During one of his streams he discovers glass (Yeah, that thing we had since a year before he started streaming that he apparently didn't know about) And what does he say? That glass is too clean so we should clean it with a through sandblasting with bacon grease. And, as we all know, whatever Marek says is final. So we get glass that is so dirty I'm pretty sure a dead person could cry at the horror of its appearance. A few weeks later Marek streams again and says "Too scratched" and this time its not final because he secretly called off that project of fixing it within the past few months as of the time I'm writing this. And Marek hasn't streamed much since. Want to know why? Because he wasn't really streaming. He did not interact with chat, and barely talked. It was mainly poor Joel telling him how to play his own game (Again showing he was away). Anyways, what I'm getting at is that Marek doesn't seem to be the Life of the Party and barely listens to outside input. From what it seems from my understanding, he sees numbers and money as a goal. He see's us all as unintelligent Pawns. Now, that statement may just be because there were very few Marek sightings and that he isn't open with his community he has created. Onto another subject, it seems that Joel is treated as a pet at Keen by the "Upper Portions of the Hierarchy" even though he has turned into the face of Keen and takes the hits. The poor man is the ambassador for the community and is ignored by the upper hands of Keen.

Onto Now. Today, it seems that Keen is running low on money and Marek's response is "Make the game look new, don't worry about fixing issues, just make it look competitive in the market of today." and put it up as a 1.0 and then ignore it, like they did with Miner Wars. The game does not deserve this.

My solution. Okay, lots are going to disagree with this, but I want to see Marek put to the side and see Tomas Psnicka take the project over. Have Marek worry about the big picture and tell Tomas what needs to be done (IE "The game is declining on statistics, try to fix that") Don't have Marek getting his fingers into the game itself (We don't want another cyberhound incident).

A Final Statement. I know that many are going to want me dead for this post. Once again I am going to repeat that I do not intend to insult anyone, I have seen what the people of Keen are like and they are very nice people who are very open with each other. I just wish that they could be more open with the community. I ask for forgiveness from anyone who feels offended by this post as I understand that I could have easily inadvertently hurt someones feelings with this post.

To make my position clear: Have Marek backoff, have Tomas set-up, and have Joel taken seriously. (And don't rush Game Development, Fix all the bugs, Add all the promised features.)


I just want a good game. Hopefully @Xocliw and @rexxar can help make that idea come true in Space Engineers. And moderators, please do not lock my account, I simply want to voice my and others opinion. Hopefully someone at Keen can take this post seriously and act upon it and see it through for once.

 

This seems more assumptions based than facts. For starters SE was not originally lead by Tomas the lead programmer was Ondreiz I believe (sorry if I butchered your name). If you read the original SE credits it actually says that and the old Q&As and IAMAs also support it. After Ondriez left then Tomas took over I believe (although that's a bit of a dark area in my knowledge).
Second you seem to be under the assumption Marek makes every little decision he doesn't. Do you know why CEOs hire game designers and project manger So? So they don't have to. He makes a desicion to where the money goes though so yes general desicion do matter. I actually have proof too and it's right in your own writing.

You see the funny thing is cyberhound were Tomas' idea. He even stated it when doing the interview with Wasted. He even stated that it was probably his biggest mistake in making the game.
Rotors and Pistons, now this is an interesting one indeed. You want to know why they are what they are? 2 things 1 they're tinkering with them to improve them and that backfires a lot. Also (and people always forget this) this game is much, much bigger than the original plan. I mean 100x times bigger. They didn't even plan for large world's they originally wanted a little fun sandbox game that had like a 10km map or so. Multiplayer came sooner than expected. There's a ton of non planned things.
"Let marek focus on the big picture." That's what he's be doing forever the only time he even focused on the micro management was those streams. Originally it was just one stream he was doing for fun because it's been awhile since he's had a really good SE experience. But people seemed to have wanted more of them so he did them for awhile until probably realizing it wasn't working for him.
Overall I think the whole "marek hate" is more because his personality isn't a very personal one so people take it in the wrong way. He's a not a PR guy he's the CEO and his persona is not the same as someone like Xocliw. That's why Marek got a PR guy; he got Xocliw so they could have a personal person to communicate with people.

 

This follows the rule of "buts." When you say, "I don't mean to sound X, but..." everything before the but is irrelevant. It's what you say after that matters, and no amount of good intentions will change the actual content.

So, you start off with rampant speculation of internal company dynamics. Unless Joel himself is telling you that he is either unable or unwilling to present community input in these meetings, or that such input that he presents is ignored, using "seems" is just a cover for your own speculation.

Not really. But I do remember when I couldn't walk on a moving ship because it would kill me. The usability of rotors and pistons has always oscillated between works-if-you-pray-hard-enough and ticking-bomb depending on the patch.

And as I remember, Marek was working on SE in 2013 when it launched. Rotors were added in December 2013, two months after launch,, and GoodAI didn't become an internal KSH project until Jan 2014. So this, "There were good old days when rotors/pistons worked and it was because Marek wasn't there to ruin it" bit is hogwash. Imputing negative views to him, like "He see's us all as unintelligent Pawns," is not in any way "constructive criticism." At best, that's just your own salt and bitterness coloring your view of people you don't even know.

You keep using 'seems,' and it's always followed by rampant speculation. This is why you should not use the word 'seems.' Do you have any access to Keen's financials? Baseless statemens about fiscal solvency and CEO actions aside, you do understand that, as the CEO and lacking a publisher, the financial health of the company is his responsibility? If the company is in financial trouble, then it is his responsibility to tell the people working under him (like Tomas) that it's time to trim fat/features and get the game done, so that they can have a new project and new income. Many video game projects have run into trouble exactly because they didn't have anyone to do this - Daikatana ring a bell? I'll address your "Make the game look new," statement below.

Now. "Make the game look new." "Fix all the bugs, Add all the promised features." Let me direct you to the roadmap. We have known for a long time that the models in game are placeholders. We got teased with new models when they first implemented DX11. Indeed, many in the community have been vocal about the fact that we haven't gotten those models in game yet. So, if your "Make the game look new" comment is directed towards the idea that Marek is trying to throw new models at the game to try and pretty it up before he kicks it out the door... you have not been paying as much attention as you claim to have been. The new models we are being shown are a promised feature. We were promised proper models to replace the placeholders we've been using. We were told that they were going to try and make a new rendering engine with PBR and proper occlusion culling for better visuals and better FPS. They are doing that. Whether you like the new models/textures or not is a different discussion, but trying to spin the new models as desperation move before they just throw the game out the door is a real far stretch.

Besides them working on that promised feature, they appear to be on track with this roadmap. Not only does that indicate that, maybe, perhaps, Marek knows what he is doing when it comes to software development and was able to set his team realistic goals for a year's worth of work, it means we are likely to get plenty of bugfixes. One really big issue that people are really upset about is the new server-side movement and the ship stutters and movement weirdness that came with it. That is tied into sim speed issues. The sim speed issues are tied into a variety of things being in main game logic that should not be - welding, grinding, mining, o2 pressurization checks, conveyoring, etc. These things are being split off into their own separate thread, so that main game logic - physics for movement, weapons, and collisions - can be unhindered by these other computationally expensive processes that don't need the same real-time fidelity as ship motion.

Do you think that is easy? Taking major parts of the game and separating them out into different, independently running sections when they were never written with the intention of being separated? It's what has to happen for the sim speed issues to be fixed, but it takes time, and there are no sexy updates for it. It's either done and they can patch it in or it isn't done and patching it in will break the game. We are constantly getting bugfix patches, week after week, along with new features that were promised in the roadmap. I cannot stress this enough. New build system, inverse kinematics, new animation system, and more, these were the features we were told we would get this year, and they are the ones we have been getting. They are delivering on the roadmap, piece by piece. We are still waiting for some of the really big pieces, but being big pieces they would logically take the longest to develop. However, those big pieces are keystones for fixing major issues with the game. Just because your pet grievance isn't being seen to right-bloody-now doesn't mean they are doing nothing. Your opening grievance, in particular, is directly related to this big piece I have been talking about. Rotor and piston instability has strong relations to sim speed instability. They cannot fix rotors without fixing sim speed, and fixing sim speed is a major undertaking. There isn't some solution where they just throw developers at rotors for a week or two and you suddenly get to do "real engineering" again.

 

I don't think there is anything I could possibly add after devistators post.

 

No, not really. Rotors and pistons have been iffy since their inception. I can honestly say they work better now than ever, especially in SP, but the real issues are in multiplayer, which is the current focus.

I think you and your friends have been talking each other into a circle and you seem to be completely unaware of how much better the game works, not to mention how much more that has been added that has made it more complicated, yet it's still better.

I'm not entirely sure what you intended to happen making this thread. If it's an attempt to make the game better, Keen is way, way ahead of you.

 

Making assumption without having some solid information or source to back it up is bad.

Please lock this thread, it will only get worst from here.

 

1. Write about company not having money can be slander/harm to comapany name and its prety much sue able in moust of countryes.
2. Come with internal company informations ( true or not ) sound like some angry ( fired ) employee who didnt read his working contract, about not publish company informations. ( again sue able ).

Another story is, if you can present some documents or some proofe and then we can speak about it... but you didnt show proof... ? ? ? so what are you talking about ? ? ?

 

The only thing i can agree upon is that Marek's micromanagement was a big problem, and it has stopped, so we only have to worry about the regular bad management (like taking away World Options or implementing a halfbaked new block system and leaving it like that for weeks).
I'd also not worry about their wallet. Remember, for the longest time, Keen was really small, and even now they're at, what, 50-ish employees? SE sold like orgasm flavoured cake back in the day, and GoodAI is probably getting permits shoved up Skynet's ass by the dozens. If they ever run out of money expect another modpack sold as it's own game, something like Aerial Engineers or Naval Engineers. We'd also have heard about the first layoffs by now. Bank account's fine, worry about SE instead.

 

Additionally, rather than dropping the game they're looking at opening up new markets for it with the Xbox release.

 

On other side they dont search for investors/partners and thats first sight, when some one miss money and try save situation ( early game release a side ). So... i still wonder where OP hear about it ??? ? + proof.

 

Seems that a few of you think this is speculation and that it's a bad thing. I thought I made it clear that it is speculation so I don't need you to point out the fact that it is, as I clearly know that. This thread was made of many conversations with other people, some in closed testing groups, some as youtubers, some as just normal players (Nobody violated NDA's, don't worry.) Those conversations were based off a combination of facts that we know about keen, our personal experiences when talking with keen, and stuff like that.

As to you all thinking I am worrying about the money, I am not. What I care about is what Marek thinks of the money. To me it seems that he is getting super-micromanager because of it (which is never a good thing).

All these theroies and speculations could be wrong for all we know. And if they are wrong I would blame Keen's transparency issues(Like the fact that we havent had any blogs from marek of significant value as of late).


In responce to @Seff
So, you start off with rampant speculation of internal company dynamics. Unless Joel himself is telling you that he is either unable or unwilling to present community input in these meetings, or that such input that he presents is ignored, using "seems" is just a cover for your own speculation.
I use the word "seems" because that is what it looks like from my outside perspective. And Indeed. I feel that Joel's ideas from the community are ignored in those conversations because it's not in his job title and they ignore the fact that he has accidentally become the face of Keen.

And as I remember, Marek was working on SE in 2013 when it launched. Rotors were added in December 2013, two months after launch,, and GoodAI didn't become an internal KSH project until Jan 2014. So this, "There were good old days when rotors/pistons worked and it was because Marek wasn't there to ruin it" bit is hogwash. Imputing negative views to him, like "He see's us all as unintelligent Pawns," is not in any way "constructive criticism." At best, that's just your own salt and bitterness coloring your view of people you don't even know.
In responce to you thinking that I am inputting negative ideas, I am. Only because I indeed do not know him, and he doesn't want himself to be known. All we know is that he runs keen. We don't know his personality or rationality behind his decisions, and he doesn't seem to be trying to fix that.

You keep using 'seems,' and it's always followed by rampant speculation. This is why you should not use the word 'seems.' Do you have any access to Keen's financials? Baseless statemens about fiscal solvency and CEO actions aside, you do understand that, as the CEO and lacking a publisher, the financial health of the company is his responsibility? If the company is in financial trouble, then it is his responsibility to tell the people working under him (like Tomas) that it's time to trim fat/features and get the game done, so that they can have a new project and new income. Many video game projects have run into trouble exactly because they didn't have anyone to do this - Daikatana ring a bell? I'll address your "Make the game look new," statement below.
I feel that my using of the word "seems" is correct and I have no clue what you are trying to say there. In terms of be having access to their finances, I dont. And it seems that he is, as you basically spelled out, pulling another Miner Wars where they "Finish" a game only to move on and don't care how the existing community reacts.

Besides them working on that promised feature, they appear to be on track with this roadmap. Not only does that indicate that, maybe, perhaps, Marek knows what he is doing when it comes to software development and was able to set his team realistic goals for a year's worth of work, it means we are likely to get plenty of bugfixes. One really big issue that people are really upset about is the new server-side movement and the ship stutters and movement weirdness that came with it. That is tied into sim speed issues. The sim speed issues are tied into a variety of things being in main game logic that should not be - welding, grinding, mining, o2 pressurization checks, conveyoring, etc. These things are being split off into their own separate thread, so that main game logic - physics for movement, weapons, and collisions - can be unhindered by these other computationally expensive processes that don't need the same real-time fidelity as ship motion.
I'm sorry but have you looked at the game code / logs recently? It's not being multithreaded well as it's only using 1 and a 1/4 threads and it's been that way for three months now. And yeah, it looks like they've been on track with the roadmap up until this point where they are all of a sudden jumping off it and working on fancy models and having their programmers spend time on useless PBR rather than fixing the actual game. I don't mind if they do it to just keep their artists busy but PBR requires programmers and this seems to be a very poor prioritization of their resources.

Do you think that is easy? Taking major parts of the game and separating them out into different, independently running sections when they were never written with the intention of being separated? It's what has to happen for the sim speed issues to be fixed, but it takes time, and there are no sexy updates for it. It's either done and they can patch it in or it isn't done and patching it in will break the game. We are constantly getting bugfix patches, week after week, along with new features that were promised in the roadmap. I cannot stress this enough. New build system, inverse kinematics, new animation system, and more, these were the features we were told we would get this year, and they are the ones we have been getting. They are delivering on the roadmap, piece by piece. We are still waiting for some of the really big pieces, but being big pieces they would logically take the longest to develop. However, those big pieces are keystones for fixing major issues with the game. Just because your pet grievance isn't being seen to right-bloody-now doesn't mean they are doing nothing. Your opening grievance, in particular, is directly related to this big piece I have been talking about. Rotor and piston instability has strong relations to sim speed instability. They cannot fix rotors without fixing sim speed, and fixing sim speed is a major undertaking. There isn't some solution where they just throw developers at rotors for a week or two and you suddenly get to do "real engineering" again.
I know stuff takes time, I'm a modder and a game designer myself. Stuff breaks, stuff stops working randomly. But when you know something broke and purposefully ignore it and look at doing stuff like PBR instead it seems they are still adding new cool things to cover up the broken bits. Would be nice if they are more transparent as I have stated though. If Keen was more transparent I would never have created this post in the first place, and heck I would never had those conversations with other people on this subject.

 

I know it's not multithreaded. Read what I wrote again. They are working on making the game more multithreaded, specifically moving non-time-critical calculations out of main game logic so that the game physics can run unhindered. This is not a small change. This is a large change that will not be visible to us until it is ready.

You stopped reading when you got down to the Medieval Engineers part of the roadmap. Scroll down, because there is a "both games" roadmap below that. It includes PBR. They aren't jumping off anywhere. They even have test renders with PBR in the roadmap.

"Modder" and "game designer" does not sound like "programmer" or "project lead," so I expect you're the Jon Snow of this piece. Are you familiar with the old phrase, "Too many chefs spoil the broth?" You cannot just throw every programmer in the company at a problem. Eventually, communication and coordination breaks down and you have people working at cross-purposes producing merges that don't work together. You put individual programmers or small teams on different projects and you let them do their thing. Working on different things is not a poor prioritization of their resources; effective multitasking is an excellent use of their resources.

You can keep on thinking that they're ignoring broken things and just worrying about 'shiny,' but then you would just keep being wrong. Fixing the broken things is not simple. They fix what they can - like recent patches trying to address rotor wobble, or piston heads randomly detaching on game load - but trying to really fix rotors and pistons requires stable sim speeds. Likewise, their decision to add an o2 pressurization checkbox. O2 checks are a major source of lag, and being able to temporarily turn them off improves the feel of gameplay/physics for us until they can get O2 checks split out of main game logic.

Of course more transparency would be nice. You know what else would be nice? Less kvetching about them not dropping everything they're working on to magically produce fixes for the things you personally deem important.

 

There is nothing simple about fixing bugs. It has to be recreated first, which isn't always easy with sketchy reports. Let's face it, we don't pay attention what happens before the bug strikes us as well as we could so all we can provide is sketchy information. The logic of the code and interactions with other bits of code needs to be found and thoroughly understood. Often times it's not the original programmer working on the bug fix so it is a lengthy process. Code is written, debugged, and tested. Repeatedly. The first attempts might not have fixed the bug, or it might have introduced bugs in other parts of code. Once a release candidate is ready, ideally, they would do some internal play testing. In reality, it's probably put into the weekly release for us to play test.

Optimistically, this entire process will take around a month. Several months is more likely the reality though. Don't expect that bug you reported last week to be fixed in the next update. Maybe if the bug was related to the previous update, but don't count on it.

As Seff mentioned, "...more transparency would be nice." Perhaps more feedback on the bug fix progress would be nice, too. But like any organization, priorities have to be set. Unfortunately, we don't know what's going on inside the company that would limit transparency and feedback. Quite possibly one person doing the work of two or three and pressured for meeting deadlines.

 

You know... in the future, if early-access, open-development, all-access alpha games fall out of style and we go back to a world of publisher-driven games which are announced almost on the eve of their release... I think it will be the result of the impatience, rampant speculation and endless assumptions that I see in forums for this and other games. What is it, exactly, that makes you think there's anything even remotely resembling a guarantee that anything is going to be "as advertised" before the game is released? The game is early access, which means in development, which means not done... the fact that they let you play it now is a boon not to be taken for granted; true they get funding this way, but all that entitles you to is what they explain on the store page: alpha access and input on the game.

If this were a traditionally published game, the game would have likely been announced somewhere around 3 years or more into development. I couldn't find when SE was announced, but it went to early-access in October 2013 and I think 1 year of development before this is fair (am I wrong?). So, if this were a traditional game, we would have heard about it a little less than a year ago and would have had no opportunity to play it except maybe at E3 for 5 minutes in a tightly controlled environment.

Also, if this were a traditional game, you can be sure that nearly every single detail about the game and its development would be stifled. You might know 1 or 2 names of the development staff but virtually nothing about the actual development. Probably 1 out of 10 videos, pictures or press releases would have made it to the public. Every detail that made it public would be highly scrubbed of anything but what they want you to see.

I mean, just look at No Man's Sky. I've been watching streams of the game, and boy am I glad I didn't buy it. Beyond performance issues, there are so many ways in which I didn't expect the game to be so bad. You can't fly close to the ground, you can't manually land, the procedural generation is lazy and repetitive and reminds me of Spore to a huge degree! The game is a theme park with set pieces that seem to repeat themselves on every planet (I've watched 4 streamers each explore 2 to 3 planets). I would gladly take broken rotors and (currently) half-finished features over what NMS turned out to be.

I'm sorry that early-access means you get to see so much about development, warts and all, and that Keen respects us enough to admit that they regret certain decisions, or to even tell us about those decisions in the first place! I'm sorry that you're not satisfied that the game is still incomplete, lacks polish and features, and has bugs while still being 1-3 years within the boundary of "average" game development time cycle for AAA studios.

So, by all means, if you're tired of early access and open development, and want to see it less often in the future, continue with the uninformed speculation, continue making unwarranted demands, continue judging them on an unfinished product. It certainly seems like this is what you're going for.

 

You guys realize they have said this game will never leave alpha if sales stay low on steam.... which they have been. You guys are all kinda just enjoying your powwow though, funny. I came to see if anyone here was rejoicing at the complete failure of No Man's Sky, instead It looks like you guys haven't even heard. Literally how many of you only play SE?.... This place has gotten frightening.....

 

Tons of people have put a lot of hope and hype into NMS, why would we be happy that their game has disappointed them this much? We're not assholes.

 

I like NMS, they have done a nice job with it.
Regards SE, it has gotten a little worse since they let the boss have a say.. I.e. clean up that ******** glass.
.

 

Funny .... but you usually hear these sorts of comments while crossing a bridge with a load of goats.
Lots of people expected far too much from NMS, and were always going to be disappointed. But if I wanted to discuss that game...I'd go look for an NMS forum.

 

Like everything else in this thread, I highly doubt you will get any actual facts presented to you.

 

It's likely based on this and took on a life of it's own in some peoples' heads:




https://bestofama.com/amas/21fsj9

 

Wow...a throwaway comment in a chatroom 2 years ago, when the game was barely functional. I hadn't even bought the game then....which means it predates survival, and goes back to a point in time where SE was a creative spaceship builder with a physics engine so you could build a ship and fly it into a rock.

I think it's fair to say the game has moved on a bit since then.......

 

They didn't even read it right- they claimed that "if sales are low then it'll never leave alpha" but what the statement actually said was "if interest stays where its at", i.e. "if the community remains highly active and interested in the game, we can keep catering to them".

 

If its not where you want it, don't play it for now. Check back in a few weeks (every stable release), keep abreast the situation. Try it out occasionally. Not good enough? Come back in a few weeks. Don't grow toxic over time. They have all of 2016 to accomplish the 2016 Road Map.

Either that or maybe I'm one of the few that have other games vying for my time while I wait for a favorite to work out its kinks.

 

Thing is.... That's what I've been doing for months now..... MONTHS!!! Ever since planets were released

 

I think you'd have a much better time making posts on these forum if you were a little less demanding, and tried using less aggressive terms. Also, instead of assuming some kind of worst-case scenario and claiming there's some kind of malicious intent or negligence on the part of the developers, why not ask what their workflow is? Maybe ask what the blockers are, or what they've been trying lately. When I read your OP, there's no way I can read it without imagining someone banging their fists on the table and kicking the furniture. How do you think that makes the other posters on this forum feel? It seems like you're attacking the game and its developers and, by extension, each and every poster who remains positive on this game. You may think you're not being aggressive or on the attack, but the rest of us don't know that; we can only respond to your words, which are decidedly aggressive.

If your post were more along the lines of "I have these concerns and questions," with a little bit of "certain things remain broken after what feels like a long time," and perhaps add on some "what sorts of things are the devs trying, or what is it that causes these to be an issue"... I dare say you'd spend more time discussing the subject of your post, and less time discussing the tone. Who knows, maybe you'd find out other posters share your concerns or have some knowledge they wouldn't mind sharing. It's important to keep in mind that your word choice is what people are going to respond to: not your justifications, intentions, or any knowledge/experience you profess to have.

 

This is something I agree with 100%. I was actually trying my best to not go overboard and sound like I was attacking him and instead explain my views and point out some of the miss information. Now if I succeeded or not is left to be decided. I've been trying to say this for awhile tone matters. If you have a harsh tone the more likely there will be hostile people.

 

Yeah, And if you don't mean to sound hostile people will still think your being hostile and attack you... Welcome to the Internet my friend!

 

Pay attention. That's an issue of you making a post phrased with hostility- no amount of platitudes and "don't take this th wrong way BUT"s will change that.