Question For Mongoose Staff about proof-readers and more

[Dave Buehner]

Ok, so I have RQ Deluxe 3rd edition already and stuff for it. What I would like to know, is what can be said about the mongoose proof-readers this time around considering what happened to me when I bought the first edition of the mongoose CONAN system. Now it sits collecting dust because I was in no mood to turn right around and buy the 2nd “Atlantean” edition of Conan that came out seconds later to correct the whole mess (sorry guys, the minor discount offered wasn’t the way to handle that when it should have been a full refund due to something Mongoose was entirely responsible for). And who wants to (or has the time to) go through a bunch of errata pages and try to correct the first edition themselves. That's what I pay you guys for. So, now here is the new RuneQuest, which seems to be getting flack online for breaking up the manual, and I'm concerned about the proof-reading and if in a month or so a second edition of Mongoose RQ is going to turn up to correct a bunch of spelling problems, and put more stuff into the manual that should have already been in there to begin with, etc. I don’t want to repeat history. So, what’s the deal here guys?? I like Mongoose stuff, but I’m a little concerned this time around probably because Runequest means more to me. I was all geared up to get into buying the new RQ line when it comes out, but now I'm having second thoughts. Maybe I should just get a few of the new RQ supplement stuff when they come out and use it with RQ 3. The RQ 3 system seems more complete as it stands, and I was surprised to hear some of the things about the new RQ system when I came here today. I’d sure appreciate hearing an official(ish) Mongoose take on these concerns. Thanks.

 

[wartorn]

Let it go already.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=19082

 

[Dave Buehner]

Well thanks for the link, though I'll pass on your attitude. "Let it go already" ? I lead a busy life and haven’t been here for months. I wasn’t aware of that link/thread (nor the short response by msprange). If I had been, I wouldn’t have bothered to post my concerns now would I? If I knew how touchy some people have seemingly become here in the forums overall, I probably would have stayed away. Hope the Mongoose staff (whom my post was addressed to) is doing fine these days at least. Good day to all.

 

[wartorn]

Well thanks for the link, though I'll pass on your attitude. "Let it go already" ? I lead a busy life and haven’t been here for months. I wasn’t aware of that link/thread (nor the short response by msprange). If I had been, I wouldn’t have bothered to post my concerns now would I? If I knew how touchy some people have seemingly become here in the forums overall, I probably would have stayed away. Hope the Mongoose staff (whom my post was addressed to) is doing fine these days at least. Good day to all.

I ask you to carefully evaluate your original post and ponder its purpose. It reads like you are asking "Hey, are you guys now professional enough that I can trust you to have revised your editorial policies?" This question is very insulting and hurtful - what kind of answer do you expect?

If they aren't professional and they say "yes we've fixed our process, please buy our books" what have you gained and how does this tell you whether or not they are professional? I think the Real purpose of your post was to grind your axe about the original Conan release. I don't know you at all, but I think this because there was no possible valuable response to your original question.

 

[salazar]

It reads like you are asking "Hey, are you guys now professional enough that I can trust you to have revised your editorial policies?" This question is very insulting and hurtful - what kind of answer do you expect?

"Insulting and hurtful"? What is this - some kind of therapy group devoted to group hugging sessions? Mongoose is a business, and we are customers, or potential customers. We have the right to bring up issues with quality that have occurred in the past, and I am sure they are big enough to handle a little criticism without breaking down into tears or storming off in a huff. At least, I would like to think so...

As for what answer could be expected, I can think of several, such as: "since the unfortunate Conan incident, we have allowed an extra iteration of proof-reading as part of our quality control process" or "we feel that the quality of the previews speaks for itself" or....whatever the case may be.

A fair question, which deserves a fair answer.

edit: I've just noticed that Matthew Sprange has already responded to a similar complaint/question in another thread not long ago.

Salazar

 

[wartorn]

In business how you treat people is of paramount importance. The question is 'insulting and hurtful' and a decidedly poor approach regardless of the context. Despite 25 years of cyberpunk literature suggesting the contrary, corporations are still composed of people with feelings. But please, treat your bank manager like he owes you something and see how far you get with your next loan. Anyhow if you have a problem with the touchy-feely terms I used I'll employ another one - disrespectful.

Now let's consider the meat of your point 'we have the right to bring up issues'. That is true if the issue in question is demonstrably ongoing. Surely you are aware that the Atlantean edition of the core rulebook was released along with a great quantity of other products in the Conan line? How many of these products exhibited horrendous typos? Even if you've never picked up a follow-on Conan book, it should be apparent from the success of the line that this 'issue' has been resolved. Furthermore there is a great well of independent, unbiased reviews from which to draw in order to determine if the problem is ongoing. But the original poster chooses to ignore all of this evidence and decides to carelessly dredge up a long-dead issue on a public forum for dubious purpose.

I already pointed out that 'we have revised our policies' is a possible response - but they can say that whether they did or not, proving nothing - or are you expecting them to say 'I'm sorry, we don't believe there was a problem with the original release and continue to produce product with errors' thus saving you the expense? who would say that? Again, no possible response to the original question has any actual value.

 

[atgxtg]

Again, no possible response to the original question has any actual value.

But wouldn't that hold true for any response? If a company had (and I'm not accusing any company of anything) produced a substandard product is some way, then, logically, we should say nothing to the company, as it makes no difference.

It's an intesting thought, and based upon what I've seen on various comapany message boards, has some truth to it. If so, then there really isn't any point in anyone having trying to deal with the comapnies at all. The whole "interactive forum with the staff" concept then becomes a waste of time.