2 billion in the bank, cash
No outstanding loans
Started airline first day the world opened
Enough aircraft owned to secure the maximum sized loan they're willing to give
#1 ranking in previous quarter pre-tax income
#4 in profit margin previous quarter
+65 airline image (which is a broken, silly metric anyways)
------
BBB Rating
Cash speaks loudest to a banker, if you have 2 billion in the bank you should be an A rated company, not to mention all of the other indicators included above.
Another silly metric that should just be eliminated from the game. It serves no purpose and is broken.
How many years has your airline been in business? That plays a part in getting an A rating or higher.
Quote from: sellouts on June 04, 2011, 11:24:32 PM
2 billion in the bank, cash
No outstanding loans
Started airline first day the world opened
Enough aircraft owned to secure the maximum sized loan they're willing to give
#1 ranking in previous quarter pre-tax income
#4 in profit margin previous quarter
+65 airline image (which is a broken, silly metric anyways)
------
BBB Rating
Cash speaks loudest to a banker, if you have 2 billion in the bank you should be an A rated company, not to mention all of the other indicators included above.
Another silly metric that should just be eliminated from the game. It serves no purpose and is broken.
AIG (the one that was bailed out by the US govt) has $68 billion in cash with an 8% profit margin and they only have a BBB rating and they've been in business over 50 years. Your airline has only been in business for 5 years, which means there isn't much of a track record to go by. Bankers don't care about cash--they care predominately about debt to income ratios. Credit rating does serve a purpose--it determines nonsystematic risk and marginal interest rates. The interest rates published are the risk-free rates. How much further above the risk-free rate you can get a loan is determined by credit rating.
Beginner's World is setup to NOT be challenging so that virtually everyone can be successful. If you are the #1 airline in the game your company image should be 100--not 65. You stated in another post your bored...Beginner's World is like playing tennis without a net. Fuel prices are ~$250 and interest rates remain low. If you're bored, why not join DOTM2 where fuel is ~$350 (in the 1980's) and interest rates are 20%?
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 12:09:32 AM
How many years has your airline been in business? That plays a part in getting an A rating or higher.
As I posted above it's been opened since the day the world started, so at least as long as other airlines that are A rated, if not longer.
Quote from: LemonButt on June 05, 2011, 12:16:58 AM
AIG (the one that was bailed out by the US govt) has $68 billion in cash with an 8% profit margin and they only have a BBB rating and they've been in business over 50 years. Your airline has only been in business for 5 years, which means there isn't much of a track record to go by. Bankers don't care about cash--they care predominately about debt to income ratios. Credit rating does serve a purpose--it determines nonsystematic risk and marginal interest rates. The interest rates published are the risk-free rates. How much further above the risk-free rate you can get a loan is determined by credit rating.
Beginner's World is setup to NOT be challenging so that virtually everyone can be successful. If you are the #1 airline in the game your company image should be 100--not 65. You stated in another post your bored...Beginner's World is like playing tennis without a net. Fuel prices are ~$250 and interest rates remain low. If you're bored, why not join DOTM2 where fuel is ~$350 (in the 1980's) and interest rates are 20%?
You're comparing the airline to a company (AIG) that has a leverage ratio estimated to be (with creative bookkeeping) between 8:1 and 11:1. They were extremely over-leveraged. I can buy out every plane I have left leased and still have money in the bank.
Let's also not ignore that AIG used questionable if not outright illegal bookkeeping to create it's profits. An airline is a real business with real costs, etc. All of this has been on my books and assuming my airline was traded publicly, would be available to them.
The complaint about the airline only being in business for 5 years is moot -- it has been in business as long as possible and as long if not longer than A rated airlines who do not turn the same quarterly, pre-tax profit that I do.
Let's take an example from BeginnerWorld currently. Thai World Airlines has a value of 400 million and is locked into a total of 187 out of a possible 188 leases for aircraft. My airline has a value of 1.98 billion dollars and has 92 leases out of a total of 188 aircraft. THey also have a Company Image of 72, not anywhere close to 100. They are A rated.
Siberian Husky Airlines is a similar situation, their company image is higher but they own 0 aircraft and have another ~150 aircraft on order that are presumably leased as well. They are also only worth 738m as well.
My point is, the metric is broken and is an arbitrary explanation for the game's decisions regarding financing that do not even closely match similar decisions made in the real world.
Quote
My airline has a value of 1.98 billion dollars and has 92 leases out of a total of 188 aircraft.
How do you have 2 billion in cash with zero loans and own 96 aircraft, but only have a company value of 1.98 billion? There is obviously a system in place and if I had to guess, it would be due to taxes (where are you based?). If you are making 30% profit pretax and not retaining your earnings by buying aircraft and assuming a 30% tax rate, you're profit margin goes from 30% to 21%. Every country has a different tax rate and if you're in Dubai, Doha, and several others--you pay 0% tax.
Also, you realize you can open additional bases at other airports, right? Typically the biggest airline in a game will have 400+ aircraft with 200-300 or better at their HQ plus the maximum 70 aircraft each at the maximum 3 bases.
Company value is truly a broken metric as AWS doesn't use GAAP. When you lease planes, prepaid leases are considered an asset but instead just disappears from the books. Company value also only takes into account book value versus the potential to generate a profit and revenue growth--company values should really be 1-8x book value if they are profitable.
Quote from: LemonButt on June 05, 2011, 04:01:06 AM
How do you have 2 billion in cash with zero loans and own 96 aircraft, but only have a company value of 1.98 billion? There is obviously a system in place and if I had to guess, it would be due to taxes (where are you based?). If you are making 30% profit pretax and not retaining your earnings by buying aircraft and assuming a 30% tax rate, you're profit margin goes from 30% to 21%. Every country has a different tax rate and if you're in Dubai, Doha, and several others--you pay 0% tax.
Also, you realize you can open additional bases at other airports, right? Typically the biggest airline in a game will have 400+ aircraft with 200-300 or better at their HQ plus the maximum 70 aircraft each at the maximum 3 bases.
Company value is truly a broken metric as AWS doesn't use GAAP. When you lease planes, prepaid leases are considered an asset but instead just disappears from the books. Company value also only takes into account book value versus the potential to generate a profit and revenue growth--company values should really be 1-8x book value if they are profitable.
I mistyped, my company is worth just over 6billion and I have 1.98b in cash.
I have no idea what my realization about opening additional bases (which I have) or tax rate has to do with credit rating. No matter what business decision I make, I can't run out of money. I'm pretty sure I could cancel all of my flights, keep everyone on staff, and leave the engines running full throttle through the end of the game and not run out of money. If a bank is looking at solvency as a criteria for credit rating (and it should) I literally don't know how I could be more solvent in the scope of BW or if this game was real.
Also, looking at risk, the above example looks at the worst case scenario...let's say that the US put a 2 year ground stop on air travel. This is completely unrealistic but given my books I am able to keep everyone on staff, pay myself the maximum salary, and pay all of the bills I have for running the airline for those 2 years without a dime of income. Talk about low risk.
I guess my point is: I'm fine with AWS not using a standard accounting practice, that's probably above and beyond the scope of the game. My problem is that it's trying to create a metric that it calls "credit rating" and that metric is very poorly designed. Honestly, while I appreciate your efforts, bringing up other aspects of the game that have nothing to do with credit rating only further my point that there's no argument against credit rating being stupidly broken.
Credit Rating is complex and not always the biggest airline has the best rating.
I know much too less about your airline to say why you have just BBB but if you think it's a bug, feel free to post in the bug forum. In my AWS history there was never never a point to complain about the rating system and I used to run the most largest most valuable airline in the games I play.
I'm also nearly sure AWS uses a simplified credit rating model, mostly because sami (the owner and coder) hasn't employeed some experts to calculate the rating properly :) The rating between AAA and B just decides how much you pay interest, the difference in allowed loan is small.
And, no offense, but I saw airlines with much more cash reserves and they lost hundreds of millions a week when fuel prices rise. Nothing what happens in Beginner World, but just to terminate your imagination of boring world domination game for game :)
Quote from: sellouts on June 05, 2011, 03:42:55 AM
As I posted above it's been opened since the day the world started, so at least as long as other airlines that are A rated, if not longer.
I'm not in the game world so I don't know how long that is I'm afraid (hence why I asked "how long" and not "since when"; case of RTFQ). But looks like some more enlightened people have come to your aid anyway.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 01:48:05 PM
I'm not in the game world so I don't know how long that is I'm afraid (hence why I asked "how long" and not "since when"; case of RTFQ). But looks like some more enlightened people have come to your aid anyway.
"As long as possible" applies to either one of those pedantic questions. Neither one has any bearing on what I'm asking.
Quote from: Curse on June 05, 2011, 05:19:12 AM
Credit Rating is complex and not always the biggest airline has the best rating.
I know much too less about your airline to say why you have just BBB but if you think it's a bug, feel free to post in the bug forum. In my AWS history there was never never a point to complain about the rating system and I used to run the most largest most valuable airline in the games I play.
I'm also nearly sure AWS uses a simplified credit rating model, mostly because sami (the owner and coder) hasn't employeed some experts to calculate the rating properly :) The rating between AAA and B just decides how much you pay interest, the difference in allowed loan is small.
And, no offense, but I saw airlines with much more cash reserves and they lost hundreds of millions a week when fuel prices rise. Nothing what happens in Beginner World, but just to terminate your imagination of boring world domination game for game :)
I would argue that the credit rating is actually not complex enough, given the evidence I have posted. Or perhaps, the credit rating is complex enough, just poorly designed. These are simple methods of valuation that should be considered when it comes to rating the credit worthiness of a company.
I would not post this in the bug forum, as it is not a bug. Credit rating obviously works as intended, my point is that the intentions are incorrect.
Interest rate % is just one result of credit rating. At it's most basic definition, credit rating is the likelihood of a company to repay debt. The evidence I've posted are enough to determine that my solvency far exceeds the amount I would ever need (or be able) to borrow to meet my long term expenses or expansion.
This aspect, combined with other thing such as artificial floors and ceilings established to financing/selling aircraft that an airline owns (can't sell too high or too low), just show how this game, at it's core, has to put artificial barriers to simulating a free market economy. The model is broken and unsustainable unless unrealistic and honestly lazy rules are put into place. To keep this on topic, Sami should remove the concept of credit rating and stop trying to make that aspect of the game something it is painfully not.
Why?
You are the first one who complains about and I can't get what exactly your point is.
Do you feel just angry because you have this extreme cool airline but others have A rating and you haven't?
Or what do you complain about?
That the system is unrealistic? Yeah. Like the demand model. Or 1000 other things. But it's a game and in this game credit rating influences only some aspects a bit and for that it's good enough.
I might note that credit ratings often take into account credit history... if you have not routinely had credit (i.e. loans in AWS) open in the past, the bank has no proven track record of timely payments etc, even though all the evidence is that you could pay. No/little credit history = Low credit rating.
So, ironiclly, the very best companies sometime have lower rating than those who have often taken out loans but paid on time.
Quote from: sellouts on June 05, 2011, 04:21:38 PM
"As long as possible" applies to either one of those pedantic questions. Neither one has any bearing on what I'm asking.
Pedantic to some, basic language skills to other.
Needless to say I don't quite think that you're too big for this game after doing OK in one Beginner's World scenario.
Beginners World is serious business, Alex. True story.
:P
Quote from: Curse on June 05, 2011, 06:01:51 PM
Beginners World is serious business, Alex. True story.
:P
Hehehe... I wouldn't know... I've never played one :laugh:
I went straight into the "big boys" worlds.
Maybe you want to go and play www.eveonline.com (http://www.eveonline.com) that has full working economic model.
When you start to play the real game world you will notice things are no where as easy as Demo Game.
Welcome to AWS.
I'm doing better in the real game worlds than in Beginners Game. Due to my HQ I was only #2 there!
True story!
:D
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 05:46:02 PM
Pedantic to some, basic language skills to other.
Yes, and in my opening post I said "As long as the world has been open" and also that I had amassed 2 billion of cash in the bank with no outstanding loans. I don't think you can do that in just a year or two regardless of the world you're in. Infact, the earlier in the game that I could do this, the more likely a lender would want to invest in my business early as the model is proving to be very low risk with very high returns. But way to use those stellar basic logic skills. Doubly sad since you're so proficient in the "big boy" worlds. That doesn't speak well for the difficulty of this game.
Quote from: ACDennison on June 05, 2011, 05:33:42 PM
I might note that credit ratings often take into account credit history... if you have not routinely had credit (i.e. loans in AWS) open in the past, the bank has no proven track record of timely payments etc, even though all the evidence is that you could pay. No/little credit history = Low credit rating.
So, ironiclly, the very best companies sometime have lower rating than those who have often taken out loans but paid on time.
I think there's a difference between credit ratings vs consumer credit score, but this is the best argument I've seen thus far as to explain the situation. I actually took out a few loans I didn't really need and paid them back just to establish a credit history with lenders to see if it made a difference. It didn't, at least to my experience. Maybe I didn't take out enough or use enough secured loans to make a difference. Good thinking though, I thought the same thing.
My skill level is irrelevant to the problem with credit rating, so it's interesting to see so many red herrings used as arguments against my point.
"Good enough" is a pretty terrible goal for any aspect of a game. Do it well or don't do it at all -- the game wouldn't suffer from the credit rating being removed until it can be done correctly.
Quote from: sellouts on June 05, 2011, 08:52:21 PM
"Good enough" is a pretty terrible goal for any aspect of a game. Do it well or don't do it at all -- the game wouldn't suffer from the credit rating being removed until it can be done correctly.
My god, sellouts, take a chill pill. Surely there are some aspects of the game that need to be improved (hence the "feature request" topic) but there's absolutely no need for statements like this, especially taking account that you're new to this game (yes, this is relevant). With your logic, you could remove the entire game from the server since the real world is very hard to simulate.
Throughout this entire thread you continuously rant (quite arrogantly in my view) how much this metric of the game is broken. As you have already pointed out, credit rating is an incredibly hard metric to calculate properly, thus it is bound to have some flaws in any sort of game. Therefore I'd really want to urge you to stop ranting already and start making valid suggestions as to how the rating should be calculated differently. After all, criticism is easy and art is difficult. Honestly, though, throughout the game's history there has never been a single complaint about it so in my view, it is quite properly calculated (i.e. players have not experienced negative effects on their airlines due to the way credit rating is calculated).
Really, breathe some positive air in your lungs. ;)
Quote from: Quinoky on June 05, 2011, 10:14:59 PM
My god, sellouts, take a chill pill. Surely there are some aspects of the game that need to be improved (hence the "feature request" topic) but there's absolutely no need for statements like this, especially taking account that you're new to this game (yes, this is relevant). With your logic, you could remove the entire game from the server since the real world is very hard to simulate.
Throughout this entire thread you continuously rant (quite arrogantly in my view) how much this metric of the game is broken. As you have already pointed out, credit rating is an incredibly hard metric to calculate properly, thus it is bound to have some flaws in any sort of game. Therefore I'd really want to urge you to stop ranting already and start making valid suggestions as to how the rating should be calculated differently. After all, criticism is easy and art is difficult. Honestly, though, throughout the game's history there has never been a single complaint about it so in my view, it is quite properly calculated (i.e. players have not experienced negative effects on their airlines due to the way credit rating is calculated).
Really, breathe some positive air in your lungs. ;)
I'm glad you said it like that mate, because I would not have been so nice :)
Let's calm it down guys; especially with the snide comments about "big boys' worlds" and the like. We're all here to have fun.
Quote from: Sigma on June 05, 2011, 10:44:48 PM
Let's calm it down guys; especially with the snide comments about "big boys' worlds" and the like. We're all here to have fun.
Why in particular mine and Curse's posts which were said in jest? Why single out and victimise
us? What about the arrogant attitude displayed by the OP throughout the thread and the open criticism from the start of the game we are here to have fun on. Obviously a case of a big fish in a small pond. Maybe if a mod was here to do their job quicker this wouldn't be a problem thread.
I can see myself getting banned again here over this so I'll try and keep my cool. But seriously, I was done with this topic until that was posted you could have used more tact and not offended anyone now this thread is going to kick off again (let's not bring up mine and some others six page job).
Quote from: Quinoky on June 05, 2011, 10:14:59 PM
My god, sellouts, take a chill pill. Surely there are some aspects of the game that need to be improved (hence the "feature request" topic) but there's absolutely no need for statements like this, especially taking account that you're new to this game (yes, this is relevant). With your logic, you could remove the entire game from the server since the real world is very hard to simulate.
Throughout this entire thread you continuously rant (quite arrogantly in my view) how much this metric of the game is broken. As you have already pointed out, credit rating is an incredibly hard metric to calculate properly, thus it is bound to have some flaws in any sort of game. Therefore I'd really want to urge you to stop ranting already and start making valid suggestions as to how the rating should be calculated differently. After all, criticism is easy and art is difficult. Honestly, though, throughout the game's history there has never been a single complaint about it so in my view, it is quite properly calculated (i.e. players have not experienced negative effects on their airlines due to the way credit rating is calculated).
Really, breathe some positive air in your lungs. ;)
Why is the idea of removing a non-critical aspect of the game so insulting? I'm not saying he should remove credit, loans or whatever math is used by the game to determine credit limits and interest rates, I'm saying get rid of an obviously arbitrary rating that makes the game look worse by it being there and being poorly done. I have no problem with the amount of credit available to an airline at any time, no problem with interest rates, etc.
If you want me to suggest improvements, I'll state it again clearly. Credit rating should more accurately reflect growth rate, consecutive quarters of profitability/growth, the increase in assets for the company, leverage ratio, cash on hand, etc. The credit rating should be calculated quarterly and adjust as need be given the previous quarters data. Example: If you're AAA rated but take on more liability in the following quarter by committing to leases, a decrease in load factor, etc, it should fall. The game should, without a doubt, at 80% way through the time period have an airline that is eligible to be AAA rated. Topping out at A with an airline worth over 12 billion and a max credit line of 500-700m as is the case with the biggest airline in BW right now, is insane. It's the easiest level, it should also be the easiest to get an AAA rating. AAA should not be unobtainable in any world and if it is obtainable, I'd love to discuss how that was obtained.
Another suggestion is to not display the credit ratings of other airlines. You can't do anything with the information anyways. It's not like you can reject a questionable airline's request to lease your aircraft or loan a struggling airline money.
I'm not addressing balance issues such as, in my opinion, the complete lack of balance in regards to a consumer's price sensitivity. Credit rating is a non-critical aspect of the game. Just pull it out and move along with improving it.
The lack of previous complaints about this is, again, irrelevant.
And hey, Alexgv1, you're glad he said what he said because you're flat incapable of saying it in a similar way. Let's call a spade a spade. You tried to refute my argument and when you couldn't you resorted to red herring arguments and backhanded comments about me and my airline. It's easy to agree, it's harder to form a coherent argument and/or refute one presented to you.
Quote from: Sigma on June 05, 2011, 10:44:48 PM
Let's calm it down guys; especially with the snide comments about "big boys' worlds" and the like. We're all here to have fun.
Thanks. I don't think anyone in this thread created the credit rating so I'm not sure why so many are taking my notion that it's broken and should be removed so personally. It's ok to not have answers!
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 10:49:22 PM
Why in particular mine and Curse's posts which were said in jest? Why single out and victimise us? What about the arrogant attitude displayed by the OP throughout the thread and the open criticism from the start of the game we are here to have fun on. Obviously a case of a big fish in a small pond. Maybe if a mod was here to do their job quicker this wouldn't be a problem thread.
Do you know what victimize means? And blame the mods all you want for not showing up to save you from yourself and your comments, but I've presented a case for my opinion and you've done nothing but write disparaging comments and offer red herring arguments to distract from my point. I'm sorry if you don't agree that credit rating is important or you're frustrated that you can't offer up a solution to defend this aspect of the game, but it is what it is.
Indeed Quinoky put it so elloquantly, hence why I thanked him. Mine would have involved the work C**t a lot. Let's call a spade a spade. So let's also call a C**t a C**t. To be honest I care not for credit rating I was just amused by the fact that someone thought they had beaten the game within a month just because they made some money on a kindergarten world. I can't wait to see you fail in a real game world. Or if you were that good you would be running your own airline by now.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 10:57:20 PM
Indeed Quinoky put it so elloquantly, hence why I thanked him. Mine would have involved the work C**t a lot. Let's call a spade a spade. So let's also call a C**t a C**t. To be honest I care not for credit rating I was just amused by the fact that someone thought they had beaten the game within a month just because they made some money on a kindergarten world. I can't wait to see you fail in a real game world. Or if you were that good you would be running your own airline by now.
Did you mean Cant?
As in "I cant argue with your points, while I don't agree that credit rating matters I can't form an argument against your point?"
Or did you actually resort to calling me a name? Just quoting this so when your mods show up they can see this.
And yes, the old "a critic can't be a critic because they can't do it themselves" argument. If you think that running an airline is as simple as being "good", you have a very naive view of the world. You also have no idea what I do for a living (but you're right, I don't singlehandedly run an airline).
While you might be good at this game, you've shown some bigger inadequacies in this thread. It almost makes me wonder what it says about a game that let's you be so good at it.
Wow you must think I'm some illiterate commoner. I don't know what made you to have such a great upbringing and education but as noted earlier you still lack the basic skills of manners and paying attention to what you're reading. I am lucky enough to have saved myself from the fate of being an illiterate commoner by working hard for myself, what's your story?
Quote from: sellouts on June 05, 2011, 11:00:51 PM
Did you mean Cant?
If you mean the philosopher, it's spelt Kant ;)
If you mean yourself then I'm sure you know how to spell it.
I would spell it out for you but that fate didn't end so well for THI.
Anyway, I'm to bed. I think I've wasted enough time here trying to help people and falling on deaf ears.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 11:01:35 PM
Wow you must think I'm some illiterate commoner. I don't know what made you to have such a great upbringing and education but as noted earlier you still lack the basic skills of manners and paying attention to what you're reading. I am lucky enough to have saved myself from the fate of being an illiterate commoner by working hard for myself, what's your story?
Basic skills and manners? Sir/Ma'am, you're the one who resorted to name calling. I mean, come on, it wasn't even 2 posts ago. This is laughable.
Considering we're conversing on an internet forum, illiterate isn't exactly the word I would use. It's kind of a requirement to be here!
I stand by what I've said and with one typo regarding my company value vs cash on hand, I've paid attention to everything I've read and presented arguments for or against it. You've called me names, asked unrelated questions, produced red herring arguments and essentially just agreed with other people rather than generate the argument itself.
Oh, and let's not forget the "RTFQ" you dropped earlier, too. That's not exactly pleasant or called for.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 05, 2011, 11:04:04 PM
If you mean the philosopher, it's spelt Kant ;)
If you mean yourself then I'm sure you know how to spell it.
I would spell it out for you but that fate didn't end so well for THI.
Anyway, I'm to bed. I think I've wasted enough time here trying to help people and falling on deaf ears.
You haven't tried to help anything. You've tried to drop in on other's arguments and resorted to name calling and other distractions. You don't have an argument for my issue at all.
Congrats on dropping the intro to Philosophy knowledge though. I'm well aware of Kant and while it wouldn't be surprising if you misspelled his name given your other misspellings in your previous posts, I didn't misspell anything.
But way to dance around calling me that name again without actually doing it for fear of what would happen. You obviously feel the need to say it, so just say it. Gutless.
Quote from: sellouts on June 05, 2011, 11:07:25 PM
Basic skills and manners? Sir/Ma'am, you're the one who resorted to name calling. I mean, come on, it wasn't even 2 posts ago. This is laughable.
Considering we're conversing on an internet forum, illiterate isn't exactly the word I would use. It's kind of a requirement to be here!
I stand by what I've said and with one typo regarding my company value vs cash on hand, I've paid attention to everything I've read and presented arguments for or against it. You've called me names, asked unrelated questions, produced red herring arguments and essentially just agreed with other people rather than generate the argument itself.
Oh, and let's not forget the "RTFQ" you dropped earlier, too. That's not exactly pleasant or called for.
Yes well that is because of the arrogant tone faced when I try and help newbs like I do on a regular basis. And yes commoners like me clearly resort to name calling and violence when we are outmatched by our intellectual superiors (so be happy that you have the protection of being behind a PC). I care not for the typo I didn't even point it out. Although my name calling was blunt, your attitude has been rude and arrogant throughout the whole thread. There is a thing in my line of work called the Attitude-Behaviour cycle where it means that you get treated like the way you act. So you acted like a pr*ck (should this be censored too) and were received like one. Simples.
Alex, go to bed.
I don't want an alliance member banned for an idiotic reason like this
Wilco
Alright guys, enough with the poo-slinging from both sides. I'm gonna have to lock this one up before someone says something that gets them banned or the like, because no one wants that to happen, least of all me.
Sellouts, I recommend you take your suggestions here and put them in the "Feature Requests" area. Just copy-pasting the relevant parts will do, no need to write up anything new.