Now I *am* getting a little cross!
No, it's not hard to add links. Keeping them maintained is hard - when Microsoft changes the link to its DirectX patch, or Firaxis software needs a different version, or someone else discovers another issue with it, or Windows 7 or Windows Vista need a different one. And if everyone wants his own small addition to the Game release pages, they will rapidly become totally unreadable.
Surely I have some right to question whether your requests are reasonable before I blindly obey your instructions?
Let me try to understand what you would like me to do:
1. Add a link to the patches for Civ4, Warlords and BtS to every Game Release page, in spite of the fact that the links to the patch page are readiiy available on these forums, and we already link to the patch page from the Introduction page on the GOTM site. Civ4 patches are generally available from Firaxis. We tell you which version of Civ4 is required to run each game. I can see zero justification for providing the details on how you go about updating your copy of Civ4.
2. Add a link to Microsoft's DirectX patch page, although you have given me no evidence that this is a GOTM-specific patch. I think it is likely that Microsoft produced it to solve a few more issues than getting your GOTM Start files to load, and the number of people for whom this is an issue seems to be tiny.
3. Move a piece of highlighted text that specifically warns about updating the CvGameCoreDLLs a few inches down the page, and bury it in the Software Versions section. Presumably because you failed to read the page properly when you were trying to get your game started.
No one has spoken up here to support your suggestions. If they were thought to be useful for more than an audience of one, on an ongoing basis, then I would be happy to implement them. As it is, you seem to feel that I should execute your every personal wish, without question. Otherwise I'm a "Bureaucrat"? Fair enough, I can live with that! Now, please can we move on?
No, it's not hard to add links. Keeping them maintained is hard - when Microsoft changes the link to its DirectX patch, or Firaxis software needs a different version, or someone else discovers another issue with it, or Windows 7 or Windows Vista need a different one. And if everyone wants his own small addition to the Game release pages, they will rapidly become totally unreadable.
Surely I have some right to question whether your requests are reasonable before I blindly obey your instructions?
Let me try to understand what you would like me to do:
1. Add a link to the patches for Civ4, Warlords and BtS to every Game Release page, in spite of the fact that the links to the patch page are readiiy available on these forums, and we already link to the patch page from the Introduction page on the GOTM site. Civ4 patches are generally available from Firaxis. We tell you which version of Civ4 is required to run each game. I can see zero justification for providing the details on how you go about updating your copy of Civ4.
2. Add a link to Microsoft's DirectX patch page, although you have given me no evidence that this is a GOTM-specific patch. I think it is likely that Microsoft produced it to solve a few more issues than getting your GOTM Start files to load, and the number of people for whom this is an issue seems to be tiny.
3. Move a piece of highlighted text that specifically warns about updating the CvGameCoreDLLs a few inches down the page, and bury it in the Software Versions section. Presumably because you failed to read the page properly when you were trying to get your game started.
No one has spoken up here to support your suggestions. If they were thought to be useful for more than an audience of one, on an ongoing basis, then I would be happy to implement them. As it is, you seem to feel that I should execute your every personal wish, without question. Otherwise I'm a "Bureaucrat"? Fair enough, I can live with that! Now, please can we move on?
I think there is no lack of respect to the staff. It looks like newbie' excessive enthusiasm. 
.
