I just sent this off to the info@shadowrunrpg.com address (with a cc to Adam's webmaster account over there) as a suggestion for a question in the next installment of the FAQ:

With what information has been put out in the month since the announcement, some longtime Shadowrun fans have experienced ever-increasing Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt about the rules changes as they've been described so far. For this segment of the fanbase, each installment of the FAQ has brought deeper concern and in some cases even confusion. Perhaps if you could share some insights on what the design team's base principles for both the new mechanics and the setting and how the two should mesh and compliment each other, some of these concerns could be eliminated? Some short statements on your overall vision for Shadowrun and what general guidelines you apply when you make all these rules changes to ensure that the change supports that overall vision, perhaps?

A bit long and wordy, but it'll be interesting to see the answer even if they edit the question down to size.

I seriously doubt that's gonna eliminate any concerns.

Based on their FAQ so far, I think you may be asking for far too much. I applaud your effort though and I agree with your point of view.

it will, at least, give those concerns solid ground on which to stand. the problem is that the FAQ basically says "everything you know is wrong!", and the guys playtesting the game are saying "no, guys, seriously--it's still SR!" a more in-depth treatment of what the devs are thinking, with SR4, would help everybody figure out where exactly that dichotomy is coming from.

i mean, i think Rob has great ideas, in general. i've liked the directions he's taken SR3. but the FAQs aren't very descriptive of what Rob's idea's (and the ideas of the guys/gals he's got writing for him) are. i mean, everybody's got their own ideas about where SR4 is going, at this point, and nobody (or, well, nobody who's allowed to speak on the matter) knows exactly what the overall direction is--we're gleaning as many clues as possible from the FAQs, but there are a multitude of conclusions you can reach from those.

we asked "what's not changing", and he told us in the very next FAQ, which is awesome. hopefully, an upcoming FAQ will center around one question: "Rob, what are you thinking?"

i covered this in another thread. if you pay a minimal amount of attention, the answer he gave is perfectly clear: the setting is not subject to change; the rules--all of them, or nearly all--are. i don't see why that's a bad answer, though i understand why people might not like that answer.

Got back a reply:

Rob is one of the good guys.

Have the changes from past editions to SR3 been as drastic as the ones were seeing for SR4?

If they already "had this in mind", then why aren't they posting anything but the terse FAQ answers? To build up the hype? Because it takes too long? It's not important enough to try (although the above reply is contradictory to this statement)? It doesn't take more than 30 minutes to write up a brief description of a specific design concept and the ideas surrounding it. At the outside, I'm guessing 3 hours, tops, and that's if you send it to all your fellow developers for clarifications, spelling, etc. It sounds more like he's telling you what you want to hear. Until we see the first "SR4 Design Diary", I think we will still be waiting for a satisfactory answer.

I'm not saying Rob isn't a good guy. I'm just asking "Where's the beef?"

Another vauge yet terse answer....very encouraging.