Well it's not just the weekly update posts that are a point of frustration. It's pretty much all communication, that was just the most recent thing to grab as an example. There's hardly anything informative coming our way, spanning back several months at this point. There used to be a fair amount of activity on the forums and IRC, and lately all we get are "thread moved to appropriate section" posts for the most part.

The weekly update posts could stand to have more elaboration, though. Part of the reason is feedback to us that you see a given problem or suggestion the way that we intended. Otherwise, we feel like in the middle of all the chaos you overhear just "small missiles" and then it's off to the drawing board to mess with small missiles! More activity (from your end) on the forums could help out with this as well, participating in threads that you see a legitimate suggestions and discussions to help guide fleshing out an idea, because let's face it a lot of people are bad at fully proposing an idea. That way we don't feel like you just hear the topic and then go off to do your own thing to it.

New dev blogs are good and all, but so far I don't think I've seen one that has really told us, the closed beta testers, anything we didn't already know. They all seem like marketing material to get people out of the loop interested, and not a look at what's on the horizon. The rewards one was a little informative, but really only so far as you guys refused to tell us how it worked exactly before the dev blog, because it was being written at the time and "wait for it."

Many of us still don't know what kind of game you want Dust to be, though, and that's a huge problem for those of us that feel that way. It was always explained as tactical before I joined into the beta, but things have gone in a direction that is anything but tactical with each new build. We don't know how to tailor our feedback when not knowing what vision you have for Dust. If it's supposed to be an arcade shooter, that'll alter our perception of various mechanics (and how we provide feedback) differently than if it's supposed to be a tactical shooter.

One of the biggest issues is all the changes being made with no explanation, such as AR iron sights and ambush red line changes. They're just thrust upon us and we have to beat an explanation out of you as to why they were done, if we ever get one at all (I don't think we have about either of those). Most of the time we make up our own ideas for why they were done, and it just leads to all this speculation about the direction the game is heading.

I spoke to you in IRC (I'm Skytt in there) about communication a while back, and setting up some kind of organized feedback system to have better two-way communication, but I never heard anything since then. I'd still like to see that. You could choose a reasonable number of the more rational members of the community and have a weekly or bi-weekly feedback session (whatever fits your schedule) with them where their role is to simply relay the important matters the community has between you and everyone else. They can do all the typing it up to save you time to work on other stuff.

If we're supposed to have any role in the testing that isn't purely providing you with usage data, and instead actually having some kind of impact on the development of the game with our ideas and suggestions, then something really needs to be done to establish better two-way communication.