http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/client-feedback-on-the-creation-of-the-earth
Dear Mike, thank you for this thorough feedback. I will run this by my engineering team, but I can give some preliminary feedback on the issues you point out.
1. Please note that "day" and "night" are just handles we use internally. Wording and translation to different languages is the customer responsibility, and we have provided a configuration system for this purpose. Please see clause 5b in the contract.
2. Well, you didn't provide any strict requirements regarding color, but you had quite a few requirements regarding the composition of the atmosphere and the fact that carbon-based life were to be able to live on "earth" without external support systems. Finding the right balance here turned out to be quite a challenge, but I believe we found a good tradeoff between cost and functionality. The color is really just a consequence of the composition of the atmosphere and there is nothing we can do about this so late in the process.
3. Unfortunately it is not possible to make life out of carbon alone, you also need fluid to transport stuff around (sorry about this simple explanation, my engineers can get back to you with more details if necessary). Water turned out to be the most stable fluid available. I realize that the amount of water might seem excessive, but it is really necessary to get everything working.
4. I'm not sure where you are getting at. You specifically wanted carbon-based life. Now, your definition of "life" might differ from the generally accepted meaning in the industry, but some sort of "reproduction" is usually regarded as a key ingredient. The "seeds" and "fruits" (these are your terms, our internal, technical terms are more refined) are needed for reproduction. Thus no "seeds"; no life.
5. This is really a cost issue. It turned out that creating a source of light was far, far more expensive than expected. Thus we only created one. The second source you see at night is really just a reflection of the primary source. We considered adding more reflections like this, but it soon became unstable and crashed.
6. As I explained above, we need sea to get life. The fact that the life also spreads to the sea is a side-effect of life. (Actually it was the other way around, it turned out that the easiest way of bootstrapping the life-process was by starting it at sea, but this doesn't matter. Even if we had started the life on land it would have spread to the sea eventually)
7. The birds was just an add-on, really. One of our engineers thought it would be a fun idea and added it. I believe it adds more drama and movement and overall makes the system more rewarding to use.
8. You can regulate the amount of animals by adjusting the amount of plants available. Please see the users manual.
9. They aren't really made "in my image", that is just something the keep telling themselves to boost their own ego and sense of superiority. But they are really at the top of the food-chain, and that means the can pretty much do what they like. I understand that this can be a PITA, but life is usually structured like this, with one species on top, and everything else is really just a consequence of this.
10. Please see note about life above (pt 4). Mankind, being at the top of the food-chain, cannot be expected to figure out the most rational way to behave by themselves. Everyone else on "earth" is hunted by someone else and will adapt the behavior necessary to avoid extinction. Previous trials show that this doesn't work with the species on top, and they need to be told what to do. If not given explicit instructions to "be fruitful and multiply", they will just vanish after a few generations. Please note that we tried to put this as delicately as possibly, using the euphemism "fruitful" instead of more explicit terms.
Working on sunday is a no-go, but I will gladly bring my chief architect to go over these issues with you and your stakeholders on monday.
regards
God
