I'd like to bring attention to the edit of my ignorant post earlier. I took some time to rewrite the whole thing.
I mean no offense, my man, but that post is HUGE. Somebody somewhere in one of your threads mentioned that you should endeavor to become more concise with your communication, and I definitely agree. No one ever says that a speech is too short...but on a forum readers will very often tune out if your post requires any use of the Page Down key. <3
I personally don't believe that ideas are worthless, or that there is anything wrong with discussing theory or concepts. But ultimately, this is Gamedev.net, not Talkaboutgamedev.net. The aim is to get games made. I'm not going to tell anybody that they shouldn't make an MMO or whatever, but I am going to reiterate that these things don't build themselves.
Incidentally, Gamedev.net has a bit of a reputation among game development websites as being mostly frequented by newbies and dreamers with little in the way of actual games being 'devved'. The people who are actually shipping games they made themselves are mostly over on TigSource.com. So, if anything, we here at Gamedev.net are not biased enough towards the practical aspect.
@Thade The way I see it is, if it pertains to something someone feels like reading/is interested in, they won't feel pressured in its length. I also format constantly so people can realize when I'm ending or straying or starting a new topic. This way, they can choose to stop reading at any point they start to lose interest and NOT miss out on anything they might have wanted to read/could benefit from/contribute to.
P.S. That someone was in fact Sir Legendre. To which I haven't posted my reply yet (formatting and correctly wording still). I see his and your point but I stick to my original statement. If you don't like it, dont read it. If you do, thank you for taking your time to read it and it more than likely didn't feel like a waste/bothered you.
@Thade The way I see it is, if it pertains to something someone feels like reading/is interested in, they won't feel pressured in its length....
If you don't like it, dont read it. If you do, thank you for taking your time to read it and it more than likely didn't feel like a waste/bothered you.
You are in danger of enabling your thread to be pulled right off your actual topic for this thread. I am not disagreeing with your assertion of how you present your posts or even the length of them, but with regard to your actual thread, paying attention to issues that detract from the actual subject is the fastest way I know of degenerating a thread into uselessness and probably locking. To a degree you need to moderate your own threads by reminding people to keep on track where appropriate, possibly summarising various points and thoughts derived out of the thread so far into a form that enable further constructive discussion or points to the fact that you have obtained enough information to your satisfaction on the subject. If you see something that strikes you as needing commentary but stands out as separate issue from the thread's subject consider using the Messenger tool as a form of reply.
I should point out that if I purely intended this message for you I would have also utilised that tool. But it strikes me that a gentle reminder allround about keeping to the thread's subject and its appropriate evolution is not a bad thing.
Apologies; I didn't intend to derail and I meant no disrespect. My goal was only friendly advice...advice which really applies to most situations in life. When saying anything, the briefer it is the more likely it is to be understood and to be memorable. If your goal is to reach an audience, brevity is fundamental. That is especially true on the Internet. Youtube and cat videos are legit one tab away.
But don't mind me.
Thank you Sir StormyNature, I'll keep an eye on it.
I actually attempted to do just that with the edit of my last large post.
Specifically from when I said:
Last bit of general commentary on what I feel is unfair and would like to see less of around here.
Up until I quoted Lady SunAndShadow
Consider this an official moderator warning that everyone -- and that includes you as the original poster SinisterPride -- is to stay on topic from this point onwards, as things are already getting off the topic at hand and the topic will have to be locked if it strays much farther.
-------------------------
@SinisterPride: I realise you've put some effort into your posts, and I'm sure it's much appreciated that it helps increase readability -- and you're right that people who aren't interested can simply choose not to read -- but if you wish to effectively reach a larger audience I do however have two suggestions for you:
-------------------------
In line with the above instruction, please do not respond to this post either. There's been some good discussion so far, and it would be sad to see it dragged off topic. 
I read the entire thread, and, no offense, SinisterPride, but at this point it really seems to me that you're more interested in getting people to agree with your own point of view than in taking advice from other members, especially those who have been in the industry a long time (all over the design-to-implementation spectrum).
The problem with simply offering ideas is that while it's good to have imagination and creativity, a good idea isn't going to transform into a fully fledged game over night. Actually getting the whole development process moving requires time, patience, money, and commitment, far more than many people who come on this board posting "I have this awesome idea for a game" threads are willing and/or capable to provide. People on Gamedev.net don't discourage newbies from "their idea" because they are a bunch of evil trolls, they do it to put the newbie into perspective and don't want to give him false hopes. No, good ideas are not dime a dozen - it's one thing to get a basic concept going but quite another to make it actually possible and playable. This is what game designers do for a living and it's a perfectly respectable profession, the only thing is it is being tarnished by this "idea guy" concept which is really just an uninformed person asking other people to create their game for them ("here is the initial idea - make it and give me 50% cut") which does not work.
The precise definition you use for "development", "design" and "idea guy" is irrelevant, the point has been made several times throughout the thread.
I realized something on a reread of my post/making sure I didn't miss any post before and after I was active.
I've said two things and attempted to clarify what I see as a common root cause for misunderstandings in the heavy matter of politics relating to balance in Design vs Development.
Sir SwiftCoder, Lady SunAndShadow as well as Sir Kylotan have contributed generously and continuously to clarifying and adding their opinions to this cause within this post.
___________
I'd like to reiterate my two main contributions:
1. Realistic design and productive development meet at a vague threshold where the balance of ideology and functionality/feasibility is key.
2.
Definitions taken directly from www.Dictionary.com
Development: the act or process of developing; growth; progress:
Developing: undergoing development; growing; evolving.
Design:
1. to prepare the preliminary sketch or the plans for (a work to be executed), especially to plan the form and structure of.
2. to form or conceive in the mind; contrive; plan.
_______
So what does this tell me, the "Idea Guy"?
It tells me that I have an Idea of where and how to show that there is a line drawn which clearly states what is and isn't design within the industry. The confusion which so many others seem to have stems from a misunderstanding and generalization of terms which I will attempt to mostly clarify in one a simple statement.
_________
Design is inarguably a part of Development within the gaming industry (as well as many other industries) and therefore IS a form of Development. Development however, is comprised of multiple aspects some of which (NOT all) comprise elements of Design.
Therefore, Design is ALWAYS Development while Development does NOT always entail Designing.
_________
I hope that was clear and accurate. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Edit: Duely noted Sir Jbadams, Tahoma ok? lol (I jus can't stand Arial)
