6 ms·

I think it looks worse that it took so long to respond without any demonstrable improvements.

by Siecje 11y ago

wiremine 11y ago
I disagree: I'd rather see a well reasoned response than a knee jerk relation. If they had decided _not_ to do anything, I'd prefer to have them think about it first. That said, they set the bar pretty high, and now they need to execute.
Touche 11y ago
What world do we live in that 29 days is an unacceptably long amount of time to deliver a feature that affects 0.1% of millions of users?
- johnnyfaehell 11y ago
  This world. Seriously their response was some words, that doesn't take that long to come up with. 29 days to go to production on that is not good. Adding a simple feature on a project which I am pretty sure they say they deploy daily on shouldn't take 29 days when you have the amount of talent they have. I am sure people aren't expecting the world, but 29 days should equal some text saying ok we're listening here is something we've done.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - hk__2 11y ago
    They’re already working on a lot of different things; they’re not just there waiting for someone to write a letter and then jump on coding everything that’s written in.
    - x1024 11y ago
      Oh, the classic "HR" response. "We're very busy here". Well, if they truly have "more imporant things to do than address community ire", then this also means that they agree to take the community's ire.
      - hk__2 11y ago
        I didn’t say they have more important things to do but that they can’t just stop what they’re doing and code a solution in 3 weeks as the parent comment was suggesting. It’s perfectly ok to have to wait more than 29 days to (hopefully) see new features released that address the letter.
        johnnyfaehell 11y ago
        They don't have to just stop what they're doing, they stop what a couple of people are doing and ship something. 29 days would be fine if they replied straight away. But they didn't they took ages, 29 days is a long time for a response. So if you take a long time to reply you have to have something to show why. As it stands, this just looks like they couldn't really be bothered and had it as a "do at some point" task.
- toyg 11y ago
  They didn't deliver a feature, they put out the lame equivalent of a press release. It's like somebody called you on the phone, said "hello? Can you hear me?" and you waited 29 hours to reply "hello". That's no way to run a modern web-based business for alpha geeks.

I think it looks worse that it took so long to respond without any demonstrable improvements.

by Siecje 11y ago

I think it looks worse that it took so long to respond without any demonstrable improvements.

I disagree: I'd rather see a well reasoned response than a knee jerk relation. If they had decided _not_ to do anything, I'd prefer to have them think about it first. That said, they set the bar pretty high, and now they need to execute.

Touche 11y ago

What world do we live in that 29 days is an unacceptably long amount of time to deliver a feature that affects 0.1% of millions of users?

johnnyfaehell 11y ago
This world. Seriously their response was some words, that doesn't take that long to come up with. 29 days to go to production on that is not good. Adding a simple feature on a project which I am pretty sure they say they deploy daily on shouldn't take 29 days when you have the amount of talent they have. I am sure people aren't expecting the world, but 29 days should equal some text saying ok we're listening here is something we've done.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- hk__2 11y ago
  They’re already working on a lot of different things; they’re not just there waiting for someone to write a letter and then jump on coding everything that’s written in.
  - x1024 11y ago
    Oh, the classic "HR" response. "We're very busy here". Well, if they truly have "more imporant things to do than address community ire", then this also means that they agree to take the community's ire.
    - hk__2 11y ago
      I didn’t say they have more important things to do but that they can’t just stop what they’re doing and code a solution in 3 weeks as the parent comment was suggesting. It’s perfectly ok to have to wait more than 29 days to (hopefully) see new features released that address the letter.
      - johnnyfaehell 11y ago
        They don't have to just stop what they're doing, they stop what a couple of people are doing and ship something. 29 days would be fine if they replied straight away. But they didn't they took ages, 29 days is a long time for a response. So if you take a long time to reply you have to have something to show why. As it stands, this just looks like they couldn't really be bothered and had it as a "do at some point" task.
toyg 11y ago
They didn't deliver a feature, they put out the lame equivalent of a press release. It's like somebody called you on the phone, said "hello? Can you hear me?" and you waited 29 hours to reply "hello". That's no way to run a modern web-based business for alpha geeks.