moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks
I respect your expressed opinions and would hope to deserve inclusion among those described in your last sentence. But we must not let any "pursuit of perfection” blind us to how very good the existing “product” already is.toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
There ARE circumstances necessitating financial discrimination. When Yahoo went into meltdown, the leader of Groups.io quickly understood he couldn’t continue “business as before”. He acted in a timely manner to secure the funding necessary to successfully ride that tiger. His organization is unarguably more capable and better “positioned” for the long run as a direct result of his competence.
Those who take the time to frame and submit a specific “suggestion” may or may not be aware that their perspective is seldom the same as the Groups.io people whose burden it is to glean from what is said precisely what is actually meant; and how difficult (expensive, in a coding sense) this will be to achieve. The average quality of “suggestions" decreases as overall quantity (and the labor expended dealing with them) increases.
Reading Donald Rumsfeld enlightened me that (with apologies to any inaccuracy): “There are things we know and things we don’t know. But there are also things we don’t know we know and things we don’t know we don’t know.” In such context, yes, most of us “throw our dice” in relative ignorance with the very best of intention(s).
In the end, whatever is “requested” or “suggested” is ultimately acted upon in some manner or ignored. It is either “approved” or it is not. The words used do not change the reality.