[sldev] [POLICY] Development by consensus (Re: Question regarding upcoming maintenance on 11/27-11/28)

[Lawson English]

Anders Arnholm wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 09:43:26PM -0500, Hamncheese wrote:
>   
>> Rob,
>>
>> I don't think everyone is asking for a vote. There was considerable
>> discussion and feedback from the community and then developers went
>> off and did their thing seemingly without consideration to the
>> concerns raised. The problem is not even that. LL as the ultimate
>> architect has a right and the responsibility to pull rank when
>> necessary. But without an explanation it comes off as arrogant. As an
>> enterprise architect, I cringe when I see this behavior in other
>> architects because it backfires without fail.
>>     
>
> It's part of the stuff take make morev and more resident think that LL
> don't care a second what there views on the worls is. This spreading,
> and this may i say agnorant comunications is probalt what will make an
> alterantive to SL have a big possibility on the market. LL is in now way
> uniq, as best they are number two on the market. If they are to keep
> there I'm sure they need to change. The feedback come from that we care,
> we still do, more bashing and ignoring users makes less people care.
> Soon a this spreads and LL will have a hard time fixing the reputation.
>
>   

You're a member of AW Groupies, right? You spend time chatting face to 
face with Which, Donovan, Zero, etc., inworld? You contribute to the AW 
Groupies group where those and other Lindens are usually lurking every 
day, sometimes even on weekends and often jump in with info, or 
sometimes [once at least] even two hour-long one-on-one private 
debugging sessions?

If not, then how can you or anyone else complain that no-one is 
listening or paying attention to resident input?


Lwason