Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Doctor John <joh### [at] homecom> wrote:
> > instead I'll do what, I guess, a lot of others are doing. Bye, IRTC.
>
>   Instead of understanding that new websites present technical problems
> and that that solving these problems may take time, especially when they
> are run by people on their free time as a hobby, you decide to boycott
> the whole thing because you can't wait for people to fix the problem.

>   No, you are not being a jerk. You are being a sensible and rational
> person. Yes.

So, you accusing everyone of "boycotting", who is turning his back on the IRTC
due to some disappointment, is much better. Right. Sensible and rational, too.

I see two fundamental flaws in the re-starting of the IRTC:

(1) Failure to define the rules beforehand.

(2) Failure to do a sufficient amount of "friendly user" testing beforehand.

People get excited, shouting "hooray, the IRTC is back" - only to discover that
it is still in some kind of early beta stage. With the documentation not only
requiring yet to be written, but also still to be specified.

You're suprised some people show disappointment?

Post a reply to this message