Honest (negative) feedback, hopefully constructive

[Ikadon]

Dear community, dear IPS,

first of all I want to explain something:

The following represents my opinion . It is neither ''right'', nor ''wrong'', it is an opinion, one out of thousands. It's not better than any other opinion and I don't want neither to evangelize, nor to insult anyone!

I loved and to some extent still love this software so I'm not trying to rage or harm anyone, I'm trying to make a point so maybe in a future version I once again can use this software.

When I bought IP.Board, IP.Blog and IP.Content I did this because I wasn't happy with another software I used and I didn't want to put too much time in creating my own, but rather focus on the content. I have used many software before, open source and free software as well as proprietary software I had to pay for. Back then, I bought IP.Products because they were integrated to tightly, it seemed I didn't need to use a bridge to combine forum and cms to create a similar look and feel for both, admins and users. But mostly I chose this software because the staff here seemed to listen to the majority of customers. (I was stalking these forums for many days before I decided to buy)

Maybe this has shifted a bit, maybe the majority and I don't share the same thoughts... doesn't really matter.

I was really looking forward to IP.Content. I was aware that is was more of a framework than a ''ready-to-go-CMS'' like Joomla, Drupal, Wordpress etc. But I wanted a tight integration between the main homepage, the forums, the blogs and everything else. I knew that IP.Content was pretty new back then, but I didn't knew it was lacking many basic things literally every other software I ever used to manage content had. I could deal with it, but my members couldn't and so the user-news faded. Well, I had used the old site besides the new one so I could easily change everything back and do as nothing happened.

For a new project I used the software and it was the same. It wasn't intuitive. For example, they could write the whole articles at the front-end but they were not able to specify a SEO-URL from there. So I had to manually edit those.

Just one point.

When I heard about IP.Board 3.2 and all the new features and the streamlining process I was very impressed. I love the new skin and many of the great additions and stuff. I was a bit disappointed that the overhaul of the Calendar wasn't quite as good as it looked, for some feature-requests were postponed to a future (major) version (3.3?) and I still couldn't use it for the recurring events and stuff was lacking some of the features I needed. But this was okay, that's pretty normal in software-design.

What I didn't like was all this ''It's bloat''-attitude. Suddenly features were ''not used'' or ''too complicated'' and therefore removed. Well, I agree that some things were bloat, but code-wise, not feature-wise.

Let's take, for example, the avatars. In 3.2 you can't specify the dimensions you want to use on your board, while in 3.1.4 you could even specify it per user, which was a great feature for some groups and staff, so they're easily recognized.

The same goes with IP.Gallery. I heard one of the developers mention that ''facebook'' and ''flickr'' use square-thumbnails and that they were going for this. I had no problem with this, until it was said that this is the only option you have. So suddenly IP.Gallery became uninteresting for me. The galleries for my new project are not about the users themselves (although photos are not squarish either) but about art. And I really tried it with the demo, it looked awful at most parts

Now, this was the first time when all the pros of IP.Products suddenly crumbled. I didn't want to use another software for the gallery, but I'm literally forced to, as I can't use IP.Gallery anymore.

I could go on with many features being removed, features that made this software so great because you had the ability to customize it to your needs. I know I still have this ability, but now I have to code so much on my own that this negates the whole purpose of buying a software.

Currently I'm still hoping for a change – hope dies last – but I think it won't come. I have been sitting months on a new project, have many things ready to be converted to a software (design, content …) but I'm not quite sure if I will use IP.Products anymore.

It seems it has become to inflexible for me, to stiff. Currently I seem to have two options. Stick with IP.Products and customize it so, that I probably won't be able to ever upgrade to an official version again, or use another software.

The reason I once switched have faded. IPS probably still listens to their community but it seems I'm a minority or not part of it any more.

I still wish you all the best and hopefully at some point in the future I can once again proudly say ''Powered by Invision Power Services''

Kind regards
Ikadon

[Charles]

It sounds like you are inferring that we do not listen to our clients which could not be further from the truth. Everything we do is based on client feedback. Now of course that might mean that your specific feedback may not be implemented but that is an unfortunate reality. We will often do something that some people love and others dislike and we must sometimes just pick a direction that we feel benefits the majority.

IP.Content is getting a major upgrade now that IP.Board 3.2 is out. Expect to see updates in our blog about that soon.

IP.Gallery 4.0 was released, we received tons of feedback what people did and did not like, and we have made a lot of improvements in IP.Gallery 4.1. We even invited several members who had strong opinions on IP.Gallery into a private testing group so we could really work directly with our clients on their feedback. This was very useful for us to figure out what was "really" disliked versus what was just random noise.

I cannot think of one feature that was removed that prevents you from customizing the software. In fact, IP.Board 3.2 introduced:

• dozens of new hook points
• streamlined CSS to make it easier to deploy changes suite-wide
• new WebDAV enabled access to skin templates which makes skinning way easier
• a more organized hook/app view in the AdminCP
• new Visual Skin Editor so both pros and novices alike can quickly start a new skin
• and much more detailed under the "developer oriented changes" section of the 3.2 announcement
  

Every bullet point above was based on client feedback. We actually had a long-running topic in our Contributors section, talked to skinners, talked to mod authors, etc. to find out what people were looking for.

Of course there's always room to grow and change. Some things work and some don't. There are already a few little things in 3.2 that we thought were a good idea but now, seeing them in use in a wide audience, we are rethinking.

So, in summary, we do indeed listen to client feedback. If we did not we would be lost. However, it's a balancing act as everyone has a different view. It's our job to find the balance. Sometimes we also make mistakes and the products will evolve over time, again based on feedback, to find that happy place where most everyone is pleased. Keep in mind IP.Board 3.2.0 is brand new and still needs that time to evolve, time to process what people really are looking for, and time to implement those ideas in the best way possible.

Thank you for your feedback. I hope you can see that it's not ignored but we simply have a larger picture with thousands of voices to take into account

[Ikadon]

It sounds like you are inferring that we do not listen to our clients which could not be further from the truth. Everything we do is based on client feedback. Now of course that might mean that your specific feedback may not be implemented but that is an unfortunate reality. We will often do something that some people love and others dislike and we must sometimes just pick a direction that we feel benefits the majority.

Obviously I did not:

The following represents my opinion [img]

[/img]. It is neither ''right'', nor ''wrong'', it is an opinion, one out of thousands. It's not better than any other opinion and I don't want neither to evangelize, nor to insult anyone!

I loved and to some extent still love this software so I'm not trying to rage or harm anyone, I'm trying to make a point so maybe in a future version I once again can use this software.

...

Maybe this has shifted a bit, maybe the majority and I don't share the same thoughts... doesn't really matter.

I'm ongoing software-developer myself (besides studying the same) and I know one can't incorporate every feedback, especially since it oftens contradicts.

But I also hope that my feedback is not being reduced on "rage, because he doesn't get his will". It was honest feedback frome one person, not more, not less.

I cannot think of one feature that was removed that prevents you from customizing the software. In fact, IP.Board 3.2 introduced:

Well, I gave you one. Avatars! You can no longer change the image-resolution you want to use on your boards and you can't specify it per user. I'd definetely call this a feature-removal. (IP. Board 3.1.4 -> Feature there, IP.Board 3.2.0 -> Feature not there -> Removal)

Every bullet point above was based on client feedback. We actually had a long-running topic in our Contributors section, talked to skinners, talked to mod authors, etc. to find out what people were looking for.

Of course there's always room to grow and change. Some things work and some don't. There are already a few little things in 3.2 that we thought were a good idea but now, seeing them in use in a wide audience, we are rethinking.

So, in summary, we do indeed listen to client feedback. If we did not we would be lost. However, it's a balancing act as everyone has a different view. It's our job to find the balance. Sometimes we also make mistakes and the products will evolve over time, again based on feedback, to find that happy place where most everyone is pleased. Keep in mind IP.Board 3.2.0 is brand new and still needs that time to evolve, time to process what people really are looking for, and time to implement those ideas in the best way possible.

Thank you for your feedback. I hope you can see that it's not ignored but we simply have a larger picture with thousands of voices to take into account [img]

[/img]

Once again, I've not said that you don't listen to your customers, I said that maybe I simply don't share the thoughts and needs of the majority. But that's what I was looking for, a software that is customizable so it can fit my needs without the need of programming it on my own

Apart from that I was simply pointing out things and thoughts I have. I still love the software, but I have to stick to my own "time/gain"-plan too, sadly.

I would stay with 3.1.4 and the "old" gallery, if I could, but because of IP.Content I can't as the new project, once again is revelead about user-news, sharing impressions, articles etc. and the feedback I got say's that IP.Content is not usable by the average, non-techie user

[Mikorist]

Thanks i appreciate your opinion - all this can be said in two sentences:

Currently I'm still hoping for a change – hope dies last – but I think it won't come. I have been sitting months on a new project, have many things ready to be converted to a software (design, content …) but I'm not quite sure if I will use IP.Products anymore.

Kind regards

Ikadon

Time has changed-the world is changing - IPB change - everyone has freedom of choice (take it or leave it) - especially for what you pay for ....

But now i think more about freedom of speech - and the respect for the customers.

I think it's fair that everyone has the right to say what they think - at least if nothing else.



I hope this post will be not deleted -completely - if it continues like this

[Charles]

Once again, I've not said that you don't listen to your customers, I said that maybe I simply don't share the thoughts and needs of the majority. But that's what I was looking for, a software that is customizable so it can fit my needs without the need of programming it on my own [img]

[/img]

That's my point though :) ... We are listenting to the needs of the majority. It may be your viewpoint that we are not because you have a specific, personal view on something but we have to look at the larger picture. There are many things a minority want but we cannot add because it would either confuse the majority, create a support overhead, or is simply not technically possible. One must keep in mind that the vast, vast, vast, majority of our clients do not want to customize the software very much at all. They want it to work a certain way out of the box. You are clearly a power-user who is comfortable customizing things (and that is great so we provide tools for you to do so) but the majority you speak of just want to go about their day and enjoy chatting with their community members. That is the majority we must tailor to for the out-of-the-box functions of our software.

[Ikadon]

That's my point though [img]

[/img] ... We are listenting to the needs of the majority. It may be your viewpoint that we are not because you have a specific, personal view on something but we have to look at the larger picture.

You still don't get me, do you?! (I hope this doesn't read "offensive" as I don't mean it to! I'm sorry if it comes off like that. Some phrases in english seem like in my mothertongue but then again they are more aggressive or the opposite...)

I'm aware of this... I know that you are listening to the majority, just that I'm not a part of this majority anymore ' alt='' class='ipsImage' > I've stated this numerous times now, no need to argue about it.

I am NOT saying you don't listen. I'm saying that IPS moves into the wrong direction FOR ME (not generally!) and I was hoping to share some thoughts and maybe influence the direction a bit so that I may use the software again at some point in the future ' alt='' class='ipsImage' >

Now clear? There never was an attack, just a sharing of thoughts. At least I tried. If you misunderstood or I misspelled anything then I apologize. English isn't my mothertongue, but hopefully it is now clear.

There are many things a minority want but we cannot add because it would either confuse the majority, create a support overhead, or is simply not technically possible. One must keep in mind that the vast, vast, vast, majority of our clients do not want to customize the software very much at all. They want it to work a certain way out of the box. You are clearly a power-user who is comfortable customizing things (and that is great so we provide tools for you to do so) but the majority you speak of just want to go about their day and enjoy chatting with their community members. That is the majority we must tailor to for the out-of-the-box functions of our software.

I do understand this, although I would not act like this.

Easy is good, but easy doesn't mean to take away features many customers used to have and leave them with a raging community. E.g. the Avatars. I don't see how this could confuse anyone. If you don't know what it's good for, don't touch it.

I do understand what you mean by overhead and complexity etc. but this doesn't necessarily mean "remove features" but rather "change how features are represented".

And, probably most people don't want to customize the software, I totally agree, but that doesn't mean that they all want the same things. They want it to work out of the box for their needs and as these may well be different from person to person, project to project you, to some extent, have to "bloat" or even "clutter" the software, if you want as many customers as possible.

I'm all for the out-of-the-box functions. As I said, I had problems with IP.Content in these regards, for it was too complicated for the average user and they were like "Why are you doing this to us?! It is so complicated to write an article and publish it." I took into account that many humans generally dislike change, but I tried to view the software from the average user-viewpoint and I had to agree with them.

Again, I would have had no problem to upgrade to IPB 3.2 if some (few) really important features haven't been removed (e.g. avatar-size) or I would have even stayed with 3.1.4 but then I have the problem with IP.Content... *sighs*

[Steve H]

That's my point though [img]

[/img] ... We are listenting to the needs of the majority. It may be your viewpoint that we are not because you have a specific, personal view on something but we have to look at the larger picture. There are many things a minority want but we cannot add because it would either confuse the majority, create a support overhead, or is simply not technically possible. One must keep in mind that the vast, vast, vast, majority of our clients do not want to customize the software very much at all. They want it to work a certain way out of the box. You are clearly a power-user who is comfortable customizing things (and that is great so we provide tools for you to do so) but the majority you speak of just want to go about their day and enjoy chatting with their community members. That is the majority we must tailor to for the out-of-the-box functions of our software.

Not that I think your necessarily taking the software in a wrong direction as I really like 3.2, I do have one question though - where does the vast majority of feedback come from?

I know you've said you have a large number of corporate clients that don't even visit the forums here, is the feedback coming from them? Or is the vast majority of feedback coming from these forums?

If it is these forums would you ever consider having official anonymous customer polls on the removal of features that people are most vocal about? I'm not talking about features that only a few people are complaining about but ones that bring about several threads with hundreds of users. The removal of avatar galleries and the settings that were included would probably be a good example.

I don't want this place to turn into a "vote for you want fixed or added or removed" however it would be nice to see if the vocal people in the minority are actually in the minority. Obviously if you're getting the majority of feedback elsewhere then this wouldn't work.

[bosss]

Must say just few sentences ...Charls wake up ... you probably live in some another world...

Yes, avatars ability is removed from 3.2, but many users (your minority) will back that function from 3.1.4
Yes. statistics block in 3.2 is so bad and looks so unfinished and also many many users (your minority) will back stats block from 3.1.4 ...'
Yes, many many users wrote here what they will have in 3.2 ... (colored usernames on board index is just one expl) ...

I agree with topic starter ...IPS make same mistakes what vb makes for 1.5 year before ... and hope Charls will wake up in time.

[bfarber]

The same goes with IP.Gallery. I heard one of the developers mention that ''facebook'' and ''flickr'' use square-thumbnails and that they were going for this. I had no problem with this, until it was said that this is the only option you have. So suddenly IP.Gallery became uninteresting for me. The galleries for my new project are not about the users themselves (although photos are not squarish either) but about art. And I really tried it with the demo, it looked awful at most parts [img]

[/img]

Just really quick here - based on client feedback, we have added the ability to have different aspect ratios in Gallery back in IP.Gallery 4.1.0. You are not forced to use square thumbnails in the latest release.

[Ikadon]

Just really quick here - based on client feedback, we have added the ability to have different aspect ratios in Gallery back in IP.Gallery 4.1.0. You are not forced to use square thumbnails in the latest release.

At least one great news for me! Thank you :)

[Aisha]

I hate the bloat attitude as well. But this has been argued a dozen times now, IPS won't listen.

[Matt]

Must say just few sentences ...Charls wake up ... you probably live in some another world...

Yes, avatars ability is removed from 3.2, but many users (your minority) will back that function from 3.1.4

Yes. statistics block in 3.2 is so bad and looks so unfinished and also many many users (your minority) will back stats block from 3.1.4 ...'

Yes, many many users wrote here what they will have in 3.2 ... (colored usernames on board index is just one expl) ...

I agree with topic starter ...IPS make same mistakes what vb makes for 1.5 year before ... and hope Charls will wake up in time.

I think if you personally spoke to any 100 customers, most of them would be happy with the direction we continue to take. I certainly don't dismiss any feedback but there has not been a mass outcry against the avatar/photo decision.

Go and read our many blog entries from the past six months. Read the comments too and then read on how we've further shaped the product based directly from that feedback.

With regard to "customer polls" - this generally isn't a great idea. If you pick any contentious topic you'll see that no one really agrees on a specific implementation. Our job is to listen to *everyone* and then make a decision. The moment you start compromising with direction changing input from various sources is the very moment that the product stalls and starts to come apart.

We have to present a cohesive product that suits most people. What functionality isn't present in the base system can be easily added via our extensive hooks, modules and applications frameworks. We continue to invest considerable time and effort to ensure that *you* can add the functionality that *you* need.

[Matt]

I hate the bloat attitude as well. But this has been argued a dozen times now, IPS won't listen.

I am officially listening. I do not believe that we use "bloat" as an excuse to cut old antiquated features and ideals. It's progress. It's about continuing to innovate and drive our product forwards. This sometimes means we have to let go of outdated interfaces or features. If we kept everything in and just made it a setting, it really would be one massive product. And I don't think it would be better for it.

As mentioned above, you can add in the functionality yourself. We have a fantastic community full of very talented modders who put out some amazing things.

[rastaX]

I too, often wonder about this mysterious "silent majority". I do believe IPS is moving towards a product aimed more for the business user. This would explain why the majority don't post here as a business license includes phone support. I also wonder how if the majority don't use these forums they could have possibly contributed an opinion on the new software as it has only now been released.

That said, I think catering more towards the business sector is an incredibly astute move. I have to imagine the turnover for "topical" forums is pretty high. The diversity of subject matter makes for a lot of different feature needs. The business sector uses the software fairly consistently. They have similar needs, simplicity of use and inoffensive appearance being chief among them. IPB 3.2 is probably the consummate corporate forum software. IPContent benefits greatly from a dedicated IT dept.

I don't have a problem with this. I really wasn't sold on the new look initially, and still don't love it. But I have grown used to it. I will probably grow fonder of it as time goes by. I definitely fall into the change resistant category.

Everything now rests on the next release of IPContent for me. It will make or break my continued relationship with IPS. Right now, for better or worse, IPS products are the closest to meeting my needs. I think the landscape is changing so fast all software companies are trying to catch up. IPS may not be there, I certainly have some issues, but they are the closest as of now.

One big advantage we all enjoy due to IPS's focus on business software is it must be rock solid, it must have a professional look and it must be easy for the end user to use. If we lose some fluff in the process, as has been mentioned numerous times and we are starting to see, modders will step in and create popular features.

I'm keeping an open mind. I am unhappy about a few things and I reserve the right to jump ship if my needs are met better elsewhere.

I do believe IPS's focus is now primarily on the business customer and they are feeling their way through the balancing act between us "topical" forums and the corporate customer. I don't think there is any possibility anymore of "one size fits all" software. That is why I am anxiously awaiting the next version of IPContent. The reality is that these days almost everyone has different needs to attract users. A business oriented product is a solid starting point, one which most of us should be able to build on.

Just for the record, I agree about the avatars. I always liked a large avatar since they display better............

[Matt]

I do believe IPS's focus is now primarily on the business customer and they are feeling their way through the balancing act between us "topical" forums and the corporate customer

We cater to our entire customer base. There really isn't any hidden agenda, secret meetings or hidden bunkers. We're much simpler than most people think.

We (the IPS Staff) use forums every day. We interact personally with our customers everyday via the forums, phones, tickets, emails, etc. We spot trends. We recognise popular requests. We write a list of "what we'd like in the next release" and discuss it then implement it.

Typically "business" customers just pay us to write specific integration. I honestly can't think of a single feature we added into 3.2.0 that was based from a request by a "business" customer.

[bosss]

Matt you have wrong ...show me please one post or topic where your minority wrote that they will have removed abillity to resize avatars ...
Show me one post or one topics where your minority wrote that your stats block in 3.2 version is nice, pretty and looks perfect? please Matt ...

regards

bosss

[Matt]

I think the better question is "Show me the deluge of hatred over merging avatars with photos and making the thumbnail a fixed size". There is none. Yes, there are a few topics here and there but when you put that in the context of our entire customer base, it makes up a teeny tiny proportion.

When people are angered, they leave feedback. When people are amazed and wowed they leave feedback. When people are happy and content, they keep using the product but say very little.

In that context, the silence validates our decision.

[Aisha]

I am officially listening.

What? You're officially listening now? What about all the other times where all of this was discussed before? What were you doing then, picking your nose? I already said this has all been discussed dozens of times before. It's just not worth the effort anymore. Your company has made their stand and I give up.

I do not believe that we use "bloat" as an excuse to cut old antiquated features and ideals. It's progress. It's about continuing to innovate and drive our product forwards. This sometimes means we have to let go of outdated interfaces or features. If we kept everything in and just made it a setting, it really would be one massive product. And I don't think it would be better for it.

As mentioned above, you can add in the functionality yourself.

Did you not just say that IPS caters to their entire customer base? Well your entire customer base cannot add in functionality for things by themselves. I know because at this point I've made over $50 helping YOUR customers add back functionality or doing the very simplest of css edits (I didn't even ask for money, they just throw it at you as a donation, what nice folks). We're not all zend certified php masters. I've been trying to add back topic descriptions and I simply can't because I do not know how. Charles told us it was a matter of adding a few lines back to the skin templates. He lied. Topic descriptions were removed from the source code entirely. Why weren't you listening then, to all those people who still wanted to keep the descriptions?

But why can't IPS simply add settings for all of these features? Well your argument is and has always been that it'd be a big massive product that was all clunky, but really there is nothing wrong with that. Being the experts that you are I would like to think that you're fully capable of maintaining such a large volume of settings and options. Really at this point I just think all of you are growing to be elitists.

We have a fantastic community full of very talented modders who put out some amazing things.

You forgot to mention that your community is greedy and overcharge for the simplest things. There's a person, right now, charging 15 dollars for a simple 3 column template for IP.Content which comes with blocks that are default plugin blocks that ship with ip.content. Seriously, what the hell?

[Matt]

What? You're officially listening now?

You clearly mistake listening with "doing as I demand". We listened to you and everyone else and then made a decision. Just because we didn't implement the feature in your chosen way, it doesn't mean that we didn't listen or value your feedback less.

Did you not just say that IPS caters to their entire customer base? Well your entire customer base cannot add in functionality for things by themselves. I know because at this point I've made over $50 helping YOUR customers add back functionality or doing the very simplest of css edits

You're welcome Yet another great thing about 3.2.0 is that has breathed new life into our eco-system which has rewarded hard working modders nicely.

You forgot to mention that your community is greedy and overcharge for the simplest things. There's a person, right now, charging 15 dollars for a simple 3 column template for IP.Content which comes with blocks that are default plugin blocks that ship with ip.content. Seriously, what the hell?

I just read someone boasting about making $50 performing simple skin edits. Value is a personal thing.

But why can't IPS simply add settings for all of these features? Well your argument is and has always been that it'd be a big massive product that was all clunky, but really there is nothing wrong with that.

Yes there are many things wrong with that, but it is beyond the scope of a simple forum reply. Ask the internet that question and see what answers you receive.

[Mikorist]

i really can not say in public- what I think that the real truth is- I'm afraid that the post be deleted - me - banned, etc...

(better to be silent)

[Steve H]

I think if you personally spoke to any 100 customers, most of them would be happy with the direction we continue to take. I certainly don't dismiss any feedback but there has not been a mass outcry against the avatar/photo decision.

Go and read our many blog entries from the past six months. Read the comments too and then read on how we've further shaped the product based directly from that feedback.

With regard to "customer polls" - this generally isn't a great idea. If you pick any contentious topic you'll see that no one really agrees on a specific implementation. Our job is to listen to *everyone* and then make a decision. The moment you start compromising with direction changing input from various sources is the very moment that the product stalls and starts to come apart.

We have to present a cohesive product that suits most people. What functionality isn't present in the base system can be easily added via our extensive hooks, modules and applications frameworks. We continue to invest considerable time and effort to ensure that *you* can add the functionality that *you* need.

Matt, how can you say that there has been no mass outcry regarding avatars? There are lots of topics on the subject and it's not just the same old users posting in every topic.

I don't care either way, however obviously a significant part of your customer base, (the ones who care enough about the software and the direction it takes by using these forums and giving feedback) care about how that particular feature was removed.

They are not asking for a new updated feature with more options - they are asking for the same thing that you've previously offered. Is there any empirical data which suggests that more people don't want it? I'm not talking about people like me that sit on the fence but people that actually don't want the feature because they believe that it is no longer relevant.

A poll with respect to this particular subject would only require two options - integrate the avatar system as it was in previous releases or leave as is.

I can't help but feel that the integration would take more work than you would want to put in and for that reason you're against re-integrating it.

Maybe I've missed it but I've not seen any modder suggest that they will be picking up the development of an avatar modification, nor could anyone expect that such a modification would be available for free as I'd imagine it would take a significant amount of coding.

How can silence validate your decisions? That's a comment I'd expect from the developers at IB not IPS. If silence validated your decisions then what you've said in respect to listening to those posting is just a façade.

[PSNation]

cdkey lots of people have thanked me for that mod. If i warrant the amount of work I put into that is $10 then so be it. I have had lots of interest and you have no need to flame the mod every topic you post in

[Matt]

Maybe I've missed it but I've not seen any modder suggest that they will be picking up the development of an avatar modification

This further proves there is not a demand for this feature and we were right to go with fixed square thumbnails. Just like the rest of the internet.

[Aisha]

I think the better question is "Show me the deluge of hatred over merging avatars with photos and making the thumbnail a fixed size". There is none. Yes, there are a few topics here and there but when you put that in the context of our entire customer base, it makes up a teeny tiny proportion.

This is how you officially listen? The guy asked you for one post, one one one post where someone said that they want the ability to resize avatars removed. One post one one one post where someone told you that your statistics display was nice, pretty and looks perfect. And then you listen to him by completely dodging his question and asking one of your own at the same time claiming that only a teeny tiny proportion of your customer base is dissatisfied with fixed thumbnails, yet at the same time you're claiming in this thread that you cater to your entire customer base. Well? Why not add a setting?

When people are angered, they leave feedback. When people are amazed and wowed they leave feedback. When people are happy and content, they keep using the product but say very little.

In that context, the silence validates our decision.

Then why do you listen to feedback in the first place? It's only coming from angry or amazed people right? What if by listening to them all the happy and content people won't be so happy anymore?

[Aisha]

You clearly mistake listening with "doing as I demand". We listened to you and everyone else and then made a decision. Just because we didn't implement the feature in your chosen way, it doesn't mean that we didn't listen or value your feedback less.

No clearly I'm mistaking listening with you being able to understand the point of view of your customers. You just completely ignored my point about how not everyone is as smart as you when it comes to code.

You're welcome [img]

[/img] Yet another great thing about 3.2.0 is that has breathed new life into our eco-system which has rewarded hard working modders nicely.

I just read someone boasting about making $50 performing simple skin edits. Value is a personal thing.

Are you being serious right now? This isn't listening, this is being obnoxious. I didn't want the money, I didn't ask for it, it was a donation. How can you be so hard-headed? Breathing life into our eco-system? So basically what you're saying is that you're going to continue removing features from your product and forcing your customers to spend more money right so that everyone has it right? What a noble cause.

Yes there are many things wrong with that, but it is beyond the scope of a simple forum reply. Ask the internet that question and see what answers you receive.

Forgive me for wanting to think that your company was better than the rest of the scum on the internet. I had realized the conclusion a while back that you were just the same as the rest but I still had hope. Now, I just don't care.