Publicize Features in Beta

[JamesKer1]

Concise description:

• Make a public announcement of most features as they enter the Beta Stage.

Specifics/Details:

• List would include features from GSI, Suggestions, and Administrative Pipeline that are deemed to have a positive public response.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• More community happiness

[waauw]

Seems to me the people leading the facebook page and the blog could just ask the admins directly for permission.
Would certainly make for interesting CC-articles. I don't think an announcement is absolutely necessary though.

[Dukasaur]

There's never been lack of permission. What's going on in Beta is not some state secret. Beta testers aren't under any kind of vow of silence or anything and are welcome to post updates in the forums.

That's been the difficulty -- finding someone with the time to do this on a regular basis. I know I tried for a while to do public updates, and IcePack tried for a while, but ultimately we both found other projects that needed our efforts more urgently. Ultimately this requires a volunteer who doesn't already have a dozen other duties on the site.

[Metsfanmax]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

[degaston]

There's never been lack of permission. What's going on in Beta is not some state secret. Beta testers aren't under any kind of vow of silence or anything and are welcome to post updates in the forums.

That hasn't been my experience. I was shushed when I made a post about a new feature being tested in beta - by the guy who started this thread.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=207822&p=4632810#p4632962

They should be clear about what the policy actually is.

[waauw]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

The purpose of beta is that people test out new things. Making it accessible for everybody might inspire some people to play there and not on the main website.

[degaston]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

The purpose of beta is that people test out new things. Making it accessible for everybody might inspire some people to play there and not on the main website.

Why would people want to do that?

Could it be that they want to play on a site that has no points games and a resign button that is not available on the main site? Maybe those features should be added to the main site if that's what people want.

show

[waauw]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

The purpose of beta is that people test out new things. Making it accessible for everybody might inspire some people to play there and not on the main website.

Why would people want to do that?

Could it be that they want to play on a site that has no points games and a resign button that is not available on the main site? Maybe those features should be added to the main site if that's what people want.

show

I don't know, but I'm guessing website management doesn't want to run any risk of splitting the community.

[Dukasaur]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

Do you specifically mean viewing, or posting?

Viewing: There's no precedent on CC for view-only fora. I know the BB code technically allows the possibility, but it's never been done in my memory, and I think most people would be off-put by something they can view but not post in.

Posting: The Beta test forum is a closed forum for a reason -- not because anything there is secret, but because it has strict rules about sticking to the point (testing practical aspects of new features) and not going off on philosophical debates about the direction the site is going. Making the forum open would make it extremely difficult to enforce those rules.

Still, there's a new sheriff in town, and it's only his first week. We should probably give him a chance to hang up his jacket and loosen his tie before discussing the future of his department...

[IcePack]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

Do you specifically mean viewing, or posting?

Viewing: There's no precedent on CC for view-only fora. I know the BB code technically allows the possibility, but it's never been done in my memory, and I think most people would be off-put by something they can view but not post in.

Posting: The Beta test forum is a closed forum for a reason -- not because anything there is secret, but because it has strict rules about sticking to the point (testing practical aspects of new features) and not going off on philosophical debates about the direction the site is going. Making the forum open would make it extremely difficult to enforce those rules.

Still, there's a new sheriff in town, and it's only his first week. We should probably give him a chance to hang up his jacket and loosen his tie before discussing the future of his department...

Actually, Beta Testers were not allowed to "leak" or discuss features outside of beta previously (unless the new sheriff has changed that). This was because not everything that made it to beta eventually made it to release on the live site.

[Dukasaur]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

Do you specifically mean viewing, or posting?

Viewing: There's no precedent on CC for view-only fora. I know the BB code technically allows the possibility, but it's never been done in my memory, and I think most people would be off-put by something they can view but not post in.

Posting: The Beta test forum is a closed forum for a reason -- not because anything there is secret, but because it has strict rules about sticking to the point (testing practical aspects of new features) and not going off on philosophical debates about the direction the site is going. Making the forum open would make it extremely difficult to enforce those rules.

Still, there's a new sheriff in town, and it's only his first week. We should probably give him a chance to hang up his jacket and loosen his tie before discussing the future of his department...

Actually, Beta Testers were not allowed to "leak" or discuss features outside of beta previously (unless the new sheriff has changed that). This was because not everything that made it to beta eventually made it to release on the live site.

Hmm... I did not know that.

[Metsfanmax]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

The purpose of beta is that people test out new things. Making it accessible for everybody might inspire some people to play there and not on the main website.

I said the Beta forum, not the website.

Do you specifically mean viewing, or posting?

I specifically mean viewing; that's why I said viewing. I don't particularly care that the precedent doesn't exist; that's not a reason to avoid doing it.

[JamesKer1]

There's never been lack of permission. What's going on in Beta is not some state secret. Beta testers aren't under any kind of vow of silence or anything and are welcome to post updates in the forums.

That hasn't been my experience. I was shushed when I made a post about a new feature being tested in beta - by the guy who started this thread.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=207822&p=4632810#p4632962

They should be clear about what the policy actually is.

Actually, Beta Testers were not allowed to "leak" or discuss features outside of beta previously (unless the new sheriff has changed that). This was because not everything that made it to beta eventually made it to release on the live site.

Privacy Notice: Please do not share any information that you may receive from beta testing with anyone outside this forum.

Sorry gast- didn't mean anything bad by that.

[denominator]

The Beta forum is to discuss what is happening on Beta. If you want to be able to see what is going on, then volunteer for Beta and contribute. We don't need thousands of opinions from people that aren't contributing, making actual testing a nightmare.

There is a very good reason that Beta is kept private: not everything tested makes it to the live site. Some ideas are great, but run into issues with coding, or working into the site, or having to rework existing interfaces, so they get tested and don't go live. We don't need to have the community at large get excited and attached to an idea only for it to be scrapped. Again, this is the whole point of Beta testing.

We always need more and new Beta testers, so if you're really interested to see what's going on, apply to be a Beta tester. Otherwise, the beta forum will remain private and what is being tested will stay on the Beta site until (if) it is released to the live site.

[DoomYoshi]

What is the argument against making the Beta forum publicly viewable by all?

The purpose of beta is that people test out new things. Making it accessible for everybody might inspire some people to play there and not on the main website.

I said the Beta forum, not the website.

Do you specifically mean viewing, or posting?

I specifically mean viewing; that's why I said viewing. I don't particularly care that the precedent doesn't exist; that's not a reason to avoid doing it.

BigWham still posts in Beta, if it was open to the public he would have to directly interact with the public so Beta would take a diminished role. That's not an official position, just my perception.

At the last Team Leaders pow-wow I said the whole Beta site should be available to everyone, but ppl were worried about increased complaints about bugs and etickets etc. Right now if a major bug happens on Beta it only affects a few people. Also, premium is manually given out on Beta.

[Metsfanmax]

There is a very good reason that Beta is kept private: not everything tested makes it to the live site. Some ideas are great, but run into issues with coding, or working into the site, or having to rework existing interfaces, so they get tested and don't go live. We don't need to have the community at large get excited and attached to an idea only for it to be scrapped. Again, this is the whole point of Beta testing.

The problem with this logic is that sometimes it is really worth it to go the extra mile and work around some issue that makes a feature hard to implement. bigWham will never know when that applies if the community doesn't know that these features are being worked on, because it won't be possible for him to gauge their importance based on community feedback. So yes, you do need the community at large to get excited about ideas before they happen -- otherwise you have no idea what the community wants to happen. This is especially true given that community response has been rather flat when it comes to several major site changes that have been implemented since bigWham took over. This argument for keeping Beta private is tantamount to saying that you don't care how the community feels about site changes.

[JamesKer1]

Did a quick count- 5 features didn't make it to the live site since BW started. One was Forum Archiving, which I don't count, then there were two HUGE features that were shelved due to tech difficulties, and another feature shelved because of perceived community issues. The latter three definitely should have come out in some shape or form.

I am totally on board with Mets, as always. If the admins saw how overjoyed the community would have been about these features, they would be out right now.

[waauw]

Did a quick count- 5 features didn't make it to the live site since BW started. One was Forum Archiving, which I don't count, then there were two HUGE features that were shelved due to tech difficulties, and another feature shelved because of perceived community issues. The latter three definitely should have come out in some shape or form.

I am totally on board with Mets, as always. If the admins saw how overjoyed the community would have been about these features, they would be out right now.

Personally I don't agree entirely. If you look at the big gaming companies they usually keep most of their R&D private as well. This enables these companies to manipulate fanbase expectations through sneak peeks. I think this is what CC should be doing rather than open it up entirely.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

A lot of gaming companies have alpha AND beta stages, and this is why. Beta can be public to some extent, alpha is not.

[denominator]

There is a very good reason that Beta is kept private: not everything tested makes it to the live site. Some ideas are great, but run into issues with coding, or working into the site, or having to rework existing interfaces, so they get tested and don't go live. We don't need to have the community at large get excited and attached to an idea only for it to be scrapped. Again, this is the whole point of Beta testing.

The problem with this logic is that sometimes it is really worth it to go the extra mile and work around some issue that makes a feature hard to implement. bigWham will never know when that applies if the community doesn't know that these features are being worked on, because it won't be possible for him to gauge their importance based on community feedback. So yes, you do need the community at large to get excited about ideas before they happen -- otherwise you have no idea what the community wants to happen. This is especially true given that community response has been rather flat when it comes to several major site changes that have been implemented since bigWham took over. This argument for keeping Beta private is tantamount to saying that you don't care how the community feels about site changes.

Did a quick count- 5 features didn't make it to the live site since BW started. One was Forum Archiving, which I don't count, then there were two HUGE features that were shelved due to tech difficulties, and another feature shelved because of perceived community issues. The latter three definitely should have come out in some shape or form.

I am totally on board with Mets, as always. If the admins saw how overjoyed the community would have been about these features, they would be out right now.

The issue isn't community response, it is generally technical. If the community response is positive to an idea, but in beta it becomes technically unfeasible, then bigWham is stuck with a situation of the community at large wanting a feature that is not possible with the current website setup. Which, we all know, leads to major negative community feedback when it is not implemented, or major negative community feedback when bigWham implements a feature that causes a significant change to the current system.

Further, there is a business privacy issue in allowing everyone to view the beta site. You don't expect Ford to allow Chevrolet to view their research and development, and while CC doesn't have competition akin to Chevy/Ford, you don't publicize the new features you are developing.

Like I said before, any member of CC is welcome to volunteer for the beta testers if they are interested in seeing the new features and helping to develop them. But for the above reasons, the beta testers forum and the beta site will remain private.

[Metsfanmax]

The issue isn't community response, it is generally technical. If the community response is positive to an idea, but in beta it becomes technically unfeasible, then bigWham is stuck with a situation of the community at large wanting a feature that is not possible with the current website setup. Which, we all know, leads to major negative community feedback when it is not implemented, or major negative community feedback when bigWham implements a feature that causes a significant change to the current system.

I understand the argument, and you haven't responded to my counter-point: when something is not possible with the current system, sometimes the correct answer is to change the current system to make it feasible. Yes, those large-scale coding changes are hard to swallow -- but part of the reason bigWham rarely swallows them is because he has no idea ahead of time whether the community will like the changes. He's trying to fly solo and predict what will work for the site. But he is not omniscient, and there's not much of a good reason for ignoring community feedback.

Sure, it's possible that something will be discussed in Beta that doesn't end up happening, and that causes huge community upset. But if that is the case, bigWham should very much be asking himself why he's causing that upset and not implementing this feature. If there really is major negative community feedback, what are the chances that whatever he is working on instead is more important to the community?

Further, there is a business privacy issue in allowing everyone to view the beta site. You don't expect Ford to allow Chevrolet to view their research and development, and while CC doesn't have competition akin to Chevy/Ford, you don't publicize the new features you are developing.

This is undermined by the fact that any CC member is invited to join the Beta team. Really wouldn't be hard for a competitor to infiltrate the team.