Page 3 of 3

Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:31 pm
by gregwanderson
This seems like a good proposal… but… My concern is that attempts to restrict what the software can do will have unintended consequences. And, since those consequences are unintended, I can't really predict what will go wrong.

The fact that the church has an official presence on YouTube and social networking sites means that, somewhere up the chain, someone has decided that being “in the world” is worth the risk (to both the church and to its members). This discussion is based on catering to one family’s policy about how it uses mobile devices. I’m not comfortable with the idea of imposing that policy on everyone else.

Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:03 pm
by mkmurray
GregAnderson wrote:This seems like a good proposal… but… My concern is that attempts to restrict what the software can do will have unintended consequences. And, since those consequences are unintended, I can't really predict what will go wrong.

I'm sure the developers won't ship a fix that renders the app unusable, and I doubt they'll remove the feature entirely (I hope they don't, but can instead find a way to make it work).
GregAnderson wrote:This discussion is based on catering to one family’s policy about how it uses mobile devices. I’m not comfortable with the idea of imposing that policy on everyone else.

Even if the original poster intended this, I certainly have not. I am only championing the merits of the bug found, and not anything in relation to the original poster's personal or family moral convictions. And it is indeed a bug as the feature can be made to work in a way that was not intended.