Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:42 am
BradJackman wrote:I apologize for my harsh words, it just seems like:
a) Everyone is turning a blind eye to issues that will severely damage the genealogical integrity of the Church's new system, believing that every element of NFS is infallible and inspired by God.
b) Nobody is willing to take a hard look at what really needs to be done to fix it
c) Users are being slammed by moderators and "NFS is infallible" supporters when problems are being raised.
You are new here aren't you
As much as we (I include myself) would like this forum to be a place to spec church software, that is only a small part of what goes on here, and not the primary purpose of this forum.
The church is, and has struggled with how to include people like you into their design process. This forum is a major step toward getting feedback on their software, and including the community in the development process. It is major progress that you can post your thoughts to a forum like this and have people like Gary'sTurn see what you think.
This problem is not unique to nFS. Jump over to the clerks' forum if you want to see MLS' warts. LUWS gets hashed here pretty regularly as well.
BradJackman wrote:I have to deal with the implications of every NFS update, every day, all day. Every change of technique, every lack of function, every IOUS and every false "take me to the temple" button requires me to address these issues over, and over, and over.
Calling for firing was too harsh. I didn't mean it. I do, however, wish NFS people would take a serious look at major overhauls, instead of little bandaids like "The combined record would be too large." Even "raising the limit" as Godon Clarke suggested, is absurd. If you can't combine every single duplicate, the whole plan is flawed.
I work with professional genealogists all day long. Every one of them has great suggestions for improvement, but nobody is listening. It's incredibly frustrating.
If this was a piece of commercial software, I'd just move to a competitor, but you're dealing with a product that will be mandatory for use by millions of users, and will be used to judge the Church's level of authenticity in the genealogical field. If NFS fails, people don't just lose their programming jobs - millions of volunteer hours will be lost, millions of Church members will suffer, temple duplication will increase, and the work of the Lord will be hindered.
I see serious problems, and I think I have a unique perspective. If I don't speak up, and get someone to take notice, I'm as much at fault as the programmers who don't understand real genealogy.
So, I'm sorry for coming off uncivil, but it's righteous indignation. I want NFS to succeed so everyone can benefit, but people need to change their way of thinking, and I don't see anyone asking questions, only defending problems.
My issue is that you come across very combative. You spend a lot of time detailing how nFS makes your life miserable, but little time on how to make it better. You talk of suggestions and fixes, but the only one I see in your posts is 'Raising the size limit is a bandaid'. Your tone is a bit more productive on the place naming thread.
So, start naming suggestions. Start dialog about how nFS should work. Go comment on the versioning discussion at: http://tech.lds.org/forum/showthread.php?t=353&page=3
You should also jump onto the familysearch wiki at: wiki.familysearch.org, and the forum that matches.
I think we just caught you on a bad day, and got the brunt of your frustration. Now let's get to work!