It is reduction to the absurd, but that is my point. Getting more users is great, if it doesn't destroy what made your product interesting in the first place.
As to voting with my feet: I'd much rather vote with my voice before it gets that far. But if Mozilla isn't interested, eventually feet are all that will be left. On 18 Jun 2015 12:25 pm, "Mike Connor" <mcon...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Let's not get to reductio ad absurdum please. > > Improving products effectively involves research, testing, and measuring > engagement. If a new feature is popular and significantly improves user > satisfaction and retention, we're doing good things. Users get to vote > with their feet here, if we build a product that works better for more > users, surely that's a good thing? > > There are risks, we will make mistakes along the way, and that's okay. > That's part of building a great product. > > -- Mike > > On 18 June 2015 at 12:14, <automated.reckon...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am sympathetic to your position, but every time people use 'market >> research' to justify changes, or talk about how a user increase proves they >> were right, I feel the need to point out a simple fact. The Daily Mail is >> one of the most popular websites in the world, with a huge user base. >> >> Does this mean that the DM is a good publication? >> _______________________________________________ >> governance mailing list >> governance@lists.mozilla.org >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance >> > > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
