[JohnJ80]

Re-read my last post and then re-read your last one. I'll leave the psycho analysis to you and defer to your expertise in that subject. I found a better solution to my problem. Thanks for your help.

J.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

I found a better solution to my problem. Thanks for your help.

That's good to hear. Sometimes talking out the kinks in your system leads to a completely different but better solution. Glad I could be of help.

-Dennis

[paulduv]

Well I just cannot get on with my day without commenting on the devolution of this thread. If there's anyone at OmniFocus reading this, I apologize for adding a few inches to a thread that's already kind of "cooked".

I'm always struck by how rarely a forum like Ask Metafilter has comments to the effect of, "That's not actually not that great a question. Here's why."

Below their message field, they note: Ask MetaFilter is as useful as you make it. Please limit comments to answers or help in finding an answer. Wisecracks don't help people find answers. Thanks.

The comments in this thread that sent things the "wrong" way were certainly not wisecracks, but I think they're every bit as frustrating (and in some ways, more so) as wisecracks, spam, or rude comments. I wonder if there's some way of encouraging people to curb rebuttals and countering views that are really not of any substance, or so generic and self-evident as to be, in effect, off topic.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

Toadling, each and every time someone expresses a need for a more elegant iCal integration, and/or a reminder system, someone like you says something like,

"Unfortunately, things are rarily that simple. Every added feature consumes finite engineering resources -- resources that might be better spent elsewhere.

So, by all means, send in your feature requests so Omni can evaluate them and plan accordingly. But don't expect other users to just accept your pet feature or ignore it if they don't see a pressing need for it."

That's your post – didn't have to paraphrase. As well, they also say,

"OmniFocus is not "meant" to do that".

The fact is, you could lob out either of the two above comments about virtually any feature, existing or proposed.

So at best, it's inane to read through those countervailing comments, because because they're an obvious generic consideration about any particular feature. It's particularly frustrating to see so many people go out of their way to comment about this need, and end up having a vacuous discussion.

About the tone of this thread, here's my answer to your question, "So why the animosity?".

You write: "But when pressed for details, you've been intractable and defensive, flaunt your credentials..."

This was your comment at the beginning of the thread:
"Maybe. But unless you've got the source code, it's hard to be certain. Either way, I'd still rather see the resources invested elsewhere. But that's just my personal opinion."

You should be aware that your post looks a heck of a lot like credentials flaunting to those who don't feel compelled to write posts like yours. To give you an idea of why they're so vexing, they read something like this:

"Even though I'm saying I don't personally need the thing that you think you need, I'm going to insert comments into this discussion whose subtext signal my pretty impressive insight into "source code", and into "the investment of resources" of a complex product, and the successful organization that designed it."

So yeah. Maybe the solution would be something like this: start a discussion entitled, "Where I think OmniFocus should invest their resources", and it'll be both easier to seek out your opinion on the matter, and easier to avoid it when looking for substantive replies to a post about alarms and calendars.

About the topic, it looks like Brian is aware of the interest – and of course, the technical issues. Hopefully someday we'll see little alarm check-boxes next to the words "Start" and "Due" in the inspector!

[JohnJ80]

well said and I agree.

J.

[curt.clifton]

paulduv,

Thanks for your thoughtful, and thought provoking, post. (And I apologize for prolonging this thread, but I think the meta-issues that you raise are important for the community and worth spilling some "ink" over.)

I think the forums here provide a somewhat different service than something like Ask Metafilter. These forums serve both as a place to find solutions to problems and as a community of people passionate about a product. Those two purposes generally reinforce each other—if there weren't passionate, knowledgeable users here, then questions would go unanswered—but sometimes the two purposes are at odds. This seems to happen most often when someone posts something that reads more like a demand than a question. There's a natural tendency for some of us to want to defend a product of which we are passionate advocates. I think you're correct to point out that such defensive reactions don't typically further the discussion.

I disagree with your assertion in the following:

Originally Posted by paulduv

Toadling, each and every time someone expresses a need for a more elegant iCal integration, and/or a reminder system, someone like you says something like,

"Unfortunately, things are rarily that simple. Every added feature consumes finite engineering resources -- resources that might be better spent elsewhere..."

You're omitting a key step in these (admittedly tedious) exchanges. That step is the one where someone claims that their desired feature must be implemented immediately, or that it is clearly trivial to implement. Like you, I've recognized that the right response is to simply not take such bait, so I've tried to avoid posting in such threads. I'm confident that the good folks at Omni can sort out the costs and benefits of implementing particular features. (And, like you, I suspect that we'll eventually see some more robust reminder features in OF.)

[Lucas]

I acknowledge that some people really genuinely think that there should be some type of reminder function in OF. But I would also say that whoever designs this product is well aware of it too. I know that people do it honestly, but re-bringing up the absence of a feature doesn't make the developers any more aware of it; and I think it interferes with the enjoyment of using the forums to help other users better use the product as it is - in fact, to a greater and greater degree as these demands use more and more strident language.

Toadling in particular has been on these forums a long time and has taken a lot of time to help other users. While I know that some of you feel that no one could productively use this software without some kind of reminder thing, I think it would be nice if you would make clear that you had made an effort to solve your problem using the software as it is designed and maybe ask for help on that first before making your demands. (I remember reading Eric Raymond's point about this years and years ago.) Second, if you think that Toadling wasn't sufficiently considerate of your feelings in the way he answered you in the forums it would be nice for you to recognize that your comments were made in, minimally, a strident tone themselves.

[JohnJ80]

The "tediousness" factor just went up another 5 clicks after that last one.

Repetition is always helpful to marketing guys to drive home the point to the engineering guys. If the requests stop, then what would a marketing guy think? Answer: Feature no longer needed or overtaken by events.

J.

[whpalmer4]

Paul, Curt, Lucas,

a fine trio of carefully thought-out posts. Speaking as one who often falls into the "or someone like Toadling" category, I'll add one point which has so far been missed here. Not everyone who posts on these forums asking for "just this one little feature I need" has a background in delivering software products, and those who don't rarely realize the length of the "tail" on even simple changes to complex programs (and for that matter, people who do have such a background are known to occasionally underestimate it, too!)

Dennis,

I think you understand why I spend so much time on the forums better than I do!

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

The "tediousness" factor just went up another 5 clicks after that last one.

John,

along the lines of one of your earlier comments that started this:

Don't like it? Then don't read it!

This isn't your staff meeting where you can squelch dissent if you've made up your mind, it's a open forum.

[JohnJ80]

Originally Posted by whpalmer4

Paul, Curt, Lucas,
ad it!
[/INDENT]This isn't your staff meeting where you can squelch dissent if you've made up your mind, it's a open forum.

I think that was exactly the point that paul made and I agreed with. Now that you agree with it then it would seem this is done.

J.

[Toadling]

I spend time in these forums out of a honest desire to help people and, to a slightly lesser degree, influence and promote what I think is a truly excellent piece of software (OmniFocus) developed not just by smart people, but by good people (the Omni folks).

I like that Omni is so open with their development plans and receptive to new ideas and suggestions. It really gives me the sense that they genuinely care about the product and their customers, and that I can have some impact, however small, on the app's evolution.

But as Curt pointed out, sometimes feature requests don't look like requests at all, but rather more like demands or just complaining.

I'll admit, those posts annoy me. Maybe I get defensive and argumentative when I should just ignore them and move on.

But what I find particularly irritating is when arguments against a feature request are labeled as being disruptive, inane, or lacking in substance. If you're not in favor of the feature request, you're expected to just shut up and get out of the way.

Originally Posted by JohnJ80

Don't need it? Then don't use it...

I'm sorry, but that's simply not good enough. As good as OmniFocus is, there are a lot of things I'd like to see improved. So please don't tell me to "just not use" some feature when I think its development resources could be better spent elsewhere.

You know, the funny thing is, I'm not even particularly against the proposed reminders feature. Heck, I might even use it at some point. But I'd still rather see Omni work on some other things first. Not because your proposal is necessarily bad, but because I think there are other things that are more important and more people have asked for.

Originally Posted by paulduv

So at best, it's inane to read through those countervailing comments, because because they're an obvious generic consideration about any particular feature. It's particularly frustrating to see so many people go out of their way to comment about this need, and end up having a vacuous discussion.

So you're telling me you've got the patience to read through arguments for the feature you want but not against the feature you want?

Originally Posted by paulduv

About the tone of this thread, here's my answer to your question, "So why the animosity?".

You write: "But when pressed for details, you've been intractable and defensive, flaunt your credentials..."

This was your comment at the beginning of the thread:
"Maybe. But unless you've got the source code, it's hard to be certain. Either way, I'd still rather see the resources invested elsewhere. But that's just my personal opinion."

You should be aware that your post looks a heck of a lot like credentials flaunting to those who don't feel compelled to write posts like yours. To give you an idea of why they're so vexing, they read something like this:

"Even though I'm saying I don't personally need the thing that you think you need, I'm going to insert comments into this discussion whose subtext signal my pretty impressive insight into "source code", and into "the investment of resources" of a complex product, and the successful organization that designed it."

How did I suggest any kind of "impressive insight" into the source code or the investment of resources of a complex product?

My whole point here is: we don't know! I have no special insight into Omni development and, assuming he doesn't work for them, neither does JohnJ80.

The only ones that truly know are the people at Omni. So why not let them judge the difficulty?

Setting aside all speculation on difficulty, it might still be interesting to discuss how such a feature might work, right?

But when I tell JohnJ80 I don't understand his idea, I get nothing but a patronizing response: "Think about it a bit, it'll come to you." How is that constructive? Are you telling me that you wouldn't be put off by such a comment?

My question was a sincere attempt to learn more about his idea. Without a constructive dialog, I can only assume that either JohnJ80 thinks I'm not worthy of his 20+ years of engineering experience or all he wanted to do was complain. At this point, either way is fine by me.

-Dennis