Thread:Talk:Flow Portal/Interactive Prototype/Please don't implement this/reply (5)

I'm confused. Brandon has spent a large number of hours sat on this talkpage, largely without staff support, having a conversation with you about what the plans are. Do you think he'd be doing that if he felt that he didn't owe editors a conversation about this in which they could participate? The very fact that we're having this discussion somewhat undermines the argument here.

I agree there needs to be more input, and we'll be throwing it out a lot more widely and in a lot more detail once we're in the next phase. But at the moment we're just throwing ideas around; the fact that your suggestions haven't been implemented in the prototype doesn't mean we're not listening, it means we're having a discussion. Yes, we're going to have energy spent on explaining our thinking behind features, and defending those features, because that's what "discussion" means; both sides setting out their case. Us implementing whatever people wanted instantly without thought would not be a discussion, it'd be software design by committee - and I'd note that when we're criticising LiquidThreads, one of the big things that brought it down was design by committee.