Thread:Talk:Article feedback/Irrelevant/reply (14)

Yes I was summing up the various sweeping criticism in that posts.

But let's look at point 4. You state "A tool that does not provide sufficient data for editors is utterly useless."

Now as I said before that issue is multi-faceted mostly because the idea of "sufficient" and "useful" are subject. The tool already provides some data and, again as noted before, any knowledge of survey taking and market research can see immense value in the kind of data already being provided since it is formatted to show patterns of response.

Also, the idea at the moment is to provide data about what the readers think and then figure out how to make it useful to editors at larger. So while you may feel that it is not sufficient and useless now, the appropriate response is to make recommendations for improvement (which many have) and to give it time to see how the tool develops and improve. It is the then part in the equation that I have to say is surprising that a vocal few don't seem to want to wait for.

I mean the first computers were pretty "useless" oversize calculators. You can only imagine what would have happened if we shelved THAT idea so early on in the beginning under the idea that "A tool that does not provide sufficient data for users is utterly useless."