Thread:Talk:Article feedback/Continued Rollout of AFT/reply (9)

"This is not a tool for the editor community."
 * I am painfully aware of that. And it's a shame. Tools could, and should, have been developed to suit both editors and potential editors. One tool for editors to evaluate articles and one (or more) tools and features to engage potential editors.

"The tool is rather well liked by pretty much everyone." and "There is already consensus for the tool."
 * please. I don't contest the survey of 2000+ users of the tool, but on what do you base the support from the user community?

"We were told to do this by the community through the strategic plan."
 * I doubt you were told explicitly by the plan to develop and implement the AFT. If so, can you provide me with a link to that paragraph? (Not just "improve ways to measure quality" but rather something that supports your statement.)

I have also raised concern about the roll-out itself and what I believe is lack of evidence of community support. Is that something you will take into consideration for future roll-outs of other tools?