As stated earlier Catman, your name was brought up because you presented a good point which I addressed in the previous post. In addition, I wanted to pick Shannon's brain to see exactly what he was looking for in his testers. Why you ask? Because there are others on this forum (and you and I know who they are) who are having similar issues as you (as far as the lack of results go). My primary concern when Shannon said what he said in your journal was the following "Damn, so Shannon is done helping Catman and is focusing on the majority. Well wait, who are the majority? Who is it that he's going to focus on from here on out? What differentiates those he's willing to help from those who he is not?"
Those are important questions because just like you Catman, I would look across the forum, read journals of DMSI users and looked at many things but always had these questions in mind: Is this person achieving design goal? Did they ever achieve design goal? If the answer to any of those questions was "Yes" then I wanted to see how much and how often. The answer many times (but certainly not ALL the time) was either "NO" or "Yes, but not often/rarely". That's why the question of "who is the majority" bugged me because the "majority" of people around the forum (as I've stated before and as Shannon is aware of now) fall into one of three categories:
1.) Have NEVER achieved design goal for DMSI
2.)Have achieved design goal but only once or twice or sporadically (which is where I fall)
3.)Are experiencing some results via DMSI but not design goal
Shannon's answers clear up a lot and I thank him for taking the time to answer. I think it's also healthy that he clearly stated what he was looking for in testers and what his limits are on who he is willing to help. I publicly acknowledge that the question could have been posed without mentioning your name specifically and as you have seen Catman, the post in question has been edited. I apologize for that but I will not keep apologizing.
If I truly gave zero f*cks about you Catman and thought little of you I would have left that post where it was because in the end I know that I personally was NOT trying to attack you and believed that my reasons for bringing you up were just. I do NOT/did NOT agree with everything you are saying or have said about DMSI but I DID/DO respect you for being willing to report what you see and am grateful that up to this point you have contributed to the development of DMSI which has gifted us kick ass products. And I showed that gratitude and respect by removing your name earlier. If you want to continue to say things like "thanks again..." or "thanks Ktrain" and throw shade after the fact, that's cool man.
Good luck to you and if you decide to avoid the forums and go off do you that's cool. Be safe man and thanks again for helping with DMSI development as a tester.
EDIT: Forgot to mention this as well: there HAVE been people who achieved design goal with DMSI and also did so consistently and executed. So DMSI does indeed "work". We're simply waiting on Shannon to crack the fear code which I'm sure he will or at minimum will come close.
Those are important questions because just like you Catman, I would look across the forum, read journals of DMSI users and looked at many things but always had these questions in mind: Is this person achieving design goal? Did they ever achieve design goal? If the answer to any of those questions was "Yes" then I wanted to see how much and how often. The answer many times (but certainly not ALL the time) was either "NO" or "Yes, but not often/rarely". That's why the question of "who is the majority" bugged me because the "majority" of people around the forum (as I've stated before and as Shannon is aware of now) fall into one of three categories:
1.) Have NEVER achieved design goal for DMSI
2.)Have achieved design goal but only once or twice or sporadically (which is where I fall)
3.)Are experiencing some results via DMSI but not design goal
Shannon's answers clear up a lot and I thank him for taking the time to answer. I think it's also healthy that he clearly stated what he was looking for in testers and what his limits are on who he is willing to help. I publicly acknowledge that the question could have been posed without mentioning your name specifically and as you have seen Catman, the post in question has been edited. I apologize for that but I will not keep apologizing.
If I truly gave zero f*cks about you Catman and thought little of you I would have left that post where it was because in the end I know that I personally was NOT trying to attack you and believed that my reasons for bringing you up were just. I do NOT/did NOT agree with everything you are saying or have said about DMSI but I DID/DO respect you for being willing to report what you see and am grateful that up to this point you have contributed to the development of DMSI which has gifted us kick ass products. And I showed that gratitude and respect by removing your name earlier. If you want to continue to say things like "thanks again..." or "thanks Ktrain" and throw shade after the fact, that's cool man.
Good luck to you and if you decide to avoid the forums and go off do you that's cool. Be safe man and thanks again for helping with DMSI development as a tester.
EDIT: Forgot to mention this as well: there HAVE been people who achieved design goal with DMSI and also did so consistently and executed. So DMSI does indeed "work". We're simply waiting on Shannon to crack the fear code which I'm sure he will or at minimum will come close.
