Conflict of Interest?

Page 3 of 3 (60 items) < Previous 1 2 3
This post has 59 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 3:07 PM

Thanks MJ. I hope I’ve made it clear enough, but just in case, I really do love you guys and all that you do! Hope it doesn’t look like I’m trying to challenge/dismiss that!

Posts 18244
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 3:11 PM

James McAdams:
Some of the MVPs have a red star signifying who they are - I think that’s based on number of posts, but not sure if there’s more to it than that.

All of the MVPs have a red star. That's what the red star is for, to signify who are the MVPs. It has nothing to do with number of posts, though most MVPs do also have a lot of posts. That's partly why they were selected by Faithlife to be MVPs. They had demonstrated a commitment to interacting helpfully with other users and most have been using the product for many years so they've naturally racked up a lot of posts. Mind you, having a lot of posts does not necessarily make one a good candidate to become an MVP. A person has to interact with charity, so it's quality not quantity of posts that makes one a desirable candidate. New MVPs are nominated by existing MVPs who have noticed a track record of helpfulness among their fellow users. The MVP program is not something unique to Logos. I believe it was Microsoft that first pioneered the use of MVPs on their user forums a couple of decades or more ago.

I have lots of posts but don't have the red star badge anymore because I relinquished my role as an MVP after it became too time consuming for me and I wanted to back off on my involvement. I still post voluntarily from time to time, but much much less than I used to, and don't want to feel pressured or responsible to do so, which being an official MVP was making me feel. Also, to be honest, this angry attitude that some people have towards MVPs was part of why I didn't want to do it anymore. It's not a completely thankless role; many users are very appreciative. But there were enough misunderstandings and negative experiences, that I'd had enough.

James McAdams:
Liam mentioned that he was invited to try a preview build of Logos 8 - that’s the kind of relationship I’d want signified, because it signifies a different kind of relationship. I’m interested in who has that kind of relationship - access to non-public builds and such. Basically, normal users, MVPs, staff and those with early access - they’re the different types of relationship I see. All are legitimate, valued, positive things. No complaining here. But they’re in different kinds of relationships with the software and with Faithlife.

Beta testing is open to anyone who wants to try it. There are risks involved, because preview builds (betas) are not guaranteed to be as stable as shipped releases, so one might experience crashes and data loss and interruptions in the ability to use the software, which could get in the way of getting your sermon done for Sunday if you're a pastor, etc. People who beta test are encouraged to have two installations of Logos on their machine, one stable one in addition to the beta, so they can still get work done if they are blocked by a crashing bug.

There is information on how to become a beta tester and what are the risks involved pinned at the top of the Logos Desktop Beta forum. MVPs are not necessarily beta testers, though most probably are. I have been a beta tester for most releases in the past. Beta testers are not allowed to talk about the new features while they are testing them. There are private forums that can only be seen by beta testers for reporting bugs in the betas. If they post in the regular forums about stuff that's relevant to existing versions, they are supposed to be careful not to post screenshots that would reveal some of the new features.

Using beta testers is a well established practice in the industry and I have never ever heard of the idea of other users feeling miffed that they didn't get to be one, or that they didn't know how to distinguish who were the beta testers from other users. It doesn't really matter, or shouldn't. It's meant to be something you sign up for voluntarily (and, like I said, anyone can do it), but it shouldn't affect how you talk about the product publicly, and it would probably be unwise to identify beta testers publicly with some badge. Then others might be scrutinizing their posts to see if they slipped up and mentioned some feature that was still under development and not announced yet.

Anyway, all of this is meant to make the user experience of Logos better (as is beta testing for all software companies that do it). The better it gets tested before it's released, the less likely regular users are to come up against bugs in the released product. So whoever is complaining about there being this class of users who get special inside views of upcoming versions should quit it and be thankful that beta testers exist, and volunteer to be one if you're so inclined.

There are also a very few alpha testers who get even earlier access than the beta testers. Most of them are Faithlife employees. Faithlife invites a few others from among longtime users who know the product very well (mostly MVPs). Yes, alpha testing is kept pretty hush-hush so as not to reveal new features that are still under wraps. But again, this is nothing abnormal in the industry, nor a conflict of interest. These people give something valuable to Faithlife (their time testing the product) and may receive some product credit in return. It's a fair compensation (actually not entirely fair, since I think Faithlife gets the better end of the deal; think how much they'd have to pay employees if they hired more testers internally).

Faithlife employees are identified with a Faithlife logo under their avatar.

MVPs are identified with a red star under their avatar:

I hope I've adequately defended why beta testers don't need to be identified. And there are no other special classes of users that I'm aware of.

Posts 1927
Donovan R. Palmer | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 3:16 PM

Some of these MVPs I have known going back to the old Logos usenet newsgroups. (though I don't recall we had an MVP program then... we were a lot smaller group)

These MPVs, along with the newer ones, follow my general impression that they are honest and generous volunteers.  The company is solid too and Bob has answered my emails on more than one occasion.  The value of generosity and integrity only comes from a group of people choosing to do the right thing over and over the years.

So maybe I have a bias, but I personally have no problem with MVPs or beta testers getting some token of thanks for their work.  I am grateful for the time they invest and sometimes I wonder when they have time left to study the Bible!  In the early days of the wiki I worked on some of the pages and helped a few users out here and there, but I just don't have the time that some are able to give. I think we are better off as a logos community with their generous contributions.

If MVPs or beta testers do an official 'evaluation' of the software on a blog or some other sort of digital medium and if they receive some sort of 'benefit', it seems a 'best practice' is to declare it. That said, it would not bother me greatly if they didn't.  Not saying that I disagree with people who feel differently, it's just when I read evaluations or reviews, I read from multiple sources to dissuade any one voice, positive or negative, from influencing me too much.

P.S. - I do not receive any benefit from Logos, other than I think Logos 8 is the fastest and most stable Mac version we have ever had. :)

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 3:40 PM

Rosie Perera:

There are also a very few alpha testers who get even earlier access than the beta testers. Most of them are Faithlife employees. Faithlife invites a few others from among longtime users who know the product very well (mostly MVPs). Yes, alpha testing is kept pretty hush-hush so as not to reveal new features that are still under wraps. But again, this is nothing abnormal in the industry, nor a conflict of interest. These people give something valuable to Faithlife (their time testing the product) and may receive some product credit in return. It's a fair compensation (actually not entirely fair, since I think Faithlife gets the better end of the deal; think how much they'd have to pay employees if they hired more testers internally).

These are the ones I'd like to see identified, in the same way that we can see Faithlife staff/MVPs. I've already been as clear as I know how to be that my reasons for wanting an identifier have absolutely nothing to do with suspicion of conflicts of interest or accusations that anything untoward is going on (I think you have me muddled with the OP), so I won't go into that again.

Posts 18244
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 4:32 PM

James McAdams:

Rosie Perera:

There are also a very few alpha testers who get even earlier access than the beta testers. Most of them are Faithlife employees. Faithlife invites a few others from among longtime users who know the product very well (mostly MVPs). Yes, alpha testing is kept pretty hush-hush so as not to reveal new features that are still under wraps. But again, this is nothing abnormal in the industry, nor a conflict of interest. These people give something valuable to Faithlife (their time testing the product) and may receive some product credit in return. It's a fair compensation (actually not entirely fair, since I think Faithlife gets the better end of the deal; think how much they'd have to pay employees if they hired more testers internally).

These are the ones I'd like to see identified, in the same way that we can see Faithlife staff/MVPs.

Not gonna happen. It would be like revealing intellectual property secrets. I'm probably not even supposed to have mentioned that alpha testing exists, as it's the sort of thing that companies usually keep secret. But anyone who knows the software industry at all knows that most software companies do alpha testing of some sort, though they might not call it that. In any event, no company identifies their alpha testers (or beta testers, for that matter). So why should Faithlife? They don't want people pestering them to give them hints about what's coming in the forthcoming versions of the product. I've never been invited to be an alpha tester so I was only speaking speculatively as to whether any non-MVP users ever get invited. But if they do, they (as well as any MVPs who might be alpha testers) should be shielded from scrutiny or jealousy by other users by keeping their identity private, IMO.

James McAdams:

I've already been as clear as I know how to be that my reasons for wanting an identifier have absolutely nothing to do with suspicion of conflicts of interest or accusations that anything untoward is going on (I think you have me muddled with the OP), so I won't go into that again.

Sorry, I was responding to the OP about that part. I didn't mean to imply you agreed with the sentiment about conflict of interest. But you do seem to think it's unfair that there are these people whose identities are kept secret. (FWIW, by even mentioning that they do alpha testing, I'm sure I've permanently disqualified myself from ever being invited to do it, but I don't care. I don't have time. I think there are some folks on the forums who are envious and wish they could be invited to be alpha testers. But it's Faithlife's prerogative to choose whom they're going to invite and keep the program under wraps.)

Obligatory disclosure (or non-disclosure): I get no benefit from Faithlife for defending their practice.

Posts 2236
Ronald Quick | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 5:55 PM

Rosie,

I know absolutely nothing about the software industry, but logically it would make sense to have a smaller group of users test software prior to releasing to a larger group for beta testing.  Therefore, I don't think you have divulged any "top secret" information.

Posts 18244
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 2 2018 7:55 PM

Ronald Quick:

I know absolutely nothing about the software industry, but logically it would make sense to have a smaller group of users test software prior to releasing to a larger group for beta testing.  Therefore, I don't think you have divulged any "top secret" information.

Well, yeah, and the fact that it's called "beta" testing kind of gives you a clue that there might be an "alpha" level testing that comes before it. So you're right that it's no secret this sort of thing takes place. But the companies that do it (including Logos) don't make a big deal about it because they don't want to give any hint about when the next version is coming out before it comes out. If word got around that it was in alpha testing, then everyone would guess that a new release was just around the corner.

Logos's practice seems to be to use secret alpha testing in the lead-up to a major new release (..., L7, L8) and not reveal once the beta testing of same is going on behind the scenes. Then for the incremental releases (e.g., 8.1) the beta is publicly acknowledged.

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 12:25 AM

Rosie Perera:

James McAdams:

Rosie Perera:

There are also a very few alpha testers who get even earlier access than the beta testers. Most of them are Faithlife employees. Faithlife invites a few others from among longtime users who know the product very well (mostly MVPs). Yes, alpha testing is kept pretty hush-hush so as not to reveal new features that are still under wraps. But again, this is nothing abnormal in the industry, nor a conflict of interest. These people give something valuable to Faithlife (their time testing the product) and may receive some product credit in return. It's a fair compensation (actually not entirely fair, since I think Faithlife gets the better end of the deal; think how much they'd have to pay employees if they hired more testers internally).

These are the ones I'd like to see identified, in the same way that we can see Faithlife staff/MVPs.

Not gonna happen. It would be like revealing intellectual property secrets. I'm probably not even supposed to have mentioned that alpha testing exists, as it's the sort of thing that companies usually keep secret.

A few MVPs here specifically talked about being involved in a pre-release testing phase (mentioned post-release). You’re not telling me anything that wasn’t public knowledge to an extent - I didn’t know if it was an early private beta or alpha but... meh. Thing is, I’d assumed we already had that badge before this thread - I thought it was just a subset of people who had the MVP/Faithlife badges. I’m not looking for anything terribly specific (declaring exactly what distinguishes them from normal customer in minute detail) - just a marker of some kind. Graham Criddle put together some help videos based on early access but, y’know, he had a star under his name so I guessed that he would have some preview access. It was only when Liam mentioned it that it occurred to me that there are people with that access that I would never have guessed. I’d have liked some indicator for that. It doesn’t need to give any specific info on what they’ve done - just some indicator that they’re in a different subset to normal customers in some sense.

Posts 25194
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 1:52 AM

James McAdams:
just some indicator that they’re in a different subset to normal customers in some sense.

Pardon me for butting in but isn't being "normal customers" exactly who you want to be doing the beta testing? You want Logos to work for "normal customers" not just for the elite.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 303
Liam Maguire | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 1:57 AM

James McAdams:

It was only when Liam mentioned it that it occurred to me that there are people with that access that I would never have guessed. I’d have liked some indicator for that. It doesn’t need to give any specific info on what they’ve done - just some indicator that they’re in a different subset to normal customers in some sense.

Please read the following in the most pleasant, charitable tone you can imagine, because that is how I felt when I wrote it. All questions are genuine questions to which I am interested in your answer :-)

I fear that my initial well-intentioned post has stirred up such hornets that I know think that perhaps I should have kept my fingers in check! But alas, it is out there now and there is nothing I can do about it now. ;-)

That said, I've been following this thread quite closely and if I am honest, the question I keep coming back to as I read your posts is this: "What difference would it make?" Let me give you an example, here is the link to my recent forum activity.  Take a random sample of some of the posts I've made over the last 6 months, in what significant way does your new knowledge that I've beta tested for Logos products changed the way you read those posts? 

If you really want to have an idea of who Beta Tested, take a look at the early posts in the Logos 8 Forum and note down all the names of people defending the release or offered support to new users. You cannot know for sure, but chances are that some of names you list will be beta testers. Again, you could look back over some of their posts and ask the question above. I suspect you'll come to the same answer.

Furthermore, people (not necessarily yourself) tend to associate a beta tester with a person who possesses technical knowledge of the software. But that is not me, far from it, I'm just an ordinary user. 'Power user' maybe, but a user nonetheless. My worry is that by giving me a 'badge' it might have the effect of investing my posts with more credibility than they deserve. "He said to try this but it didn't work, he is a beta tester he should know what he is talking about!" Worse still giving me a badge might lead some to believe that I am faithlife's employ. At least with MVPs it doesn't take much brain power to work out that MVP most likely stands for 'Most Valuable Poster' or similar, ruling out the likelihood they are employed, it is much harder for new users to do that for someone with a 'beta tester' badge.

I Beta Test because I enjoy it; because I have a learning difference (dyslexia) and so can offer a different (hopefully useful) perspective to the process; attached the previous reason, Logos has transformed how I do bible study and theological reading, and if anything Beta Testing is a way to see thank you. For full disclosure, yes, I (and the other testers) received store credit as a way of saying 'thank you' for Beta Testing Logos 8. This is the one and only time I have ever been compensated for beta testing. I neither asked for it, nor expected it, but I was thankful to God for his kindness. Again, does knowing that I received a gift significantly change the way you read my posts? What about the other testers? Since you don't know who the testers are, what value does this information have? If you did know who there were, what difference would it make?

Check out my blog 'For Fathers'

Posts 12709
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 2:32 AM

Into Grace:
I expect when Logos 8 and previous versions were released, a lot of hype came from those who receive secret discounts or free books not offered to the general public. If this is true, it is a disgrace.

You're making serious allegations there, but putting no evidence forward. You "expect" that this happens, and you're willing to sully the reputations of others merely on the basis of what you "expect"? If you have specific allegations then state them. If not, I think you should withdraw this.

For myself, I have never received a secret discount or free books not offered to the general public. Although I beta tested Logos 8, and have been enthusiastic about it, I wasn't gifted a copy or given a discount. When Logos 8 was released I spent $2,200 of my own money on it. When I buy a product from Faithlife, I always pay what everyone else pays. I get no special discounts either as an MVP or as a high-paying customer. I pay what everyone else pays — the price listed on the website.

That's not to say I've received nothing from Faithlife. I have, several years ago, undertaken some contract work for Faithlife (producing videos for MobileEd) for which I was paid. I have occasionally received small gifts from Faithlife (a Logos branded water bottle was the most recent example), and the odd bit of store credit as a thank you for providing significant amounts of private beta feedback. As you can see from other posts in this thread, they're exactly the same things that other people have also received. I also currently have a free subscription to Faithlife Connect Essentials, which I guess saves me $100/year. I appreciate that, but frankly, that's saving me only about 1.5% a year on my own expenditure on Logos products. That 1.5% annual saving is far, far less than thousands of other people on this forum get through their academic discount. 

Everything I write on these forums (positively or negatively) is written with one aim: to help people study the Bible better, so that they may know more of Christ. It's not entirely an unselfish aim, if I can help in a small way to make Logos Bible Software a better product, that benefits me too. But financial gain has never ever been a factor. That's simply not how I operate. It's not how Faithlife operate, either.

Posts 12709
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 2:49 AM

James McAdams:
You’re not telling me anything that wasn’t public knowledge to an extent - I didn’t know if it was an early private beta or alpha but... meh. Thing is, I’d assumed we already had that badge before this thread - I thought it was just a subset of people who had the MVP/Faithlife badges. I’m not looking for anything terribly specific (declaring exactly what distinguishes them from normal customer in minute detail) - just a marker of some kind.

Personally, I don't think a beta-testing badge would be a good idea, because

  1. The beta-testing "group" was disbanded with the launch of Logos 8. We're not secretly beta-testing Logos 9 already! (8.1 is a public beta of course.)
  2. The further we get from the release date, the less relevant our testing is. On the day of release, it's very relevant, because we have more knowledge than any other customer. But now? Several non-beta users will by now be more familiar with the software than many beta-testers.
  3. Where it's relevant to the specific post, we already disclose that we've beta-tested. We're having this conversation in part precisely because we've disclosed that we beta-tested on the forums!
Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 3:06 AM

Rosie Perera:

I also want to reiterate that people shouldn't be resentful over unfairness that they suspect might be happening if they have no evidence whatsoever that it's happening. They can create a conspiracy theory out of thin air that way, and get more people disgruntled whoh wouldn't otherwise have been.

I have plenty of beefs with Logos -- e.g., the troublesome level of bugginess (don't worry -- I report specific ones in hope they'll be fixed; it's just an overall impression I've gotten over the years of a deficiency in QA and relying too much of users to find the bugs), the sluggishness (their policy of code first optimize later rather than designing faster algorithms from the beginning), and the time-consuming drudgery of maintaining your library with tagging and collections so that the software it performs the searches you want it to well.

But my critiques do NOT include dishonesty or unethically manipulating user support through secret incentives.

Also remember Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Sometimes some users have a poorer experience of the product than others because of a bumbling roll-out of a new version or clumsy pricing of new features or whatever. It's human error. Not an intent to deceive. In my experience, Faithlife is an honorable company, and if they've messed something up and left someone unhappy, they will make it right.

Absolutely 100% agree.

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 3:35 AM

Mark Barnes:

James McAdams:
You’re not telling me anything that wasn’t public knowledge to an extent - I didn’t know if it was an early private beta or alpha but... meh. Thing is, I’d assumed we already had that badge before this thread - I thought it was just a subset of people who had the MVP/Faithlife badges. I’m not looking for anything terribly specific (declaring exactly what distinguishes them from normal customer in minute detail) - just a marker of some kind.

Personally, I don't think a beta-testing badge would be a good idea, because

  1. The beta-testing "group" was disbanded with the launch of Logos 8. We're not secretly beta-testing Logos 9 already! (8.1 is a public beta of course.)
  2. The further we get from the release date, the less relevant our testing is. On the day of release, it's very relevant, because we have more knowledge than any other customer. But now? Several non-beta users will by now be more familiar with the software than many beta-testers.
  3. Where it's relevant to the specific post, we already disclose that we've beta-tested. We're having this conversation in part precisely because we've disclosed that we beta-tested on the forums!

1. Granted

2. Yes, less relevant over time, but never wholly irrelevant. I was one of 50 testers for an app a while ago and it changed my perception of the company and the decisions they made. It also gave more insight into their process. It reframed the relationship. This might sound daft to you, but it makes a difference to me that people like you, MJ, Graham etc have had discussions/insights that I haven't and I really appreciate that. A lot of that comes from just being a longer term user than me, but sometimes it's the case that other experiences are relevant (as you acknowledge in point 3) and the fact that you guys have a badge makes that easier to understand - if you didn't have a badge, I'd be more inclined to wonder how it was you had access - is it something I missed on the website, etc.

3. Absolutely - I'm not trying to get anyone to do something that they're not comfortable with - it just seems like things would be more straightforward for me as a reader if I could easily see "they know that because they had those convos" etc - I've seen discussions about forum moderation/moving/editing posts etc that make sense without any further thought because you have a badge. I know to look out for certain posts in long threads because I see the badge.

Honestly, I care about this far less than my persistent comments make it appear - after my first comment, the follow-ups were almost all because I didn't want people misunderstanding my motives.

I don't think there is any kind of moral requirement to do this, but I think it would be helpful because it does have relevance to how I process some of the stuff that gets said. Liam's post genuinely confused me - not because he was hiding something, but because it felt like he was revealing something that I'd wrongly assumed was already visible because I thought it was associated with MVP status - that he would be part of the star-brigade (no offence intended, just shorthand) if he's been entrusted to that level. It's something that I would like to see because if he said it with a badge under his name, I'd know he's been around for a while, he's known to staff, he has x, y and z experiences, he might be particularly helpful and I could mentally log the sort of questions he replies to more easily. That's all.

Posts 17471
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 6:47 AM

Liam Maguire:
At least with MVPs it doesn't take much brain power to work out that MVP most likely stands for 'Most Valuable Poster' or similar, ruling out the likelihood they are employed

MVP => Many Volunteer Posts (by passionate paying customers who want Faithlife to be successful). Faithlife Corporation chooses paying customer(s) for MVP invitation based on public interaction (some have turned down invitation plus a number are no longer active: two have Gold Star memorials). Also public can freely participate in beta testing. Logos wiki has => Logos 8 Beta Program information + risks (plus can ask Faithlife => https://www.logos.com/contact about other betas: e.g. mobile).

Big Smile Thankful for many friendly forum and Faithlife discussions: have learned a lot plus have a lot to learn.

Mark Barnes:
The beta-testing "group" was disbanded with the launch of Logos 8. We're not secretly beta-testing Logos 9 already! (8.1 is a public beta of course.)

Current Beta application discussions are Public => Logos Desktop Beta

Observation: some customers include personal insults when writing about what irritates them (reflects hurt in their hearts that hurts others). Faithlife appreciates feedback about what is wrong (ideally with repeatable steps) or could be improved (while leaving out who). Thankful for lively what to do discussions during Logos 8 private beta testing so am looking forward to 8.# improvements.

Logos Wiki => Logos Release History includes all Public application releases (Beta & Stable) since Faithlife combined Windows & Mac release notes as of 4.2a (also shows estimate of 2 years between initial Public stable 7 and 8 releases took 26 months: uninformed user guess for Logos 9 private beta testing is early fall in 2020)

Logos Wiki => Mac Release Notes and History has Mac only release history prior to 4.2a, which goes back to initial Libronix 3 port to OS X that took many months longer than anticipated. Due to customer angst during delay for initial Mac release, Faithlife does not announce future release plans, especially dates.

Mark Barnes:
... I have occasionally received small gifts from Faithlife (a Logos branded water bottle was the most recent example), and the odd bit of store credit as a thank you for providing significant amounts of private beta feedback. As you can see from other posts in this thread, they're exactly the same things that other people have also received. I also currently have a free subscription to Faithlife Connect Essentials, which I guess saves me $100/year.

+1 Yes Thankful for several small Faithlife gifts Smile that included a Logos branded coffee cup Coffee

Gifts were freely given (did not have any promotional strings attached). Earlier this year, a surprise gift from Faithlife arrived after my best friend transitioned from human tent to heaven. Order for all white flowers had florist change to include a dozen yellow roses. Framed wedding picture had dried yellow roses. Thankful for Faithlife assistance in transferring library resources Big Smile FYI: challenging to type with tears Crying in eyes while Smiling Big Smile that reflects choice to Be Rejoicing in the Lord always Big Smile

Odd bit of Logos 8 private beta store credit provided personal incentive to purchase Logos 8 Full Feature Set (with Ultimate upgrade). From a business perspective, credit netted Logos 8 purchase return over 2000 % larger. Faithlife has a business incentive for Connect subscription that provides beta testing feedback. Effectively "gift" subscription has become one free Faithlife Original book monthly (order history has a few gifts with many purchases so all Classic resources are permanent editions in my library). At this point, my forum post count and number of resources is less than 1000 behind Rosie Stick out tongue while my order history total is a bit less than recent house purchase (adding friend's order history causes total to be $,$$$ more than house)

Many years ago remember writing one review of Logos Bible Software after a Logos Research Systems (previous name for Faithlife) request to their users. Apologies since am not remembering any incentive for a passionate paying customer to provide a review (predated a number of current public promotions: e.g. free book of the month). Personally did not like editor modifications of review Sad, which provided disincentive to comment about Faithlife stuff on non Faithlife web sites.

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 7:01 AM

I'm not so bothered at the idea as to make it worth fighting over. I only posted more than once in this thread because people seemed to think that the only reason to take an interest was because of some kind of skepticism which I really don't share, or because I don't know about public betas or... yadda yadda yadda. I kept coming back purely to try and clarify that there are other reasons to be interested. Obviously most people disagree that something of relatively little benefit is worthwhile so I concede defeat. Apologies for the time wasted.

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 7:12 AM

Liam Maguire:

Please read the following in the most pleasant, charitable tone you can imagine, because that is how I felt when I wrote it. All questions are genuine questions to which I am interested in your answer :-)

I fear that my initial well-intentioned post has stirred up such hornets that I know think that perhaps I should have kept my fingers in check! But alas, it is out there now and there is nothing I can do about it now. ;-)

Oh, just a final addendum - I think I've been excruciatingly clear on this, but just in case, my name-checking you was never meant to suggest that I thought there was anything wrong with you beta testing or being rewarded for your work! I'm thoroughly happy for you and for all the work that everyone put into Logos 8. I loved it (and defended it) from the start, and I love all y'all.

Posts 1240
Forum MVP
Reuben Helmuth | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 7:57 AM

James, you've been clear (from the start) that you don't share the OP's gripe. I want to assure you that I (for one) appreciate your level-headed engagement in this conversation. I do understand your perspective.

Peace!

Posts 303
Liam Maguire | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 8:40 AM

James McAdams:

Oh, just a final addendum - I think I've been excruciatingly clear on this, but just in case, my name-checking you was never meant to suggest that I thought there was anything wrong with you beta testing or being rewarded for your work! I'm thoroughly happy for you and for all the work that everyone put into Logos 8. I loved it (and defended it) from the start, and I love all y'all.

Hey James, I never thought you did. In fact, I worked really hard to ensure I didn't lump you in with the others. My apologies, It would appear I failed to do an adequate enough job. 

If only this we an 'in real life' conversation, then I'd simply invite you to the pub and we'd chat about it over a beer. Yes

Check out my blog 'For Fathers'

Posts 616
James McAdams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 3 2018 8:52 AM

Liam Maguire:

I worked really hard to ensure I didn't lump you in with the others. My apologies, It would appear I failed to do an adequate enough job. 

If only this we an 'in real life' conversation, then I'd simply invite you to the pub and we'd chat about it over a beer. Yes

Ah, no worries! I was overthinking the hornet's nest thing - I worried that I might be the proverbial hornet, despite my efforts to be a somewhat more benign kind of critter.

Whatever - all water under the bridge now.

Page 3 of 3 (60 items) < Previous 1 2 3 | RSS