You then took 6 words of that post - “Wow, [t]his should [be] quite an update” - and a post wrote inferring you agreed with his post but went on to post about very much not what he’d said and implying that he and you were on the same page in being sympathetic to the plight Waytools find themselves in...
> It’s not difficult... it’s a pretty blatant and amateurish attempt at changing someone’s position (or “misrepresentation”...)
Apparently it is difficult because you didn't actually show any such thing - you simply posted the long content and claimed it is there. So I'll show you how it is done.
First, this is the entire part that applies to the subject I was addressing (the rest was a different subject):
Wow, his should quite an update...an update that requires an update after being promised so many weeks ago and way past their self imposed deadline. So as you said they at the very least should announce GR, on top of the cure for cancer, discovery of the warp drive, launch of Half Life 3, and the last 2 pending GRRM GoT novels.
Nothing is changed by the words after the first six. It just showed he was being sarcastic about what might be in it. I addressed the first 26 works which were summed up by the first 6 so that's what I quoted.
You try to imply that by only quoting 6 words, I was misleading. But I took 6 words simply because that was sufficient to show what subject I was replying to. That isn't very ethical of you.
> inferring you agreed with his post but went on to post about very much not what he’d said
But I didn't. He made an issue about the delay, about needing an update that needed an update on when it would come. He was sarcastic about what it might include, but I was focused on his basic point by replying with:
> That is one of the points I've tried to make to WT. The longer it takes to get the update out - missing many time projections along the way - it is going to naturally make people think that it is taking so much time because there is so much in it and so much keeps changing so they have to redo parts of it.
That doesn't change his point at all. It is agreement with the fundamental point, without the sarcasm. I didn't say it WOULD be a be update. I said what many people who think, with or without sarcasm, that with all the delays, they will feel it better be a big update.
It was more of a criticism of WT and how the delays only would make it harder for the update, when it comes, to satisfy people. A short update will leave people saying, "It took almost a year to write that? Or even more than a weekend?"
I did not perceive DBK's comments as misdirecting or misrepresenting.
But moving on:
@dabigkahuna, a bone for you: What are your thoughts on the state of WT communication ? Do you agree that it is inexcusable and embarrassing not being able to put together an update when it is 100% under their control and after a year or so ? Don't you feel it is disrespectful to their customers and supporters ? Do you envision that things like that could happen in other companies with no consequences to the parties involved ?
(And no, I do not care 1 iota about Mark's particular work habits, as I explained in my PM to you nobody should need to take into account every other individual work habits, because to be able to communicate you need common ground / basic definitions commonly accepted by all).
I did not perceive DBK's comments as misdirecting or misrepresenting.
But moving on:
@dabigkahuna, a bone for you: What are your thoughts on the state of WT communication ? Do you agree that it is inexcusable and embarrassing not being able to put together an update when it is 100% under their control and after a year or so ? Don't you feel it is disrespectful to their customers and supporters ? Do you envision that things like that could happen in other companies with no consequences to the parties involved ?
(And no, I do not care 1 iota about Mark's particular work habits, as I explained in my PM to you nobody should need to take into account every other individual work habits, because to be able to communicate you need common ground / basic definitions commonly accepted by all).
Well, I think I've been pretty plain that I have not agreed with the lack of communication. Not sure when I first posted about it - probably goes back years - but I know I've been making it an issue much further back than a year ago. Might go back to 2015. And it isn't just my public posts. I cover this privately as well.
Whether it is "inexcusable" or not is a little trickier. I certainly can't imagine what excuse there could be for missing for this long. Or, even if just measured from May 31st, how you can expect an update by Saturday night and not only extend it to Sunday, but still not have it almost a week later. But I do try to be open-minded and allow for the possibility that the actual update may explain this. Not that I expect it to - but I do allow for the possibility. But meanwhile I have been clear that these delays shouldn't be happening. IOW, the burden is on WT to show there is some explanation.
As for it being 100% under their control, that is exactly the point I keep making. That is, I can understand the GR delays, partly based on what I've experienced, partly on what other testers have reported, and partly and just applying logic (even if I don't know as much about the inside info as I'd like). But I've consistently contrasted that with the update situation where, even if there is stuff they aren't ready to reveal yet (or stuff that is never revealed, there simply must be stuff they can talk about!
I certainly think it can be taken as disrespectful, which isn't quite the same thing as disrespecting customers. I do think they are rather blind to it though.
No idea what you mean by what may happen to other companies who did the same things. I certainly believe there are consequences though. Bad PR has consequences no matter who the company is. How much depends on many things. I mean, look at all the bad PR about Facebook, yet they make many billions every quarter! I figure Mark feels he has a keyboard that can put almost all others to shame (except for some special use cases). I would tend to agree with him - though there is still the problem of inertia (will people not give themselves time to adapt to it?). After all, even if it is wildly popular, it will likely be a long time before laptops would build in something similar. So a lot of people won't want to switch back and forth, thus not adopt the TB.
But, assuming they eventually ship, while there will remain some negative effects from the PR situation, those who do get it are quite likely to be amazed enough by it to just move on, enjoying the TB.
As for work habits, I disagree. Because you have to understand where the speaker is coming from. There is no way for a speaker to say things that fit literally every possible way people interpret things. It's why I gave a series of examples for "end of the week". All were valid. There is no single one that is "accepted by all" as the only one. But I think almost all can understand each of them and, even if they normally use a different definition, accept the validity of the others.
But while the speaker can't cover every interpretation out there, it is possible for everyone out there to see what the speaker's frame of reference can be. And if you aren't sure, it is most proper to give them the interpretation most in their favor rather than assume the worst.
After all, does it really matter if they say "end of the week" and it comes at 3:00 AM Monday morning as opposed to 11:59 PM Sunday night? Because there is no way anyone can make a good case that Sunday night isn't a reasonable "end" to the week. The 3 hour extension, because of Mark's known work schedule, is, imo, also reasonable. But even if you don't want to give them that, the difference is so small that it shouldn't matter anyway.
But I also limit these things, very specifically. For example, 9:00 AM Monday would definitely be the next day, because the person has finished the prior day's work, gone to bed, and is now starting a new day.
So, while clearly we do not agree on everything, I think we agree on the main points that actually do matter. Which has always tended to be the case in good discussions.
I did not perceive DBK's comments as misdirecting or misrepresenting. But moving on: @dabigkahuna, a bone for you:
As for it being 100% under their control there simply must be stuff they can talk about! I do think they are rather blind to it though.
Here's another bone for you Kahuna. This is a sincere question. Lets see if you'll respond in kind:
Why do you use the terms 'they' and 'their' when discussing what is going on here with Waytools?
Have you spoken to any individual at Waytools other than Mark Knighton who gave you the impression the he/she is/was a decision maker or product manager or any other category of employee whom you perceived to be responsible for anything that is happening at Waytools?
Is there anyone besides Mark Knighton to whom you could attribute responsibility for the delay in the updates, based on your interactions with 'them'? Or, asked another way, is there anyone besides Mark Knighton whom you believe is writing these updates and responsible for the delays in getting them done?
Wouldn't you agree that you, to some degree, are playing along with and contributing to the overall air of deception here, when you refer to 'them' and 'they' and 'their', as if there is a real company staffed with multiple decision makers who are all contributing factors in these delays, when in fact the only person we are aware of who makes any substantive decisions regarding how things move forward (or stand still) is Mark Knighton?
How many other employees can we prove exist at Waytools? I recall posts referring to a lady (I forget her name right now) who makes occasional phone calls inviting people to Treg. No indication she is a decision maker at the company. Then there is the infamous posts of a couple of 'twins' inspecting keyboards back in 2015. Whoever they were! But no indication they were anything other than labor, and I don't recall a photo or any mention of them since.
I'm nitpicking on this because, just like when Mark Knighton says 'we have been shipping to customers' to give the deceptive impression to the public that the company has been delivering a finished product to customers - there is this other regularly occurring deception, which Mark does all the time, right here on this thread and everywhere else, referring to himself in the 3rd person as if the poster was a social media employee or customer service rep, but we all know it's just Mark Knighton. You seem to want to mimic or contribute to that deceptive behavior, referring to 'they' and 'their' when in reality all we are talking about here is one individual: Mark Knighton.
To rephrase your 'they's and 'their's:
As for it being 100% under Mark Knighton's control there simply must be stuff Mark Knighton can talk about! I do think Mark Knighton is rather blind to it though.
I don't think this is an unimportant point. The 'they' and 'their' crap, in my view, is a means of deflecting the attribution of responsibility away from the one person we all understand to be the only person responsible for what is going on here, Mark Knighton, and that makes it a deception, a lie.
You claim to always be seeking the truth, so lets stick to the truth here and wipe away any obfuscation about what we're dealing with and whom we're dealing with.
dabigkahuna said: No idea what you mean by what may happen to other companies who did the same things.
As for work habits, I disagree. Because you have to understand where the speaker is coming from. There is no way for a speaker to say things that fit literally every possible way people interpret things.
So, while clearly we do not agree on everything, I think we agree on the main points that actually do matter. Which has always tended to be the case in good discussions.
In order: 1- I meant that in another company the person in charge of PR would be fired very quickly if they would do the same. In this case as it is Mark himself that does not happen, but he should. Somebody else more versed in PR should handle customer communications. (Irrelevant if they are current customers, ex-customers or prospective customers. As this is a public forum more tact should be exercised)
2 - I will not re-ignite the "day of the week" debate. There are common standards for a reason. As I said above: nobody should need to take into account every other individual work habits, because to be able to communicate you need common ground / basic definitions commonly accepted by all. ie: there shouldn't be any interpretation at all. Monday is the first day of the work week, Tuesday the 2nd and so on...and not be concerned if Joe's work week is Mon to Sat or Jane's is Mon to Thu. Common understanding makes it easier to communicate and have clarity what end of the work week actually means universally. Nobody knows or should care what Mark's work habits are to be able to understand that the end of May occurs on the last day of the month, and in this case a Friday.
A company should always adapt their communication styles and adopt frames of reference to be easily understandable and clear to their customers. They shouldn’t expect the reverse to be the case as a general rule of thumb...
Expecting customers to have to navigate jargon-laced doublespeak and be left to interpret if their understanding of the end of a month/week is the same as that of the company is an unreasonable burden.
The one I would give credence to is seasons; I live in the Southern Hemisphere so winter where Waytools is is very definitely not winter where I am... on top of that, seasons have different start/finish dates depending on what part of the world you come from; which is why it is a very bad idea to use seasons as a frame of reference - 1st/2nd/3rd/4th quarter of a given calendar year is a much more customer-friendly approach... much easier to ensure everyone is on the same page and there is no room for misunderstanding... once that quarter commences, they should be narrowing down the timeframe to which month of the quarter they are estimating release...
...because Waytools leans toward these poor examples of time reference, and due to their lack of comms and follow up, it leaves a vacuum of information which in turn leads people to wonder whether Waytools do so deliberately in order to fudge things and be intentionally unclear... the jargon laced double-speak incites similar speculation (in the absence of anything to the contrary...)
Not only is it poor form, but it’s extremely easy to rectify. Over-communication can be annoying, but easily filtered or muted whereas a lack of communication simply creates that pesky vacuum which we all know nature abhors...
I use "they" and "their" because those are the way I refer to every company I'm familiar with. I only occasionally refer specifically to the person in charge of that company, like if I'm referring to something a particular person told me.
No deception, whether they are large or shall or I know whether one person is making all decisions or just who is the person who is ultimately responsible for any decision made by others. But WT is obviously a "real" company and it doesn't matter how many people make decisions. Those two are unrelated. I certainly don't know what decision makers there are. I do know who is the top person, as I do with a bunch of other companies. That's sufficient.
I don't know how many employees there are. I also don't really care much, except maybe as a matter of general curiosity. I do know, from some reports of people who have been there, that some assumptions posted by critics about this were definitely wrong. But they seemed intent on claiming it was really tiny just as a way to ridicule the company, not because the numbers actually meant anything. Same as when there were claims that there were probably only "hundreds" of orders for TB. Even looking at just the number of people who joined the WT forum, that was a silly claim but, again, intended to ridicule the company.
And I have no idea what was "infamous" about the twin's photo.
> I'm nitpicking on this
Which is how I view such things - as nitpicking - instead of focusing on meaningful things.
> just like when Mark Knighton says 'we have been shipping to customers' to give the deceptive impression to the public that the company has been delivering a finished product to customers
Well, there are plenty of references to it being Treg members, who are customers. And, as I told you before, for a considerable portion of Treg, the devices we had were expected to be our final version - except we kept finding problems. That was the case until they decided to redo the paint but haven't done a mass replacement yet. Even so, it may only be the new keycaps we get, not new units.
> we all know it's just Mark Knighton
Could be. I know many are. But I also know that the WT account on their forum is not always Mark so the same may apply here. In any case, it doesn't matter to me. Mark is the head of WT.
> You seem to want to mimic or contribute to that deceptive behavior
dabigkahuna said: No idea what you mean by what may happen to other companies who did the same things.
As for work habits, I disagree. Because you have to understand where the speaker is coming from. There is no way for a speaker to say things that fit literally every possible way people interpret things.
So, while clearly we do not agree on everything, I think we agree on the main points that actually do matter. Which has always tended to be the case in good discussions.
In order: 1- I meant that in another company the person in charge of PR would be fired very quickly if they would do the same. In this case as it is Mark himself that does not happen, but he should. Somebody else more versed in PR should handle customer communications. (Irrelevant if they are current customers, ex-customers or prospective customers. As this is a public forum more tact should be exercised)
2 - I will not re-ignite the "day of the week" debate. There are common standards for a reason. As I said above: nobody should need to take into account every other individual work habits, because to be able to communicate you need common ground / basic definitions commonly accepted by all. ie: there shouldn't be any interpretation at all. Monday is the first day of the work week, Tuesday the 2nd and so on...and not be concerned if Joe's work week is Mon to Sat or Jane's is Mon to Thu. Common understanding makes it easier to communicate and have clarity what end of the work week actually means universally. Nobody knows or should care what Mark's work habits are to be able to understand that the end of May occurs on the last day of the month, and in this case a Friday.
3 - Good
1. I've addressed the problems in communication many times so I don't think I need to do it again.
2. There is always interpretation of what someone means. We can limit ourselves to what we, as individuals, mean or we can consider other possibilities.
> There are common standards for a reason
Note the standards are plural. Consider what else you said:
> Monday is the first day of the work week, Tuesday the 2nd and so on
But they didn't say next "work" week. Just "next week". I have no problem with people thinking it must be a work week and by the end of work on Friday. But they should have no problem realizing it doesn't have to mean that, once the options are pointed out.
However, there is some other context that must not be omitted. Because I've pointed out that I first addressed this matter back when some of the critics were posting on a Tuesday or Wednesday, declaring WT lied since they didn't have the update out yet!
Now, my longest period of time for the end of the week would be 58 hours past the time you and others think it should be limited to. But someone posting on Wednesday that it is already late are about two days off (depending on exactly what time they posted, plus how "late" they thought they already were). Someone on Tuesday would be more like 3 days. And neither one of those can remotely be justified to be the end of the week! Also, I noted at the time that while people claimed I had no limits to what was the end of the week (which was false - there was always a limit), those same people didn't seem to have a problem with those who cut it off days earlier than any possible real meaning.
Screw you. No, I mean really: screw you with a capital FU. There is no line drawn by a ridiculous fool such as yourself that I respect.
Your answer was dodgy. You did not respond with the whole truth, Mr. Seeker of truth. You did as you so often do, which was to fall back on things like being glib or apathetic ('I also don't really care much') to weasel out of providing a complete and truthful answer.
Why don't you care to assign responsibility to whomever is responsible for this debacle, oh Seeker of Truth?
Because it defeats your whole ridiculous narrative as perpetual defender of Mark 'Waytools' Knighton?
This is an important point. Mark Knighton is not 'they' or 'their'. This is a truth - and you want to skim over it and ignore it when called out on it, but it goes to the heart of the matter. Who is responsible for what is happening here? Who is this 'they' or 'their' that sets deadlines for shipping, and deadlines for updates in May, June 1st, after 9pm PST, Sunday, Monday, but then disappears and surfaces only a few days later with a glib remark?
It's not 'they'. It's not 'their'. It's Mark Knighton, and you need to stop pretending Kahuna.
Mark is a liar, and he crossed the line long ago with his pathological BS. When you defend him, or play into his lying BS with 'they' and 'their' rather than assigning criticism to him directly, then you are a liar too. This isn't a petty criticism of you I'm offering, it's serious. You play the 'they' 'their' game and then claim you rightfully criticize 'them' when 'they' deserve it, but that phrasing dodges the assignment of blame and responsibility to the singular person at issue here. Mark Knighton.
You are playing a game, the same as Mark Knighton is playing a game. I gave you an opportunity to respond truthfully and with sincerity.
I don't think you did so well. Do you want to try again?
Here's a portion of your post on WTF:
>No, they simply missed the day, period. While I think it is fair to extend “Saturday night” to include the early hours of Sunday morning- because I know Mark works very late at least sometimes and that goes to 3:00 AM from my own experience, it does not extend into another working day. So they missed it.
Well, who were you talking about? Who missed it? 'They'? Or Mark Knighton?
There is only one correct (and 100% truthful) answer: Mark Knighton. And look who responded immediately to that post:
>waytools:
>Well, can’t argue with that.
Who responded? Was it 'they', or Mark Knighton?
Be honest Kahuna. Stop playing games and being deceptive, like Mark Knighton. You don't want to be like him, do you?
Now, my longest period of time for the end of the week would be 58 hours past the time you and others think it should be limited to. But someone posting on Wednesday that it is already late are about two days off (depending on exactly what time they posted, plus how "late" they thought they already were). Someone on Tuesday would be more like 3 days. And neither one of those can remotely be justified to be the end of the week! Also, I noted at the time that while people claimed I had no limits to what was the end of the week (which was false - there was always a limit), those same people didn't seem to have a problem with those who cut it off days earlier than any possible real meaning.
This is the kind of tripe where people go cross-eyed and fall asleep trying to read your nonsense. You always pull out a strawman when making this argument. You ignore or fail to acknowledge the entirely valid criticism that Mark Knighton has this habit of stating deadlines that are vague, which you then interpret with as much possible vagueness as allowed by logic, and then some, rather than cutting out all the BS and getting to the heart of the matter: when 'they' (Mark Knighton) miss a deadline (May 2019) 'they' (Mark Knighton) need to be called out on it. 'They' (Mark Knighton) LIED. Not once. Not twice. Not three times. Not ten times. So many times we have all lost count.
How many times has Mark Knighton missed a deadline Kahuna? Do you have any idea at this point? Using your autistic analysis, tell us the number of times you have concluded that Mark has definitively stated a time frame for anything (shipping, communicating an update, etc) and then indisputably missed it.
Isn't it remarkable how Mark behaved regarding the May update? I think it's amazing. He missed May. Fail. Then he announces a new deadline for himself the very next day. 9pm PST to midnight. Fail. Then he implies Sunday is the quiet day to get it done. And fail again. What makes a person behave like that, to repeatedly set expectations one after the other after the other after the other, publicly, and then just fail fail fail.
We are dealing with an individual who is mentally ill.
And don't forget: he has all the money. Any chance that plays a part in this? Why does Mark insist on keeping all the money? Why would anybody lie to people, collect money, and keep the money, and then go on lying and lying to people for 4+ years? Hmmmm...can you imagine?
> Screw you. No, I mean really: screw you with a capital FU.
And the real TBD returns.
> Your answer was dodgy. I answered everything based on how I view things with this or any other company. You just don't like anything that doesn't match your meme.
> Who is responsible for what is happening here? That was answered, as you'll see in a moment.
> When you defend him What did I defend him on?
> but that phrasing dodges the assignment of blame and responsibility to the singular person at issue here. Mark Knighton. You made an issue about how many employees and decision makers there were. I responded with, "In any case, it doesn't matter to me. Mark is the head of WT" [which also refers to you quote 2 items prior to this one].
This is the kind of tripe where people go cross-eyed and fall asleep trying to read your nonsense. You always pull out a strawman when making this argument. You ignore or fail to acknowledge the entirely valid criticism that Mark Knighton has this habit of stating deadlines that are vague, which you then interpret with as much possible vagueness as allowed by logic, and then some, rather than cutting out all the BS and getting to the heart of the matter: when 'they' (Mark Knighton) miss a deadline (May 2019) 'they' (Mark Knighton) need to be called out on it. 'They' (Mark Knighton) LIED. Not once. Not twice. Not three times. Not ten times. So many times we have all lost count.
How many times has Mark Knighton missed a deadline Kahuna? Do you have any idea at this point? Using your autistic analysis, tell us the number of times you have concluded that Mark has definitively stated a time frame for anything (shipping, communicating an update, etc) and then indisputably missed it.
Isn't it remarkable how Mark behaved regarding the May update? I think it's amazing. He missed May. Fail. Then he announces a new deadline for himself the very next day. 9pm PST to midnight. Fail. Then he implies Sunday is the quiet day to get it done. And fail again. What makes a person behave like that, to repeatedly set expectations one after the other after the other after the other, publicly, and then just fail fail fail.
We are dealing with an individual who is mentally ill.
And don't forget: he has all the money. Any chance that plays a part in this? Why does Mark insist on keeping all the money? Why would anybody lie to people, collect money, and keep the money, and then go on lying and lying to people for 4+ years? Hmmmm...can you imagine?
You made an issue about how many employees and decision makers there were. I responded with, "In any case, it doesn't matter to me. Mark is the head of WT" [which also refers to you quote 2 items prior to this one].
I didn't 'make an issue' of how many employees there are. I asked you a question in a very specific context. When you say:
>As for it being 100% under their control
Whose control? Did you mean Mark Knighton's control, or some other employee at Waytools? Why don't you say Mark Knighton's control, seeker of truth?
>there simply must be stuff they can talk about!
'They' can't talk about? Who is 'they'? Did you mean stuff Mark Knighton can't talk about? Why don't you say that then, seeker of truth?
>I do think they are rather blind to it though.
Who is blind? Who exactly? Some other employee at Waytools besides Mark Knighton? Some customer service rep that you want to pretend is the person posting behind the 'Waytools' and 'Waytools_Support' screen names? Or is it Mark Knighton who is blind? If that's what you meant - that Mark Knighton is blind - then why don't you say that, and offer Mark Knighton some real and pointed criticism? Why don't you assign some responsibility to him?
Are you trying to avoid criticizing Mark Knighton by calling him blind?
Are you afraid he will brick your Textblade if you tell Mark Knighton that he is blind?
Don't dodge Kahuna. These are very specific questions and it should not be difficult to answer truthfully.
You act in a protective and deflective manner, often acting as an apologist for poor conduct on behalf of the vendor or on behalf of the CEO. By doing so, you effectively shield him from scrutiny or needing to respond to valid concerns or criticisms from customers.
Whilst you may well say “that’s not my intent...” or “I’m not the boss of Mark, he can come and address customers any time he wants, I wish he would...” the actual effect of your protectiveness and deflection, not to mention argumentation, effectively shields him and the company - for want of a better term, you’re defending him...
That is what is happening whether you want that to be the case or not. Your acts indeed have effects and consequences and that’s one of the [presumably] unintended ones.
In some cases, whether or not a member of the public feels criticism is unfair to the vendor is beside the point; it is up to the company to respond to any slings and arrows of outrageous fortune slung at them and by opposing, end them*... it’s not for you to be their spokesperson or their deflector in chief, but that’s the role you have adopted. If you believe they are being unfairly treated and want to insert yourself in to a complaint between a customer and a vendor, then apply for a job, get on the payroll and then, by all means act as their official defender.
*Apologies to a writer of some small note whose words I may have borrowed...
You ignore or fail to acknowledge the entirely valid criticism that Mark Knighton has this habit of stating deadlines that are vague, which you then interpret with as much possible vagueness as allowed by logic, and then some, rather than cutting out all the BS and getting to the heart of the matter: when 'they' (Mark Knighton) miss a deadline (May 2019) 'they' (Mark Knighton) need to be called out on it.
How many times has Mark Knighton missed a deadline Kahuna?
You need to really stop making stuff up.
1. Many deadlines are not very vague at all. For example, "May" doesn't give an exact date, but it is very limited. "Saturday after 9:00 PM" is even more restrictive, etc.
2. My interpretations are all based on legitimate reasons - which I've explained and which are also very limited. And there is nothing wrong with using what is allowed by logic!
3. I have made an issue about missing the May update (and Saturday, etc), over and over again. So your statement makes no sense.
4. Don't know how many times they've missed a deadline, but I've probably posted as they got close to the end of each of them about how they needed to do it. And when they missed, I also criticized them.
The exceptions would be about GR, because that is something that is not nearly as easy to predict with new tech.
You act in a protective and deflective manner, often acting as an apologist for poor conduct on behalf of the vendor or on behalf of the CEO. By doing so, you effectively shield him from scrutiny or needing to respond to valid concerns or criticisms from customers.
Pretty sure I haven't stopped anyone from posting the way they want.
But I like how I'm an "apologist" when I've criticized lack of communication, some banning, forced refunds, etc.
You act in a protective and deflective manner, often acting as an apologist for poor conduct on behalf of the vendor or on behalf of the CEO. By doing so, you effectively shield him from scrutiny or needing to respond to valid concerns or criticisms from customers.
Pretty sure I haven't stopped anyone from posting the way they want.
But I like how I'm an "apologist" when I've criticized lack of communication, some banning, forced refunds, etc.
Must have been sarcasm.
Hang on a sec... I wasn’t being smarmy, I was simply making an observation. I even clarified;
>Whilst you may well say “that’s not my intent...” or “I’m not the boss of Mark, he can come and address customers any time he wants, I wish >he would...” the actual effect of your protectiveness and deflection, not to mention argumentation, effectively shields him and the company - >for want of a better term, you’re defending him...
You are most certainly an apologist for the missed timeframes and delays and deflecting from valid criticism and queries from the vendor - when a question is asked of Waytools, you insert yourself in and opine as to why you think the situation is acceptable or why it might be happening or what you think people might think about what people might think and that allows the vendor to continue avoiding interacting with customers - you provide a cheap distraction for them and help them avoid having to answer - that’s a form of enabling. That is beyond question. By engaging in inserting yourself in to conversations that could and should be answered by the vendor you are [possibly entirely unintentionally] acting as a defensive shield for them - whether that is your desire/intent or not...
I absolutely don’t write the rules of why or how you post, but I can absolutely lay out what the results of your postings are - some consequences you may be aware of and may have considered; others, perhaps not so much... nothing wrong about pondering on the myriad things we’d not previously known or considered...
Sorry, but you don't get to set rules that I have to change the way I refer to any company.
And that right there is where the Mighty Kahuna, 'Seeker of Truth', bows out of the conversation with a deft duck and dodge to avoid damaging his narrative.
It isn't about the rules. It's about the truth. I demonstrated perfectly clearly from your post on the WT forum how you slipped up with your mix of pronoun vs name. Once again:
>No, they simply missed the day, period. While I think it is fair to extend “Saturday night” to include the early hours of Sunday morning- because I know Mark works very lateat least sometimes and that goes to 3:00 AM from my own experience, it does not extend into another working day. So they missed it.
Who missed the day, period? 'They' or Mark Knighton?
Why don't you want to say Mark Knighton missed the day? Are you afraid he will brick your keyboard if you assign blame to him directly?
You can dodge the truth of this all you want, but it perfectly illustrates the point. Your tactic, as WS also stated quite well above, is to obfuscate the truth and defend Mark Knighton. You do it passively, by avoiding blaming Mark directly for actions you know he is solely responsible for and instead assigning responsibility or blame to a vague and undefined 'they' - just as Mark does when speaking in the 3rd person about himself - and you defend Mark actively, by virtue of your entire persona, this 'character' you play online - Kahuna, the Seeker of Truth, Defender of Waytools, arguing against every valid criticism directed at the company for 4+ years of lies, when you allegedly have no direct stake in the company. Seems implausible that you do not have some financial interest in all of this.
You are playing a game Kahuna. A very deceptive game. I understand you don't want to admit to your deceptions. You're just like Mark Knighton in that regard.
Taking money from people and lying to them and defrauding them via false advertising is nasty business Kahuna. I really do not understand why you would want to align yourself so closely with someone else who is making such serious mistakes, unless you are involved? When Mark finally gets sued, you may even get sucked into the legal drama. Why would you want to risk that if you don't even work for them? That seems just plain stupid.
It is just about one week since Mark Knighton missed the deadline for the promised May 2019 update.
See how he does? Miss miss miss. Fail fail fail. And then just ignore it all, as if the promise was never made, the deadline was never missed. What happened to that urgency from Friday May 31st, to Saturday June 1st, when Mark jumped in and promised he was just a little late and it was coming after 9pm PST? And then again, on 'quiet Sunday'? Nothing happened. Just lies to make people wait and eventually give up and go away, so Mark can keep the money.
Gaslighting 101.
And all the while, Kahuna is standing straight and at attention, ready to soldier on, on behalf of Mark Knighton.
Comments
Apparently it is difficult because you didn't actually show any such thing - you simply posted the long content and claimed it is there. So I'll show you how it is done.
First, this is the entire part that applies to the subject I was addressing (the rest was a different subject):
You try to imply that by only quoting 6 words, I was misleading. But I took 6 words simply because that was sufficient to show what subject I was replying to. That isn't very ethical of you.
> inferring you agreed with his post but went on to post about very much not what he’d said
But I didn't. He made an issue about the delay, about needing an update that needed an update on when it would come. He was sarcastic about what it might include, but I was focused on his basic point by replying with:
> That is one of the points I've tried to make to WT. The longer it takes to get the update out - missing many time projections along the way - it is going to naturally make people think that it is taking so much time because there is so much in it and so much keeps changing so they have to redo parts of it.
That doesn't change his point at all. It is agreement with the fundamental point, without the sarcasm. I didn't say it WOULD be a be update. I said what many people who think, with or without sarcasm, that with all the delays, they will feel it better be a big update.
It was more of a criticism of WT and how the delays only would make it harder for the update, when it comes, to satisfy people. A short update will leave people saying, "It took almost a year to write that? Or even more than a weekend?"
But moving on:
@dabigkahuna, a bone for you:
What are your thoughts on the state of WT communication ?
Do you agree that it is inexcusable and embarrassing not being able to put together an update when it is 100% under their control and after a year or so ?
Don't you feel it is disrespectful to their customers and supporters ?
Do you envision that things like that could happen in other companies with no consequences to the parties involved ?
(And no, I do not care 1 iota about Mark's particular work habits, as I explained in my PM to you nobody should need to take into account every other individual work habits, because to be able to communicate you need common ground / basic definitions commonly accepted by all).
Whether it is "inexcusable" or not is a little trickier. I certainly can't imagine what excuse there could be for missing for this long. Or, even if just measured from May 31st, how you can expect an update by Saturday night and not only extend it to Sunday, but still not have it almost a week later. But I do try to be open-minded and allow for the possibility that the actual update may explain this. Not that I expect it to - but I do allow for the possibility. But meanwhile I have been clear that these delays shouldn't be happening. IOW, the burden is on WT to show there is some explanation.
As for it being 100% under their control, that is exactly the point I keep making. That is, I can understand the GR delays, partly based on what I've experienced, partly on what other testers have reported, and partly and just applying logic (even if I don't know as much about the inside info as I'd like). But I've consistently contrasted that with the update situation where, even if there is stuff they aren't ready to reveal yet (or stuff that is never revealed, there simply must be stuff they can talk about!
I certainly think it can be taken as disrespectful, which isn't quite the same thing as disrespecting customers. I do think they are rather blind to it though.
No idea what you mean by what may happen to other companies who did the same things. I certainly believe there are consequences though. Bad PR has consequences no matter who the company is. How much depends on many things. I mean, look at all the bad PR about Facebook, yet they make many billions every quarter! I figure Mark feels he has a keyboard that can put almost all others to shame (except for some special use cases). I would tend to agree with him - though there is still the problem of inertia (will people not give themselves time to adapt to it?). After all, even if it is wildly popular, it will likely be a long time before laptops would build in something similar. So a lot of people won't want to switch back and forth, thus not adopt the TB.
As for work habits, I disagree. Because you have to understand where the speaker is coming from. There is no way for a speaker to say things that fit literally every possible way people interpret things. It's why I gave a series of examples for "end of the week". All were valid. There is no single one that is "accepted by all" as the only one. But I think almost all can understand each of them and, even if they normally use a different definition, accept the validity of the others.
But while the speaker can't cover every interpretation out there, it is possible for everyone out there to see what the speaker's frame of reference can be. And if you aren't sure, it is most proper to give them the interpretation most in their favor rather than assume the worst.
After all, does it really matter if they say "end of the week" and it comes at 3:00 AM Monday morning as opposed to 11:59 PM Sunday night? Because there is no way anyone can make a good case that Sunday night isn't a reasonable "end" to the week. The 3 hour extension, because of Mark's known work schedule, is, imo, also reasonable. But even if you don't want to give them that, the difference is so small that it shouldn't matter anyway.
But I also limit these things, very specifically. For example, 9:00 AM Monday would definitely be the next day, because the person has finished the prior day's work, gone to bed, and is now starting a new day.
So, while clearly we do not agree on everything, I think we agree on the main points that actually do matter. Which has always tended to be the case in good discussions.
Why do you use the terms 'they' and 'their' when discussing what is going on here with Waytools?
Have you spoken to any individual at Waytools other than Mark Knighton who gave you the impression the he/she is/was a decision maker or product manager or any other category of employee whom you perceived to be responsible for anything that is happening at Waytools?
Is there anyone besides Mark Knighton to whom you could attribute responsibility for the delay in the updates, based on your interactions with 'them'? Or, asked another way, is there anyone besides Mark Knighton whom you believe is writing these updates and responsible for the delays in getting them done?
Wouldn't you agree that you, to some degree, are playing along with and contributing to the overall air of deception here, when you refer to 'them' and 'they' and 'their', as if there is a real company staffed with multiple decision makers who are all contributing factors in these delays, when in fact the only person we are aware of who makes any substantive decisions regarding how things move forward (or stand still) is Mark Knighton?
How many other employees can we prove exist at Waytools? I recall posts referring to a lady (I forget her name right now) who makes occasional phone calls inviting people to Treg. No indication she is a decision maker at the company. Then there is the infamous posts of a couple of 'twins' inspecting keyboards back in 2015. Whoever they were! But no indication they were anything other than labor, and I don't recall a photo or any mention of them since.
I'm nitpicking on this because, just like when Mark Knighton says 'we have been shipping to customers' to give the deceptive impression to the public that the company has been delivering a finished product to customers - there is this other regularly occurring deception, which Mark does all the time, right here on this thread and everywhere else, referring to himself in the 3rd person as if the poster was a social media employee or customer service rep, but we all know it's just Mark Knighton. You seem to want to mimic or contribute to that deceptive behavior, referring to 'they' and 'their' when in reality all we are talking about here is one individual: Mark Knighton.
To rephrase your 'they's and 'their's:
As for it being 100% under Mark Knighton's control
there simply must be stuff Mark Knighton can talk about!
I do think Mark Knighton is rather blind to it though.
I don't think this is an unimportant point. The 'they' and 'their' crap, in my view, is a means of deflecting the attribution of responsibility away from the one person we all understand to be the only person responsible for what is going on here, Mark Knighton, and that makes it a deception, a lie.
You claim to always be seeking the truth, so lets stick to the truth here and wipe away any obfuscation about what we're dealing with and whom we're dealing with.
1- I meant that in another company the person in charge of PR would be fired very quickly if they would do the same. In this case as it is Mark himself that does not happen, but he should. Somebody else more versed in PR should handle customer communications. (Irrelevant if they are current customers, ex-customers or prospective customers. As this is a public forum more tact should be exercised)
2 - I will not re-ignite the "day of the week" debate. There are common standards for a reason.
As I said above: nobody should need to take into account every other individual work habits, because to be able to communicate you need common ground / basic definitions commonly accepted by all.
ie: there shouldn't be any interpretation at all. Monday is the first day of the work week, Tuesday the 2nd and so on...and not be concerned if Joe's work week is Mon to Sat or Jane's is Mon to Thu. Common understanding makes it easier to communicate and have clarity what end of the work week actually means universally. Nobody knows or should care what Mark's work habits are to be able to understand that the end of May occurs on the last day of the month, and in this case a Friday.
3 - Good
Expecting customers to have to navigate jargon-laced doublespeak and be left to interpret if their understanding of the end of a month/week is the same as that of the company is an unreasonable burden.
The one I would give credence to is seasons; I live in the Southern Hemisphere so winter where Waytools is is very definitely not winter where I am... on top of that, seasons have different start/finish dates depending on what part of the world you come from; which is why it is a very bad idea to use seasons as a frame of reference - 1st/2nd/3rd/4th quarter of a given calendar year is a much more customer-friendly approach... much easier to ensure everyone is on the same page and there is no room for misunderstanding... once that quarter commences, they should be narrowing down the timeframe to which month of the quarter they are estimating release...
...because Waytools leans toward these poor examples of time reference, and due to their lack of comms and follow up, it leaves a vacuum of information which in turn leads people to wonder whether Waytools do so deliberately in order to fudge things and be intentionally unclear... the jargon laced double-speak incites similar speculation (in the absence of anything to the contrary...)
Not only is it poor form, but it’s extremely easy to rectify. Over-communication can be annoying, but easily filtered or muted whereas a lack of communication simply creates that pesky vacuum which we all know nature abhors...
No deception, whether they are large or shall or I know whether one person is making all decisions or just who is the person who is ultimately responsible for any decision made by others. But WT is obviously a "real" company and it doesn't matter how many people make decisions. Those two are unrelated. I certainly don't know what decision makers there are. I do know who is the top person, as I do with a bunch of other companies. That's sufficient.
I don't know how many employees there are. I also don't really care much, except maybe as a matter of general curiosity. I do know, from some reports of people who have been there, that some assumptions posted by critics about this were definitely wrong. But they seemed intent on claiming it was really tiny just as a way to ridicule the company, not because the numbers actually meant anything. Same as when there were claims that there were probably only "hundreds" of orders for TB. Even looking at just the number of people who joined the WT forum, that was a silly claim but, again, intended to ridicule the company.
And I have no idea what was "infamous" about the twin's photo.
> I'm nitpicking on this
Which is how I view such things - as nitpicking - instead of focusing on meaningful things.
> just like when Mark Knighton says 'we have been shipping to customers' to give the deceptive impression to the public that the company has been delivering a finished product to customers
Well, there are plenty of references to it being Treg members, who are customers. And, as I told you before, for a considerable portion of Treg, the devices we had were expected to be our final version - except we kept finding problems. That was the case until they decided to redo the paint but haven't done a mass replacement yet. Even so, it may only be the new keycaps we get, not new units.
> we all know it's just Mark Knighton
Could be. I know many are. But I also know that the WT account on their forum is not always Mark so the same may apply here. In any case, it doesn't matter to me. Mark is the head of WT.
> You seem to want to mimic or contribute to that deceptive behavior
1. I've addressed the problems in communication many times so I don't think I need to do it again.
2. There is always interpretation of what someone means. We can limit ourselves to what we, as individuals, mean or we can consider other possibilities.
> There are common standards for a reason
Note the standards are plural. Consider what else you said:
> Monday is the first day of the work week, Tuesday the 2nd and so on
But they didn't say next "work" week. Just "next week". I have no problem with people thinking it must be a work week and by the end of work on Friday. But they should have no problem realizing it doesn't have to mean that, once the options are pointed out.
However, there is some other context that must not be omitted. Because I've pointed out that I first addressed this matter back when some of the critics were posting on a Tuesday or Wednesday, declaring WT lied since they didn't have the update out yet!
Now, my longest period of time for the end of the week would be 58 hours past the time you and others think it should be limited to. But someone posting on Wednesday that it is already late are about two days off (depending on exactly what time they posted, plus how "late" they thought they already were). Someone on Tuesday would be more like 3 days. And neither one of those can remotely be justified to be the end of the week! Also, I noted at the time that while people claimed I had no limits to what was the end of the week (which was false - there was always a limit), those same people didn't seem to have a problem with those who cut it off days earlier than any possible real meaning.
Your answer was dodgy. You did not respond with the whole truth, Mr. Seeker of truth. You did as you so often do, which was to fall back on things like being glib or apathetic ('I also don't really care much') to weasel out of providing a complete and truthful answer.
Why don't you care to assign responsibility to whomever is responsible for this debacle, oh Seeker of Truth?
Because it defeats your whole ridiculous narrative as perpetual defender of Mark 'Waytools' Knighton?
This is an important point. Mark Knighton is not 'they' or 'their'. This is a truth - and you want to skim over it and ignore it when called out on it, but it goes to the heart of the matter. Who is responsible for what is happening here? Who is this 'they' or 'their' that sets deadlines for shipping, and deadlines for updates in May, June 1st, after 9pm PST, Sunday, Monday, but then disappears and surfaces only a few days later with a glib remark?
It's not 'they'. It's not 'their'. It's Mark Knighton, and you need to stop pretending Kahuna.
Mark is a liar, and he crossed the line long ago with his pathological BS. When you defend him, or play into his lying BS with 'they' and 'their' rather than assigning criticism to him directly, then you are a liar too. This isn't a petty criticism of you I'm offering, it's serious. You play the 'they' 'their' game and then claim you rightfully criticize 'them' when 'they' deserve it, but that phrasing dodges the assignment of blame and responsibility to the singular person at issue here. Mark Knighton.
You are playing a game, the same as Mark Knighton is playing a game. I gave you an opportunity to respond truthfully and with sincerity.
I don't think you did so well. Do you want to try again?
Here's a portion of your post on WTF:
>No, they simply missed the day, period. While I think it is fair to extend “Saturday night” to include the early hours of Sunday morning- because I know Mark works very late at least sometimes and that goes to 3:00 AM from my own experience, it does not extend into another working day. So they missed it.
Well, who were you talking about? Who missed it? 'They'? Or Mark Knighton?
There is only one correct (and 100% truthful) answer: Mark Knighton. And look who responded immediately to that post:
Who responded? Was it 'they', or Mark Knighton?
Be honest Kahuna. Stop playing games and being deceptive, like Mark Knighton. You don't want to be like him, do you?
How many times has Mark Knighton missed a deadline Kahuna? Do you have any idea at this point? Using your autistic analysis, tell us the number of times you have concluded that Mark has definitively stated a time frame for anything (shipping, communicating an update, etc) and then indisputably missed it.
Isn't it remarkable how Mark behaved regarding the May update? I think it's amazing. He missed May. Fail. Then he announces a new deadline for himself the very next day. 9pm PST to midnight. Fail. Then he implies Sunday is the quiet day to get it done. And fail again. What makes a person behave like that, to repeatedly set expectations one after the other after the other after the other, publicly, and then just fail fail fail.
We are dealing with an individual who is mentally ill.
And don't forget: he has all the money. Any chance that plays a part in this? Why does Mark insist on keeping all the money? Why would anybody lie to people, collect money, and keep the money, and then go on lying and lying to people for 4+ years? Hmmmm...can you imagine?
And the real TBD returns.
> Your answer was dodgy.
I answered everything based on how I view things with this or any other company. You just don't like anything that doesn't match your meme.
> Who is responsible for what is happening here?
That was answered, as you'll see in a moment.
> When you defend him
What did I defend him on?
> but that phrasing dodges the assignment of blame and responsibility to the singular person at issue here. Mark Knighton.
You made an issue about how many employees and decision makers there were. I responded with, "In any case, it doesn't matter to me. Mark is the head of WT" [which also refers to you quote 2 items prior to this one].
>As for it being 100% under their control
Whose control? Did you mean Mark Knighton's control, or some other employee at Waytools? Why don't you say Mark Knighton's control, seeker of truth?
>there simply must be stuff they can talk about!
'They' can't talk about? Who is 'they'? Did you mean stuff Mark Knighton can't talk about? Why don't you say that then, seeker of truth?
>I do think they are rather blind to it though.
Who is blind? Who exactly? Some other employee at Waytools besides Mark Knighton? Some customer service rep that you want to pretend is the person posting behind the 'Waytools' and 'Waytools_Support' screen names? Or is it Mark Knighton who is blind? If that's what you meant - that Mark Knighton is blind - then why don't you say that, and offer Mark Knighton some real and pointed criticism? Why don't you assign some responsibility to him?
Are you trying to avoid criticizing Mark Knighton by calling him blind?
Are you afraid he will brick your Textblade if you tell Mark Knighton that he is blind?
Don't dodge Kahuna. These are very specific questions and it should not be difficult to answer truthfully.
Whilst you may well say “that’s not my intent...” or “I’m not the boss of Mark, he can come and address customers any time he wants, I wish he would...” the actual effect of your protectiveness and deflection, not to mention argumentation, effectively shields him and the company - for want of a better term, you’re defending him...
That is what is happening whether you want that to be the case or not. Your acts indeed have effects and consequences and that’s one of the [presumably] unintended ones.
In some cases, whether or not a member of the public feels criticism is unfair to the vendor is beside the point; it is up to the company to respond to any slings and arrows of outrageous fortune slung at them and by opposing, end them*... it’s not for you to be their spokesperson or their deflector in chief, but that’s the role you have adopted. If you believe they are being unfairly treated and want to insert yourself in to a complaint between a customer and a vendor, then apply for a job, get on the payroll and then, by all means act as their official defender.
*Apologies to a writer of some small note whose words I may have borrowed...
1. Many deadlines are not very vague at all. For example, "May" doesn't give an exact date, but it is very limited. "Saturday after 9:00 PM" is even more restrictive, etc.
2. My interpretations are all based on legitimate reasons - which I've explained and which are also very limited. And there is nothing wrong with using what is allowed by logic!
3. I have made an issue about missing the May update (and Saturday, etc), over and over again. So your statement makes no sense.
4. Don't know how many times they've missed a deadline, but I've probably posted as they got close to the end of each of them about how they needed to do it. And when they missed, I also criticized them.
But I like how I'm an "apologist" when I've criticized lack of communication, some banning, forced refunds, etc.
Must have been sarcasm.
>Whilst you may well say “that’s not my intent...” or “I’m not the boss of Mark, he can come and address customers any time he wants, I wish >he would...” the actual effect of your protectiveness and deflection, not to mention argumentation, effectively shields him and the company - >for want of a better term, you’re defending him...
You are most certainly an apologist for the missed timeframes and delays and deflecting from valid criticism and queries from the vendor - when a question is asked of Waytools, you insert yourself in and opine as to why you think the situation is acceptable or why it might be happening or what you think people might think about what people might think and that allows the vendor to continue avoiding interacting with customers - you provide a cheap distraction for them and help them avoid having to answer - that’s a form of enabling. That is beyond question. By engaging in inserting yourself in to conversations that could and should be answered by the vendor you are [possibly entirely unintentionally] acting as a defensive shield for them - whether that is your desire/intent or not...
I absolutely don’t write the rules of why or how you post, but I can absolutely lay out what the results of your postings are - some consequences you may be aware of and may have considered; others, perhaps not so much... nothing wrong about pondering on the myriad things we’d not previously known or considered...
It isn't about the rules. It's about the truth. I demonstrated perfectly clearly from your post on the WT forum how you slipped up with your mix of pronoun vs name. Once again:
>No, they simply missed the day, period. While I think it is fair to extend “Saturday night” to include the early hours of Sunday morning- because I know Mark works very lateat least sometimes and that goes to 3:00 AM from my own experience, it does not extend into another working day. So they missed it.
Who missed the day, period? 'They' or Mark Knighton?
Why don't you want to say Mark Knighton missed the day? Are you afraid he will brick your keyboard if you assign blame to him directly?
You can dodge the truth of this all you want, but it perfectly illustrates the point. Your tactic, as WS also stated quite well above, is to obfuscate the truth and defend Mark Knighton. You do it passively, by avoiding blaming Mark directly for actions you know he is solely responsible for and instead assigning responsibility or blame to a vague and undefined 'they' - just as Mark does when speaking in the 3rd person about himself - and you defend Mark actively, by virtue of your entire persona, this 'character' you play online - Kahuna, the Seeker of Truth, Defender of Waytools, arguing against every valid criticism directed at the company for 4+ years of lies, when you allegedly have no direct stake in the company. Seems implausible that you do not have some financial interest in all of this.
You are playing a game Kahuna. A very deceptive game. I understand you don't want to admit to your deceptions. You're just like Mark Knighton in that regard.
Taking money from people and lying to them and defrauding them via false advertising is nasty business Kahuna. I really do not understand why you would want to align yourself so closely with someone else who is making such serious mistakes, unless you are involved? When Mark finally gets sued, you may even get sucked into the legal drama. Why would you want to risk that if you don't even work for them? That seems just plain stupid.
See how he does? Miss miss miss. Fail fail fail. And then just ignore it all, as if the promise was never made, the deadline was never missed. What happened to that urgency from Friday May 31st, to Saturday June 1st, when Mark jumped in and promised he was just a little late and it was coming after 9pm PST? And then again, on 'quiet Sunday'? Nothing happened. Just lies to make people wait and eventually give up and go away, so Mark can keep the money.
Gaslighting 101.
And all the while, Kahuna is standing straight and at attention, ready to soldier on, on behalf of Mark Knighton.