Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9102696" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Why is it your job as a consumer to assume that no Quality Control has ever been done, and that this single instance needs investigated? Actually, lets take this a step forward. Fine, then you go ahead and investigate it. You investigate their data, analyze their process, and find all the flaws in their data. You... do know how to do that, right? And you do have access to their corporate records to do so right? Or do you want to just start shouting "the survey is flawed! WoTC must fix it!" with... zero real evidence that anything is actually wrong and you didn't just find a rare outlier? In fact, it's been a week, have you done any further research to prove that there is actually an issue and not just a rare outlier? When I am running my own company, I will do whatever I feel like. In fact, what is the error rate that WoTC is comfortable with? Can you cite that? Can you cite the latest results of their quality control proccess? Do you even know what their quality control process IS? No, of course they aren't doing it intentionally. Which means that they have quality control apparatuses in place, right? And they have access to far more of the data than us, right? So... why do I need to show you anything? Why should I assume that WoTC has so utterly failed at their quality control and has such a fundamental misunderstanding of their data, that I, a consumer with no access to any of that information, must step forward and make business recommendations to them? Because you found one person in a single group of ten that was confused, and there might be more? Therefore WoTCs entire survey apparatus is not maintained, is not quality controlled, and we as consumers must investigate their practices to confirm they are getting useful data? Upon what facts do you base the idea that 5% is high? Cite a paper. Cite a source. Your own gut instinct is worse than useless when discussing things like this. Heck, cite the actual percentage of comments. Wouldn't that be more useful? And since you are investigating WoTC for Quality Control, don't you know this information? I never claimed I was talking about the 2014 playtest. I was talking about the things which actually underwent the survey process and were released for 5e. Maybe stop jumping to conclusions? Right, so WoTC is just lucky. They are incompetents who just got lucky, and you can prove this because you think you've found a flaw in their design process, despite having no access to any of their corporate data. Why is it wrong? They were successful products, this is true. If the Survey were so bad that lay-consumers of the products can tell it is bad, and WoTC was so incompetent to have no conception of these obvious flaws... then how have they released multiple successful products with this method? I own, what, five or six products that were high quality, produced by this test and survey method? Did they just stumble into success multiple times, with damaging surveys that hurt every single product? Does that seem logical to you?Because 70% acceptance of the idea seems to be important. Prove to me that WoTC has never looked into the Quality Control of their Surveys. Maybe an internal memo? An email where they declined to do so? Anything other than your gut intuition.I argue against your position, because you want to assert that WoTC has never, not once, tested the validity and quality of their surveys and is completely unaware that they contain massive flaws that are ruining their data. And your assertion comes from the fact that you found one person who was confused by a survey, and WoTC hasn't announced a retraction of their survey data, or publicly declared a need to retest everything based on this single person.</blockquote>

Verification