maemo.org - Talk - View Single Post - Discussing JollaOy strategy

pango	2014-08-27 , 16:58
Posts: 114 \| Thanked: 37 times \| Joined on Aug 2014	#105

Originally Posted by nodevel

It is a complete answer. Your idea of transparency is clearly different from mine... You want transparency just for the sake of transparency? Would you want Jolla to publish the exact time every employee comes to work and the time (s)he leaves? Because if they withhold such information, there are not 100% transparent, are they?

Of course I don't want transparency for the sake of transparency. I would like to see it, because I think it would be good for Jolla and would have lessened many of the issues they have with people loosing faith or being annoyed with Jolla. I think jalyst's idea of brutal honesty (in moderate doses of coures) was a good one. Less PR fluff, more direct info was his thought - which got me to post. Here is jalyst's post: http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=29

Maybe it is complete nonlogic too, for you?

Is it necessary to discuss the SIM holder to be sufficiently transparent? No. But to me it, as an example, seems like a very Jolla thing to do, when faced with an uncomfortable topic - to be silent about it or avoid it with a non-answer. I think they would benefit from being more transparent. That is my opinion.

Originally Posted by nodevel

Please explain to me what benefit (to anyone) it would bring if Jolla talked publicly about the SIM issue (which is probably a problem of an initial batch so it doesn't apply to today anyways). Jolla would be completely stupid if they published it.
They have most likely fixed it in other revisions, but Jolla would forever be "the phone with the SIM card issue" which clearly isn't the case.

The benefit would be respect towards Jolla from the early adopter community. It is often said that the handling of a complaint is more important than the issue itself. A well-handled complaint can gain more goodwill than had there had been no issue at all.

But the SIM card holder is just an example. Like I said, here's the test:

Am I not telling something, because I'm hopeful not telling it will be beneficial to me? That perhaps through silence I can avoid having to say something uncomfortable and it will all just sort itself out? If the answer inside one's head is yes, then that's not openness or even carefulness. I think it is a bad idea.

Originally Posted by nodevel

Jolla is already more transparent than any of them (look through the mailing list, Mer sources, TJC, IRC meetings) - I would say it is too transparent, I would hold back a bit if I were them.

A larger company has much more personnel to deal with customers.

But that's just the thing. Jolla is already very active, they are already spending a lot of time in the public. But mostly it is PR fluff and technical FOSS stuff. As a company, they rarely are transparent at all - and that, I think, is starting to hurt them. Most of the disgruntled voices (even fk_lx to an extent) I see, are people who were opportunities for Jolla to keep in the loop with better openness and not trying to swipe the hard stuff under the carpet. That is my opinion.

Originally Posted by nodevel

PS: I still think that I am talking to fk_lx, because some arguments hold similar (non)logic.

If you aren't a Finnish speaker, someone else can analyze my Finnish here: http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...8&postcount=98 Tietääkseni fk_lx ei bamlaa sen enempää svenskaa, finskaa kuin stadin slangiakaan.