Again, this is a case where Jolla themselves said they know the root cause. Nobody was asking them to comment on each and every phone that might be sent in, simply to provide an explanation as to what kind of root cause that was - so that people know what they are sending their phones in for. I was making the additional point that such community sharing is beneficial to Jolla's image in the community, whereas secrecy is detrimental to their image within same. Keep the community updated during the process, make them waste less time guessing, and they will be a happier, more loyal bunch, because you have shared with them, sort of confided in them - that's my view.

Here is Toyota announcing a Prius recall, see that detail:

http://corporatenews.pressroom.toyot...all+021214.htm

And I'm not even asking them to do a recall or go to such an extent, but I do think that thread and the community participation angle would have greatly benefited from some openness on the matter. Just a few words on the reason why. Why hide it? After all, Jolla has TJC just for those kinds of interactions - it wasn't asking them for a press release (although the Toyota example is a press release). Now it just makes Jolla look really weird in my books - and, of course, this is not the only instance where Jolla has chosen to remain silent or offer platitudes when there is an issue. I think there is a danger things pile up for Jolla and will hurt their community relations and thus their, still important, early adopter business. Just my opinion, of course.

Paspie makes an excellent point that Jolla has placed the value of their brand above other things, in my view above their transparency. Apparently they feel handling difficult issues publicly would hurt their brand. Personally I think their brand image would benefit from more transparency, though, and that in reverse their brand image is actually hurt by the secrecy. I can say my personal excitement over "the movement" has waned as I've witnessed the company go down this path. I doubt I'm the only one. I get it that you disagree.

I think Jolla would do well to re-consider. There's still time to fix these comms, although rebuiling that trust towards those who've lost it can take some time. That would be for the benefit of all, especially were it to happen without community pressure - I'd like to think Jolla would actually want to share and communicate with the community quite transparently and have just failed at finding a balance so far. (That doesn't mean spilling out business secrets, of course.)

I provide counter-arguments all the time. You just ignore them. And again, I'm not asking for "all out deep technical details of every single problem", which is just basically you trying to portray me as something I'm not. I'm sure there a fallacy for that on Wikipedia. I think there is perfectly good balance out there to be struck between transparent, open and respectful community relations and comms on one hand, and business interests on the other. I don't think Jolla is striking that balance at the moment, hence I'm providing feedback. For example, the SIM card holder episode could have been fixed with a few additional words of real fact - and suddenly it would not have looked like secrecy at all.

As for community relations and communications failures, how is the current strategy working for Jolla? Any disgruntled people out there? I know there are people on this thread who believe Jolla couldn't have done any better and it is an impossible mission to do any better, but I do think they could have done better. Some of the vitriol could have been avoided. Less secrecy would be one key. Now the silence leaves voids that will be filled by other voices.