Did you have any actual critiques of CTV+CSFS or were you just engagement baiting? (The latter worked, apparently)
Discussion
I posted it because people are skipping the rigorous process for making changes.
If you skip processes it may work in your favour today, but long term it doesn’t.
I’m not engagement baiting, I don’t care about engagement.
I’m telling you it ends badly when everyone doesn’t have consistent predictable processes for change.
As evident, people are already arguing about Core for a different CTV related issue.
You’ll all eat each other over time as the lack of process may favour you today, but over time becomes crippling and incentive orientated (not process orientated).
Like I said, follow process, have a process, stick to it, and show that the community can rely on it moving forward.
What part is difficult to understand about that and what part don’t you like about it?
Nothing ever scales without process and Core Apologists are learning this the hard way.
Hubris and ignorance works for 20 minutes but this is a 1000 year protocol IF we don’t drop the ball.
Below is an example, the writing is on the wall.
Stop apologising for this garbage, it is bad by association.
Sure is a lot of words to say you have no technical critiques. Thanks for the input.
Have fun with your processes.
You think I’m some conservative boring person, while I am, I tinker probably a lot more than anybody else in the industry with these things.
CTV isn’t the conversation, it’s the process to get CTV activated and when.
You don’t make big changes in the middle of a misalignment shitstorm. That’s what governments do during election years, purposefully for the effort of destabilising the citizens and dividing them.
This is a process and social alignment convo, zero technical nuance.