tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8951904624959546499.post6291433530547954210..comments2008-07-29T13:17:36.056-04:00Eric Jacobsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08216361684596485033noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8951904624959546499.post-4215593246700259702008-07-29T09:45:00.000-04:002008-07-29T09:45:00.000-04:00So true. I caught on to these Jedi mind tricks early on in my testing career. After a while I had some Jedi mind tricks of my own as this scene was getting too repetitive:<BR/><BR/>"It's still a bug. Whether you want to fix it or not, when, and in what priority is a different story. I'll open a ticket, do with it what you wish afterward."<BR/><BR/>BTW, loving your blog! Write some more.Ido Schachamhttp://www.testuff.com/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8951904624959546499.post-88904229679610114702008-05-19T09:48:00.000-04:002008-05-19T09:48:00.000-04:00I agree, but I also think it's a form of blackmail for those devs who hate to have bugs left in their queues, their should be a special "These bugs exist because C1 support is terrible and they won't fix their bugs" queue in my opinion. Other reputable component vendors don't need their own queue because they actually fix their issues most of the time.Pantheonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8951904624959546499.post-45527418825607388442008-05-15T12:30:00.000-04:002008-05-15T12:30:00.000-04:00This trap is all to easy to fall into when you compound the importance of "numbers." When you're so worried about the bug count, that you start looking for ways not to add them, you know you've got a problem. Perhaps that's an idea for another post.Alexhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07298916960841993037noreply@blogger.com