Well, OK, Bert... I accept your semantical correction. But a lot of what we have here is not following the usual paradigm, and I have some sympathy for AC on this. You had a product that was forced into a somewhat premature release by a large body of clients who were desperate for MU money. First it came out as a real, honest "take your chances" beta, then got the production label put on it so as to not lose a competitive advantage. When significant bugs were found, all of a sudden there were hundreds of de facto beta testers, many on this board. At that point, I think AC would have done better by realizing it as a resource, and doing as I proposed. Maybe they could have offered a bit of a break on the guardian angel fee for those inadvertent "assistant developers". But, I bet the problems could and would have been solved quicker.
Now, maybe we are again entering a new period of stability, like the "old board," and it will once again all be about helping new users and fine tuning our practices and systems. But, version 7 is out there. And some are clambering for its release. And I'll bet pounds to pickles that we are going to face the same sorts of issues again.
So again, if this board is a part of AC, and staff are involved in its activities, then I would vote they do so with full and open involvement. I am sure Travis and our other surgeon compadres would agree that you don't go into an operation planning to do it half-heartedly.
