Report a Comment

I agree with the criticism of Catoe's response. It seems to me a bizarre, and quite flawed line of thinking, for many reasons:

- a test site is fundamentally, and obviously, not the same thing as launching a full service site

- explaining that to the public is not a difficult thing to do

- assuming that the public will not understand reflects (as someone above said) a deep distrust of the public

- taking "every complaint seriously" first off, seems just plain inaccurate if you have ever tried to actually talk to someone at WMATA

- even if it were true, taking "every complaint seriously" is a choice, and one that a manager can change. Saying "we do not read or respond to complaints about our Test Site, because it is only a Test Site" is a pretty justifiable choice, it seems to me

- lastly, "measure twice, cut once" shouldn't be the model for designing services that thousands of people will engage with on a daily basis - more like measure, cut, try on, measure again, cut again, try on again, measure again...etc. The idea is that the public can provide incredibly valuable input to guide the development of services as they are being designed and implemented.

There might very well be some legitimate reasons not to have a test site - but the line of thought in this statement isn't one of them!

by Alayna Buckner on Mar 7, 2009 1:43 am • link • report