Hi, this post is sort of a follow up (or even a spin-off!) of what happened in this thread:
I was originally going to reply directly in the original thread, but since it is actually a different topic, I thought it'd be better to not mix the 2 matters. (Also, this don't belong to the same Forum category either).
To comment on Ravenna McColgan's last post, I, too, totally support the idea of making this forum a place for constructive discussion, to help improving CheckFront in a direction that suits its users.
We always want to hear all feedback, regardless of the type.
For this, you need to allow people to express themselves, without the fear of being banned for their opinion.
By essence, a written message gives a lot of leeway on how one may interpret its "tone".
CheckFront has the unilateral capacity to delete/hold messages, close threads, and even block people. By using this power inappropriately and/or too often, I don't believe this creates an environment where people feel free and safe to speak up. At least, I do not anymore...
The difference here is that when it comes to gaps or friction points in Checkfront, we're looking for constructive feedback that helps us learn who you are, what you need, and why.
The exchange of information needs to be both way: while we are obviously happy to provide a context to our requests, we'd love to understand the reason(s) when we are denied; this would surely reduce frustration.
How you can best provide that and what we don't tolerate is outlined in our Community Guidelines. But, you know this already. We've had this chat many times :)
Unfortunately, yes, this isn't the first time; hence this current response, which I hope you'll receive as a constructive input.
Please sign in to leave a comment.