rjdohnert wrote:

Did I say all Iraqi's?  Nope, I said terrorists and members of Saddams Army.  Not saying all terrorists are Iraqi, thats why I said I would have invaded, conquered and taken over the whole region.  Not everyone that lives in that region is a terrorist.  How simple is the world I come from?  Well where I come from, someone spits in your face, you cut their throat.  So yeah, its pretty straight forward.

W3bbo wrote:

harumscarum wrote: no not really I have nothing to hide.

"Having nothing to hide" nor "Being innocent" are not reasons 'not to be concerned'.

Fact is, the US Government is abusing their power and you're going to let them get away with it?

People,

Thanks for your input. Both points are good.. But, not much of it (sans Scobles' "Is it being used") is measurable. I wholeheartedly agree Quality should be built into the process, fewer defects, etc...

But, how does one measure "quality" in a contract? Everyone who has done software building as a consultant (internally or externally to their company) has requirements that often say something like "it should be "high quality" or "Quality should come first", etc. My problem is if I get assigned a task that has a contact in which Quality is of primary concern, how do I measure that? Some thoughts: 

      * I can't measure bugs, per se. I have to find them either during or after the software is being built. I can't have a "99% defect free" clause in a contract given to me. People could log erronously defects. And, what, exactly, is a defect? A bug found? Or a bug not found? (If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it.. etc.)

       * Is Quality really a broad category in which reliability, scalability, usability, etc., reside? If I achieve everything under it, it's of "high quality"?

      * Use Cases completion? How many use cases can I work though with the software? (Ideally it's 100%, but sometimes they need to be curtailed or limited, due to time / cost contraints). 

Has anyone else come up with measurable metrics? (That might be redundant.. but I wanted to stress the importants of measurement). 

Robert, how do you and the C9 team measure, "Do you like it"?  If you go to Slashdot, I'm sure you'll find plenty of negative press on it (I seem to remember a few links from /. to C9). People who routinely use C9 probably like it (otherwise, why would you use it? We don't *need* to be here.. In fact, we all should be working.. ) What does C9 do to measure how much we like it?

For the record, and the metric, I like C9.

PeterF wrote:

They arrived late for you.

Peter

Cornelius Ellsonpeter wrote:

ScanIAm wrote: It's all just carbon in one form or another. Actually the oceans have a much better ability to store C02 and other greenhouse gasses. And let's remember: A Greenhouse is where you grow the best plants

Screw this.  Let's settle this once and for all. I say we bulldoze the Amazon rainforest with an army of some soot-belching, 1970's diesel bulldozers.  If the temperature climbs around the planet by 10 degrees, we'll have answered the question.

As long as everybody can hang in there for 25 more years (how long it will take to grow the trees back), we'll be fine and then all these silly arguments can just go away.

Cybermagellan wrote:

Watch....what you say on the Internet could be used against you.

"An Ohio man who claims that he was humiliated by two other participants in an AOL chatroom has sued the two men for causing emotional distress and the ISP for failing to stop the alleged abuse, according to a report from Law.com."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/10/aol_sue_chatroom/

Tom Servo wrote:

He's gone, and better stay that way, too.

Manip wrote:

BTL

Sven Groot wrote:

He'll be back, unfortunately. The guy is like the Rolling Stones, he keeps saying he quits but he never actually does it.