nbs:

First, no one is saying that newer coaches should be out. Second, the criteria that's being talked about is experience, not total wins.

I do think that coaches w. all levels of experience should be included, as I stated previously. But I also believe that the beta testers should be more weighted to the heavily experienced coaches, because they know the game the best. Check billyg's post on the previous page for a good summation of this.

zhawks - I just got back around to reading this forum post and I'm sorry if there was any confusion about my post from early in this thread. It was in no way a slight toward you, just toward the group of people on this site who seem to see everything (or a considerable amount negatively). I apologize for offending you.

As to the beta testing, you need a representative sample. Others have said this, but this means HOFers, vets and new guys. Each group can pick up different things and there is value to all of them.

Quote: Originally Posted By mcauley on 11/10/2009zhawks - I just got back around to reading this forum post and I'm sorry if there was any confusion about my post from early in this thread. It was in no way a slight toward you, just toward the group of people on this site who seem to see everything (or a considerable amount negatively). I apologize for offending you.

As to the beta testing, you need a representative sample. Others have said this, but this means HOFers, vets and new guys. Each group can pick up different things and there is value to all of them

I am not offended and I understand what you are saying and agree that there is a good reason to have all types of users participate. That being said, the vet users (power users of the site) are the most important to getting this thing right. I think you are mistakingly believing that vet coaches have some sort of agenda to push during the beta test.

i think wis should only seek the opinions of those with 5000+ career wins and 50000+ forum posts - those are clearly the most active and informed coaches.

I'm not suggesting or believing that vet coaches have an agenda to push. Just that you'd want a group that includes everyone. Not that some group is somehow more valuable.

Although I do agree that they should be pushing content towards the vets that play this game.

Most critical is having a tester with a global perspective. That is to say one that can see issues from many sides (preferrably before they arise). Those players are few and far between. Most tickets that WIS receives, as well as forum threads that are started, have to do with how someone was wronged. Rarely will a player bring attention to an issue where he/she is receiving an advantage or bring up an issue that may not have even happened yet, but that has the potential to occur.

What they are looking for, I'd hope, is someone who is non self-serving, who understands the game inside and out and who wants to make the game as best it can be. The object is not to win. It's to try and exploit things that have been viewed as glitches in the past and then report bugs and inconsistencies. It's to head off the deluge of tickets and/or concerns once it goes live. It's to be proactive in foreseeing issues, not reactive.

As far as the testing goes, in the past they've run each "HD cycle" every 10-15 minutes, where 24 hours of HD is completed in 1-2 " testing" hours.

**Each tester should have a 1) minimum of 71,797 posts or 2) a minimum of 15 national titles and/or a run of 5 consecutive titles and 8 titles over a 9 season span.

i second Rails' proposal.

it goes without saying that beta testers should focus on people with a couple of national championships and MANY losses to Z man

As someone who has pushed every HD flaw to the limit I think I would do a good job at beta testing. I have never been picked, though of course. As long as they do a good job then I really am not too angry!

6 coaches first forum post was putting their name into be a beta tester. Interesting.

that means they read the forum but must not ever post?