I don't think anyone is 'ungrateful' for what they've been given? Is it not fair to say that what we have been given in terms of the 'core' was and remains given by Gideon? Yes Scott and many others contributed with plug-in developments, some freely and for free and others, for financial opportunity. (I'm not knocking that, by the way) When Scott requested input re; possible features to include in 1.7 back in early February. He also listed what he had already completed to that date. See
On the 25th of March. Scott posted a new thread 'Q2A roadmap - 1.7 and beyond' See.
Noone pressured Scott to post either of the above and is it not fair to surmise, that both posts gave a reasonable sense of optimism, that a 1.7 release, was quite imminent?
Of course we live in a real world. And I'm sure we all accept that what we have has been given freely in terms of the core and the same for a lot of plugins. But to date we have Gideon's v1.6.3 until we have another!
House moves, sudden outbreak of war, the cat dying. These things are all unpredictable pitfalls of life... And people do have to make a living etc. It is obvious that an honourable commitment made can be subject to changes of circumstances. But surely, there comes a point when one stops saying "in a week or two" or "Soon" and rather than find oneself in an embarrassing and yes 'unenviable' position. Is it not easier and better to say there will be one annual release and fix a positive date for it, even if it has to be a year from now. Rather than to throw a hook into a river, with no bait on the line?
1.6.3 Is a great piece of Q&A software... The only reason I'm not currently using it, is because I was waiting for 'improvements to the 'Wall-posting' and Messaging system. If I'd personally realised things would slow down this much for so long. I would have tried to find ways to disable the wall post and rather temperamental Facebook modules before they cost me the loss of valuable site members through user frustration.
I know my words might sound like criticism rather than be read in the spirit of critique that it is actually meant. But I cannot help what some may think. Any more than I can defend what I am sure is admiral loyalty by those with vested interests to maintain the status quo?
Finally, I'm just an ordinary 'user' I am sure 'Mr Sans Comic' and his companion 'anonymous' will deal with this reply and me fairly and squarely. But what is. Is... I did not create the monster!