Even if we are complaining about ThomasV attitudes, in general we (I hope I speak for the majority of the community- but I'm sure about that) like the tool, and we also would like to take benefit of it's advantages if possible even in the future. In general terms spoken it is an improvement in comparison to the old tool. That is the reason why we convert our old projects.

ThomasV basic ideas in the human interface of the tool are not so bad . His new ideas with the index-page are good to (smaller quirks can be eliminated).

Our problem is, that there is no communication in advance what will happen and when. Every time we see the reaults after the change. The second thing is that ThomasV exactly knows what our key points are - they have been discussed to often, everytime he made an incompatible change in his tool - but from my personal point of view is not willing to find a solution which would be best for both sides.

I can accept, that he is searching for a way to assure a high level of quality - whether his way is the best I don't know. With a little bit of effort and having an open ear to all communities, I think he would be able to put some configration options in, that every community is capable to configure the tool according to their needs, without loosing quality. At the moment we are happy, that our IP's are willing to give us an excellent quality ( As I statet somewhere else, I know at least 3 of them who are working as an IP on a regular base for very personal reasons, this 3 all have academic background in ancient history). But - I hope not - there may be a future where there may be a need for excluding IP's because of the general behaviour of the IP's.

Maybe that we see more or different problems, because if our history. We are doing now a lot of work, especially in the process of the second proofreading, and we are converting a lot of older projects to the new standards.

I think, if we got more information in advance what will happen, if there is a possibility to discuss new features in advance (there is no need to discuss them in german), having the possibilty to give hints which things should be configurable, things would run smoother. Even the default configuration may ThomasV way of thinking. if we can deviate in some crucial points by configuration. (IP'S setting the ready state)

Even tests before release with the german ws are possible, if we get asked in advance an it's agreed by the communty (getting the agreement is not so hard).

Just for information, we had a really hard discussions about horizontal and vertikal layout. With nearly the same trouble. Now the layout ist configurable by the community. Nearly the same thing about the pre- and postamble (Thomas didn't see our needs of acces for adaption of older porjects) of each page, now there is a common solution. We had also a big discussion about showing the state in different colors. I for my person was massivly against it. But after the implementation by ThomasV, showing this colors only on the index page, I'm now happy about that, because I can check the state of projects on the index pages. In this case the misunderstanding was on my side.