Saturday night (Finnish time) I witnessed interesting discussion about testing between Michael Bolton, Iain McCowatt and Pete Walen on Twitter. They were discussing on how people can’t distinguish good and not so good testing. At one point discussion was dying and I jumped in as I felt there was more to juice from it. I took screenshots of the discussion, but be aware that some tweets are missing as I felt that to make the flow of discussion more balanced, I needed to modify it little bit.
Here we go:
At this point it seemed that the discussion was dying and I wanted to see it continue as I found this subject highly interesting.
After this I tried to forward discussion on different direction. I wanted to think more about the big picture and trying to figure out why and who we are really testing for.
After this I went to sleep and continued next day the discussion with Michael Bolton with few tweets. Here are just few of those that I found most interesting. If you are interested all of them, go to my Twitter profile :)
When I was talking about making money (or profit), I was trying to explain that if the company goes to bankruptcy, there is nothing to test. So the focus should be on how we can by any means available shape the product via testing so that it helps (sell, perform, making profit, whatever you call it) our company.
Actually this is more of a statement: “Anything that distracts or blocks us doing the testing in the way we see it done optimally, is not just hurting our testing, but in the end, our company and its ability to survive. ”
P.S. Thanks for Rosie Sherry for the tip of adding tweets to blog post.
P.P.S If you are wondering the ‘(I)’ after the topic, that’s a Roman numeral referring to that this will not be the last post about discussions on Twitter.