Yeah, this is gross. There's zero reason that this is still relevant four years into the future. I'm a programmer, please try to convince me why this bug can't be addressed. I'll save you the trouble, it's not impossible and it's not beyond the control of the site developers. If the feature was coded in such a problematic way where you literally can't fix it without refactoring the code, then just refactor the damn code. Or does fixing bugs not get prioritized because it doesn't seem to add revenue the same way adding new features/content does?
The community PAYS ATTENTION when you just try to grab more money from them without addressing core functions in your applications. The more often shit like this gets unaddressed the more the longevity of the site gets harmed. People are going to start looking for better alternatives than the arrogant and frankly insulting explanation that the export function of their own application is beyond their control.
The bug exists because of how browser caching works, something beyond the control of the site
I'm sorry, but this is flat out incorrect. Bugs happen for any number of reasons in software. You know what we programmers do? We resolve them. Saying that the site's own functionality is beyond the control of the site is maddening and the community deserves an honest answer.
An honest answer would look something like this:
"This bug is not a priority for us and there are no plans to address it."
This is further upsetting because the site is probably going to continue to prioritize feature additions/content before fixing what's already there.
Yeah, this is gross. There's zero reason that this is still relevant four years into the future. I'm a programmer, please try to convince me why this bug can't be addressed. I'll save you the trouble, it's not impossible and it's not beyond the control of the site developers. If the feature was coded in such a problematic way where you literally can't fix it without refactoring the code, then just refactor the damn code. Or does fixing bugs not get prioritized because it doesn't seem to add revenue the same way adding new features/content does?
The community PAYS ATTENTION when you just try to grab more money from them without addressing core functions in your applications. The more often shit like this gets unaddressed the more the longevity of the site gets harmed. People are going to start looking for better alternatives than the arrogant and frankly insulting explanation that the export function of their own application is beyond their control.
I'm sorry, but this is flat out incorrect. Bugs happen for any number of reasons in software. You know what we programmers do? We resolve them. Saying that the site's own functionality is beyond the control of the site is maddening and the community deserves an honest answer.
An honest answer would look something like this:
"This bug is not a priority for us and there are no plans to address it."
This is further upsetting because the site is probably going to continue to prioritize feature additions/content before fixing what's already there.
All my 2014 characters can't be exported to PDF now. It started a month ago. Could you help me to fix it?