Lou_Cyber wrote on 10/06/10 at 16:01:02:
First goal should be to ensure punctual delivery, perhaps with incentives like a bonus pay, which is earned if x updates are delivered on time.
I vaguely remember reading in another thread that Tony has some system of penalising lateness. A bonus system such as that suggested by Lou_Cyber sounds like a good way of turning that system on its head, encouraging punctuality by incentivising promptness rather than punishing lateness.
Lou_Cyber wrote on 10/06/10 at 16:01:02:
But still it is better to wait for good updates than to download a sloppy one on time.
Any professional worthy of the name really ought to be able to produce work of an acceptable professional standard even when up against a tight deadline – which, let's be frank, should never be an issue with these updates, as they are due once a month, presumably on a fixed date. There's no reason why they shouldn't be prepared early in the cycle rather than left until the last moment. OK, they might lose a little topicality, but surely this would be preferable to not having any updates at all.
Hacker has hit the nail on the head: it is the paying subscribers who are put out by this. Two contributors to this thread have already indicated that their subscriptions have expired and implied that they won’t be renewing, which really ought to set the alarm bells ringing at Chess Publishing HQ. What I find most surprising of all is that no official explanation or apology has been offered, nor have we been given any assurance that these updates – which are now two-and-a-half months behind – will ever appear at all. I think Chess Publishing is a great idea and I want it to be successful, but this episode isn't a good advertisement for what it has to offer.