-4

I suggest we need a new tag /. There are several questions on the topic of employees (sometimes contractors) completing (or believing they've completed) a (technical) deliverable yet having the customer claim it had missing features/ bugs/ performance issues, demand rework or adding(/removing) features, port it to platform Y, etc. Often unpaid. Often there was no clear written SOW. And/or it was never defined whether the contractor gets paid for any of this, who is responsible for acceptance testing, which specific people at the customer get to define acceptance, how disputes are resolved. It gets even more complicated when there are multiple companies/contractor firms/customers/third-parties/compliance burdens involved.

Notes: No it's not a legal question. The concept is not software specific, it arises in many jobs: engineering, medical, legal etc. It's not always contractors, sometimes it's about managing/dealing with contractors or accepting their deliverable(s), or the wider impact on QA or schedule.

These questions are related, but you can't tell that because the terms used are different every time, and most of the OPs haven't even heard the term "(customer) acceptance phase" or have a clause covering getting paid for it in their contract, "acceptance criteria", Statement-of-Work. Look for "finished", "final", "deliverable", "handoff", "rework" etc.

Note: this tag has nothing whatsoever to do with "job offer acceptance", offer letters, offer deadlines, retractions, recruiters etc., and since those are the more common usage of the term "acceptance" on WP, we probably also need a to avoid confusion.

| |
  • 2
    Too many tags already. We don't need software-specific tags here. – Joe Strazzere Sep 12 '18 at 1:26
  • @JoeStrazzere: it's not software specific. It occurs in many jobs: engineering, medical, legal. Nowhere above does it say software-specific. – smci Sep 12 '18 at 1:33
  • 2
    We have about 500 tags. I don't see the point. – Joe Strazzere Sep 12 '18 at 11:57
  • I agree with @JoeStrazzere our tags are too many and messy as it is. – Neo Sep 12 '18 at 16:05
  • @JoeStrazzere, MisterPositive: irrelevant. This has nothing to do with the other tags. If you see the need for a tag cleanup thread, please start one. It's not a reason to block unrelated improvements in the meantime. – smci Sep 12 '18 at 21:18
  • Not taking a stand for or against this, but if we really have 500 tags, shouldn't there be some that need burninating? – SaggingRufus Sep 14 '18 at 11:19
2

I don't believe that this is helpful, and I think that it would simply add confusion.

From the tag page

Using the right tags makes it easier for others to find and answer your question

You've already admitted yourself that:

These questions are related, but you can't tell that because the terms used are different every time, and most of the OPs haven't even heard the term "(customer) acceptance phase"

So, most OPs won't add this tag to their question if they're unaware of the term. To many people, "acceptance-phase" would be linked to an offer acceptance, and that's how this tag will (inappropriately) be used in most cases (and there's already a tag for that purpose).

Tags are there to be used for search and categorization. I can see your point that it would bring those kinds of questions together, but you have a larger task of educating people about that term. It's likely that you're the only person who would really engage and use this.

We prefer tags to be clear, unambiguous, and intuitive in their wording, so much so that the tag description won't need to be used to understand it.

And as noted, we already have a lot of tags.

| |
  • "So, most OPs won't add this tag to their question if they're unaware of the term" That's how some tags get rolling. So we kickstart the use of the tag by applying it. (I already did by compiling that list). Then people become aware of the term. "You have a larger task of educating people about that term. It's likely that you're the only person who would really engage and use this." So fine. Then others learn. And argument-by-association/apathy of the community isn't a reason to not make an improvement. "Tags are there to be used for search and categorization." Then it's justified. – smci Sep 14 '18 at 23:13
  • "We prefer tags to be clear, unambiguous, and intuitive in their wording, so much so that the tag description won't need to be used to understand it." So do I, "prefer" is an aspiration not a hard requirement. As time goes by, people will add specialized terms where some users need to read the tag description (that's not an argument for accepting every tag). Clearly 90+% of WP users haven't heard the term "acceptance phase". Yet many users are complaining about not getting paid, or milestones not being hit, etc. for this reason. – smci Sep 14 '18 at 23:23
  • "as noted, we already have a lot of tags" But that's got nothing to do with me, or this proposal. Take it up with the creators of sparsely-used, possibly unnecessary tags like interim-report. Or the German term zeugnis, which is apparently legit but almost everyone will need to read the tag definition. Or the undefined bullshit tag workplace-rhythm which seems to be misused. And what about the use of the not-really-defined process. And others. I support any other proposals to improve/refine/cull tags as needed. But don't drag any of that in here. – smci Sep 14 '18 at 23:30
  • Oh and "Using the right tags makes it easier for others to find and answer your question" is not to be misconstrued as "Don't use the right tags even if they are the most appropriate tags, when their names may not be widely-known". – smci Sep 14 '18 at 23:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .