From time to time there are posts which potentially leak some possibly new features coming to JMP from EA version (sometimes even I feel like that I would like to comment that "this is fixed in JMP 19"). To my understanding, the agreement EA users have done, doesn't allow these but it can be a bit of a grey zone to know what can / cannot be discussed (in my opinion nothing should be discussed and EA shouldn't be never utilized when making posts to community).
I have "clear" rule for myself nowadays: if JMP has mentioned it somewhere, I'm free to mention it IF I can link to that JMP post (I would consider it public knowledge at this point and most likely being in release candidate). This is also one of the reasons I don't use JMP EA that much, I cannot really solve any community questions using it as I might risk leaking new UI for example (other big reason being constant re-installs).
I know doing "admin" work in Community with the tools we have isn't easy (we should be able to send message to user why their post was removed/edited while we do it, but we can't) but should we attempt to do it?
I have contacted @mia_stephens about these and this is part of the email I did send and her response (I hope it is OK for Mia for me to add part of her email here).
My email:
From time to time in JMP Community there are questions / issues which MIGHT (I don’t consider any features in EA coming out in next version unless there is clear comment in wish list about that from JMP Staff) be solved in future version of JMP. EA users do know about them but we have this “threat” we have agreed upon
"Remember the Early Adopter software and your evaluations of it are confidential information pursuant to the terms of software License Agreement - so your evaluations may be sent to JMP only".
Would it be considered breaking this IF I were to say that “this will be fixed/possible in JMP19”? My take has been, that I don’t talk about ANY future JMP features UNLESS it has been already been mentioned by JMP Staff in community and I can refer to that but there are some users who don’t necessarily do this. I also tend to take care that I don’t use EA for any of my community solutions to avoid leaking any possible new features and to even show that I participate in EA, which does reduce my EA usage a lot. I also asked txnelson’s opinion on this and he did remove one of his responses due to my question (definitely wasn’t my purpose…) related to grouped spec limits (if I remember correctly, couldn’t find the post). Jim’s take on this is similar as mine “don’t do it unless JMP does it first OR someone else does it first without JMP acting on it”. I would just like this be clear what can be said, how it can be said and so on.
And the answer from Mia:
You’ve got the right person : ) I think it’s a good rule for EA members not to share what they know we’re working on in the next release in the community unless someone from JMP has specifically written, “we’re working on this” or we’ve changed the status to “yes, stay tuned”. We tend to not do this unless we’re certain the feature will be in the next release. For this reason (and the potential of “lurking competitors”), we often don’t change the statuses or say that we’ll deliver the requested functionality until we’re closer to the release.
