Bitcoin Forum

What do you think is more important for a project: to deliver everything in time, even though the quality will be lower; or make reasonable delays but deliver a really nice project that the team is confident in?

To deliver everything. For me it is the best choice even though it is low quality but it has a big impact to the community. Time is the one who really need to fix and releasing an important update on time would be very great!

Same goes for me because it will make your community stronger and more confident in the project. but of course, if they can do both, it will be fantastic.

I guess that is theproblem if many icos now. They try to meet public interests and fulfill their stated deadlines usually without any significant content. And it's a pitty for me that most investors also go for time rather than quality

Obviously the most important thing is the quality. The project will never succeed if it is not working or it is much worse then its competitors. The other thing is that if you need to take more time the whole project should be transparent. Lack of communications between devs and community will bring the token to the ground before team will show any results while some good articles and updates about it may rise it better then an actual result. Unfortunately not every project care about the price of its coin after they raised money on ICO.

ROAD MAP = DREAMS

Unless the difficult parts of the road map have been completed or there is HARD evidence the dev team can complete these parts it is just a bunch of promises and dreams.

there are perhaps 20-30 real proven dev teams on this entire board that are capable of producing something of real interest and not just something btc can do

Agree. Transperancy and good communication is a key to success. But sometimes it is difficult to tell about wvery single change team undertakes during the working process, may be that is why many investors consider that they are being scammed because of that. But still quality cannot be sacrificed for time.

Haha. That definetely depends on a team. For some teams deadlines are dreams indeed, for some I would rather call them goals

The quality is better. Even if a project has a great roadmap which they always delivery on time, I do believe that the quality will affect the project more. The better the quality is, the better the project is. Try to invest your money in a project which has a great team which has a lot of experience

Exactly. That is what im trying to say.

I'll go with the quality, I don't care if they will deliver their road map late as long as quality is at its finest.
I'll choose this one as long it is reasonable and they are doing actually with their reasons there's no problem with me. Others might consider the delivery date and followed the road map but in the end that project will suffer because of its lack of quality.

Absolutely quality is the essential datum that should be attentively fixed because it's the major issue that controls any project success .
Even if it takes more time , but the results will be much better than the other option ( you cited ) because a low quality project will never last & it will be progressively abandoned ( PS :  it may get some viral interests at the beginning but as I said it can't last )

First of all professinal developer won't provide low quality product. He'll better delay release date, but no low quality. Low quality = unsafe.
About roadmaps. I think roadmap have to be simple and realizable. Simple because it's made for investors, always they are not well expirienced in IT (I mean technical detailes).
Roadmaps may contain a lot of useless (for investors understanding) detailes which may overload you.  And you may draw a false conclusion.
For your question I'd like to say that first of all it have to be clear for your understanding. Why does delay happend. Trusted projects always inform about delays and reason. Ofcourse many delays are bad for project reputation.

It should be balance,quality over quantity will be the best,we do not want to rush any projects and then will only fail use at the very end.We are investing only to those who has potentials to grow so that we can have a lot of gains with the help of the project.Probability of success and failure should be exact,project managers and developers on each project should be synchronized or else they wont achieve success.

I think that most important to work on the project and if delays with implementation of roadmap points have the uderstandable reason it is ok. But if we have not any updates from the team and answer on investors question - just silence - it is looks like scam. So my answer quality is more important, but devs should be in connection with community.

Yeah. However, have just thought that on the other hand, road map is one of the first documents that potential investors rely on, while making a decision on investing. So road map should be solid, but as I ve stated many times before, at the final stages of development road map is no more the most important think.

I would prefer the delay rather than a deliver in time but has low quality specially if it is a security issue. It is easier to tell the community that we will have a delay to make sure that the security will not be compromised than to have a crap work and later own the community will find out that your work is a piece of shit.

yes communication is important too. I joined x project, although it is good project with good team, but sometimes it's poor in communication. silent telegram in more than 3 weeks without explanation can reduce my trust in that good project

Roadmap use to created by every ICO comes to market but quality cannot assure that everyone will give us for sure. Please make sure that project have the good development team in the market and their companies focus about the blockchain technology.
At last they will using the best promotion team and use signature campaign here in the forum. You will get the best quality after that.

Wow 3 weeks .. that is not just poor communication, that is no communication at all

Still, I think it's impossible to make such distinctions, because both factors are very important. It is important that the project team act within the framework of the roadmap and that all this is done qualitatively

That is a tough question. Quality is of course the most important thing in my opinion, but there is no such thing as perfection. So if you keep searching for it, there are chances that you will never end up delivering anything, and the ideas get lost. You need a commitment between those two things and see what your public needs. Keep delivering things that are stable, even though they are not perfect yet, and keep that perfection as a goal for future development.

For me it's better for the team to make reasonable delay and they deliver the perfect form of the project.They must let the the investor know what is the development progress of the project step by step though.By delivering the perfect form of the project,it will make a new investor to join and make that project very popular.But,if they release it with many defect,investor will run away and abandoning that project one by one.

It is obviously necessary that the quality of the projects remains because even if the roadmap hasn't been followed it is okay as long as the delays are necessary. They both affect the project but the quality will be more destructive than following roadmap either way if one of them fails, it will always affect the outcome.

Road map is a very solid requirement for a project to go but in every rule there is an exception right? And if that exception is like making the quality better then that is an understandable reason. Go for a road map that will be delivered in time but later on the devs will start going out and cashing out and will show no effort. Its a good thing to see devs are working hard to their project and they are dedicated to it because it only shows on how they want the project to succeed along with their investors.

Of course quality is more important than roadmap. But before they make the roadmap, surely they have done research, studies, time estimates, costs and others. A timely project with a schedule will make investors more confident with the project. For that reason, a good project must have a strong community and all problems arise need to always be communicated with investors or supporters. So if there is a delay from the roadmap can be tolerated.

The quality is definitely important but following the roadmap could lead to trust. It could be better if this two principles will be valued and practiced at the same time.

But I think there is something that is not in accordance with their plans and expectations. as crowdfunding that accumulated does not match their expectations so developers extend the live of ICO and so on. I think if it's reasonable I think it's not a problem to revise the existing roadmap of course the goal to make the project of ICO quality be better

i think the first option is more important. about quality it still can be fixed but update from devs of a project is more important and it is make investor/users believe they still active to develop their project

I think open source is the key to a project.
No matter how good the white paper and the technical route, everything is visible from the code.

For a project you first decide your key performance indicators.
This can be budget realization , project scope realization or schedule realization.
This key performance can be decided with investors or your big mama ( main sponsor ).
so it is about what client wants

If the reason of the delay is for the great news and everything is in order that is reasonable and better than delivering it on time but there are some that needs to be clear, I go on the delay. This is far greater and convincing for success.

Roadmap to a Culture of Quality  is a tool for change management as it offers guidance on transformational change from the current organizational culture to one that fully embodies quality.

quality is important for sure, but I'm sure also that roadmap should be respected as much as possible

Of course quality is the most important. A quality project has very detailed information in all aspects and a good communication channel to attract more attention from players and to sell more tokens for sale at a later date Preparation of project development.

Delays are normal since project team have done some real things, not just fancy presentations and tweets.
Look at SpaceX Falcon Heavy delays history.

In my opinion it is important to under promise and over deliver. However, it is normal for unexpected external factors to come into play. It is then best to adjust accordingly based on the new set of information available. The aim in most instances should be to deliver quality work instead of rushing to get things done. Now of course if you're a first mover in a market, it is best to have something on the table than to wait too long!

P.S. A fully baked cake should taste better than a half baked one.  ;D

I think if they are all going to be honest every startup will most likely face delays in delivering the working project afterwards. It is important to deliver things in a good timeframe as it inspires confidence but also good communications can help smooth out the frustration that comes from delays. So I think timescales and communications would be the most desirable. Products are constantly being updated to solve bugs and enhance functionality that is a fact of life.

Definitely quality, there is no doubt about it. As for time, a project serious about its quality would factor in the time too, and any delays despite that should be well worth the wait. Its a great question deriving an interesting concensus for such policy makers.

I believe in a quality job. So for me, if there is any reason to delay the timeline of a project in order to get the job done, it is okay.

As an investor, I think its is the road map. Specially if your a professional, you should follow the initial agreement for the investors to trust your project. That's why before you could create a god project, everything must be establish first to gain more investment because people are expecting the team to deliver.

Nice project varies on the uniqueness of the platform which stands out in the market. Also quality should also not suffer during the establishment of the road map.

Reasonable, honest roadmap without any certain delay. Some can be accebtable but it becomes routine then how can we trust them.

I don't believe in roadmaps. I prefer when developers come out with strong releases and short-term plans. Long-term ones better just to be stated without a deadline. Like Nexus team for example. They doing a great job without too much of an attention.

Agree. There should be a vision what the team will do in the long run. But short term goals are much more reliable and trustworthy

I think timely distribution is better than waiting for better results but should delay some time, because for timely division it will make it easier to find or work on other projects.

Between roadmaps n quality from a project is interrelated with each other
But for creating a project with a timely road map with good quality is quite difficult, there must be a neglected one of them.
I think quality is more important, because the quality as a determinant of success or not from a project.
So no problem there is a delay if it can create a big and successful project.
The process is time consuming
which for a long time the result will not cheat.

In my opinion, I do not trust these so-called ICO team, responsible for your own investment, I will own regular study their open source code, if the code quality is very general, so I think I will sell these tokens, rather than holding a long time.

Yes, I agree on this. The roadmap and quality are consistent when the project is established. However, there are a lot of problems that can happen when the route is broken or change, which can affect the quality and service that brings the value of practical use. That is the common problem of ICOs. They are sometimes referred to as SCAM, which lies in unsolved problems from the roadmap, and the management and operation of their team. It is also supported by partners and contracts between them. A lot of problems can happen, which can change the entire ICO.

That is a tough question. Quality is of course the most important thing in my opinion, but there is no such thing as perfection. So if you keep searching for it, there are chances that you will never end up delivering anything, and the ideas get lost.

For me it's better for the team to make reasonable delay and they deliver the perfect form of the project.They must let the the investor know what is the development progress of the project step by step though.By delivering the perfect form of the project.

On time on target is more preferable in cryptocurrency ecosystem. Cryptocurrency is a very fast market with fierce competition. The fast and the best usually win in this game not the slow and the best.

Roadmap use by everyone which provided by each ICOs in the market quality cannot be give by everyone.Each project has good team in the company and market and these companies use to give the proper care for your technology.If team is recurited by good people work can be increase and quality may be good and increase surely.

Roadmap or Quality, Of course I have to admit I prefer for a quality compared to Roadmap. Because the Roadmap I often meet is not appropriate. If Quality is good it will follow the Roadmap.

Yes, quality is the most important part in the project. But it manifests itself not only in the product. Drawing up a roadmap and clear implementation is also a quality. It is important to remember that the project does not consist only of developers. Marketing, management, legal support, advisers - all these are also important parts of the project. So the choice between roadmap and quality is not worth it. All of them are a manifestation of quality.

of course quality is the right choice even though all goes slow but the team already gives the quality of hard work then all will be good and surely later will make the price become increasing

I choose the second variant: better to wait and get a good product than get a lot of problems because of fast launch. I`m still patiently wait for Exscudo or Tezos for example, despite the fact that already more than half year passed.

Both are important essence for a coin.Roadmap specify the particular project direction,its purpose,its scope,Project durability and viabilty,promise to deliver whatever is committed whereas quality is another important factor for success of a project depends upon its quality,for example technical superiority,efforts of development team.Suppose Mercedes Benz is superior to Toyota because of clear road maps of its services and no compromise on quality in similar we can differentiate Road map and quality.When the above both the factors are well organized then that coin is for longer existent and would attract larger market attraction.

It depends on your point of view. If you are a simple investor and have plans for the near future - compliance with roadmap is more important. If you have long-term plans, quality project implementation is better. The fact is that the deviation from the road map causes the cost to fall for a relatively short period of time. Technical errors can cause more serious difficulties and lower prices.

These are important, but the team is more important. Team who will carry them out.

These are very important, because if a team does not have to complete in time for ICO project development, that means that the road map to reach, or the team's technical team is not good, unable to complete the development.

there is no benchmark in the benchmark of an ico.
myself, always judging from the whole to know if ico is really potential and has a road map. but the most important thing is, I always liked having a sophisticated technology base.

I think projects can make slight delays but let there be a good quality product . Many of course believe the opposite which is not good

both actually will really affect the price, since the news is really important on crypto world.
If we planning to hold the coins for short term, then choose Roadmap even though the quality will be lower.
But if we planning to hold the coins for long term, then choose Quality

I'd prefer quality of course.
But I guess any of the variants will lower investors loyalty to the project.