My answer below would assume that said idea was evaluated fairly and it's not a PM Ego thing, which we must watch out for and also be open about because as a judge of these input, people have to trust you. Also you must be close and on good terms with both devs and sales, in which case it will still happen but that way my way worked best.
What I do (former PM now CEO) is an explanation of why said feature is not in scope of the product and marked as "Closed" and not just deleted. Can't be created again and merge new ones into the closed ticket with the statement and analysis of why it isn't in scope.
Then what have worked for me, is a talk about responsibility. If you as the PM is responsible for the product, it's market fit and its cost, but they want to add something, turn the cost and responsibility over to them. Is the Dev ok with taking in the cost, meeting with upper management, support and sales for said feature, and if sales OK with that feature coming out of the sales budget and support maintenence moved to them etc.
If the product starts not being able to get sold or bloats it's cost, will those people sign up to take the blame/be responsible with you?
If they push back ask them if they are OK with you doing the same to them. You as the PM have now chosen you want the devs to use X framework instead of Y or SQL and not Postgress, but they keep the responsibility for it working still, how does that sound?
As withe the devs, with sales talk their language and ask if they ok with risking a shift of ICP or product focus where they might not hit their targets and you ask them to change their sales methods to fit that, product lead vs sales lead or indeed face to face vs phone whatever.
Not turning to a friend for emotional support, is not the same as not having friends.
That study would point to men having other ways to deal with emotions or indeed bottle them up, but the phenomenon of having friends or not like OP said, perhaps isn't gendered.
What make and model?
I have not sat in a modern car where this have been a problem, ever.
I drive a model 3 Tesla with glass roof and there is simple no issues with Sun glare from the sunsglasses like filter on the glass roof.
Indoors most people indeed love windows, even moreso if they are roof windows.
I agree dont hang a spotlight in your face, but that is hadly the same as the Sun, otherwise how do people their houses walking, running biking without roofs?
The light is not incapacitating, it's simply an unnecessary annoyance.
People do love windows, but people also love window blinds that they close when the light points directly into a room. Especially if you are forced to face that window.
People who spend a lot of time outside gravitate towards wearing hats and sunglasses.
Yes. That's alot of battery life for in-ears of that size.
Also you add hours more in a 10 min charge from the case.
If you have to wear headphones for more than 5 hours straight without a few min break, you have other issues than th technology.
It did well commercially looking just at steam stats, not to mention the other platforms.
It seems like alot of that was used to turn it around to save their reputation to keep going not only with one game, but to make sure the next isn't "stay away" labeled even it is "wait and see" for many.
“That kind of poor customer service just won't fly in the US.”
First time hearing someone claim consumer protections are better in the US and the EU. People lose whole decades of data from top world top 10 largest US companies and those have no service and no consumer protection in the US nor court justice ad those where waived in their ToS.
If you didn't get the product you purchased and are in the EU you can take it to your ombudsman
Aren't most opinions locked behind an account, usually with a pay wall in front?
I don't mean new tech, speaking of traditional ones.
Politicians or whomever, interview with a journalist locked behind a cable subscription or a newspaper or magasine? Someone sharing their thoughts in their latest book bought at one of 3 places with one of the 2 available transactions companies that link you to the final "content".
My answer below would assume that said idea was evaluated fairly and it's not a PM Ego thing, which we must watch out for and also be open about because as a judge of these input, people have to trust you. Also you must be close and on good terms with both devs and sales, in which case it will still happen but that way my way worked best.
What I do (former PM now CEO) is an explanation of why said feature is not in scope of the product and marked as "Closed" and not just deleted. Can't be created again and merge new ones into the closed ticket with the statement and analysis of why it isn't in scope.
Then what have worked for me, is a talk about responsibility. If you as the PM is responsible for the product, it's market fit and its cost, but they want to add something, turn the cost and responsibility over to them. Is the Dev ok with taking in the cost, meeting with upper management, support and sales for said feature, and if sales OK with that feature coming out of the sales budget and support maintenence moved to them etc.
If the product starts not being able to get sold or bloats it's cost, will those people sign up to take the blame/be responsible with you?
If they push back ask them if they are OK with you doing the same to them. You as the PM have now chosen you want the devs to use X framework instead of Y or SQL and not Postgress, but they keep the responsibility for it working still, how does that sound? As withe the devs, with sales talk their language and ask if they ok with risking a shift of ICP or product focus where they might not hit their targets and you ask them to change their sales methods to fit that, product lead vs sales lead or indeed face to face vs phone whatever.
reply