ok ok..that isn't what was intended, I did not mean for the exact same thing to happen, ..... never mind, the whole idea just flew over y'alls head, I will just sit back and watch and wait like every one else i guess.
Well that was a little harsh don't you think?
While I can't speak for everyone else, I don't believe it flew over my head. I used to do the same thing you're doing at that game company and later served as a test department manager, so I'm pretty sure I might have an idea of where you're coming from. Although it did sound pretty clear as to what you were getting at so I think most of us here understood.
Anyway, it sounds like you're suggesting a more structured approach to beta testing than we do here. Things like the signing of those "contracts" as you referred to them (actually called NDAs aka Non Disclosure Agreements), the use of beta test reports with the PC or game console's specs, recording everything on VHS for visual reference, logging and tracking bugs via a database (local to you're the company or shared online if you're working with a publisher), etc, etc, etc.
Sure our methods on this board are rather loose by comparison, but only because it works fine for the development staff and because they haven't expressed a need for that type of structure as of yet. Now if Jim and/or Prolific should at some point feel the need to request that we do so, then I doubt that would be a problem with the testers. Since Jim has been in this industry a very long time and Prolific knows their stuff too, I'm not concerned and am more than happy to work within their guidelines.