Can QuickBase give us any/all filtering for user permissions?

Interesting that you say that about User Voice. What do you know about that? Insider information or just an opinion? Are they shifting to something else? It looks fully operational to me, although that doesn't mean their developers are actually caring about it. One of the main reasons I left Salesforce for QuickBase was the fact that they would come out with 3 new platform updates each year, and nothing they did was ever helpful to me, and nothing I voted for ever got touched. I posted something 7 years ago on their user request forum that was hit-you-over-the-head-obvious that they needed to do, and people are still piling onto it and voting for it today, and they will never do anything about it. Sad. I hope QuickBase keeps pushing on the development and fixing some of these naggy holes in the platform and really listening to us.

About half & half.  Some from conversations at Empower and some from just observations.

For example:
https://quickbase.uservoice.com/forums/111823-quick-base-product-feedback/status/426339

The 3 items they have listed as "planned" (i.e. They are going to implement them), have already been implemented over 6 months ago, and have not been updated.

That tells me that (1) nobody is monitoring it and (2) of the 500+ requests in there they haven't done anything in 6+ months.  Generally speaking there have been little to no updates from the QB staff in 6+ months. So either they are stuck in Boston traffic still, or they just don't care.

Also, when was the last time you saw somebody from QB actually contribute to the community or moderate any of the discussions.  Its the Wild West out in Citizen Development Land.

I would love to understand why software business models almost universally seem to deemphasize communication and responsiveness to user feedback and requests for platform features. Maybe I'm naive and don't understand their business, but in our business (website development and internet marketing) the relationship with the client is paramount. Our clients will go elsewhere if we stop listening or have a tin ear or don't make good in a reasonable amount of time on our implied promises. Perhaps software development companies think that the stickiness of the platform assures that they can somewhat skip the communication step. I think they are sadly mistaken.

Do you have a higher-up contact person's email address you know at QuickBase who would appreciate reading this thread and has the power to act on it? I'd love to forward this to someone.

Thanks,
Michael

I have contacts at QuickBase and will ask them to locate someone to comment on this thread as to if User Voice is being used internally at Quick Base.

I will say that they have multiple channels to listen to feedback and to my knowledge User Voice is still one of them.  To their credit, the pace of updates has been faster lately in terms of # of new features delivered and bugs fixed, and while there may have been a hiatus for a time where it was unclear if the Mercury interface would be replacing Quick Base, that has now been made crystal clear, that it is not and hence Quick Base as we know it is here to stay, they are focused among other things at "Improving the life of daily users and developers", which does mean to address many of the small things that bug us each and every day.

But I do agree if they are not updating user voice as to completed or planned items, then that is concerning.

On the very particular issue from this post (which I know is not the main issue here in this discussion), if I was a Product Manager at Quick Base with a wish list a mile long and substantially increased but still not unlimited resources, I would not rate that very high to allow complex rules in Role Permissions, since the easy work a round is to just to set up a formula field have have all the complexity you can write.

Yes, I totally agree with all of your comments. I have been very pleased with recent released, and I'm hoping they keep up their momentum. And, no, I would not vote for this particular issue, as it's too esoteric and the current mechanisms are working quite well for getting around it. It's the bigger issue of communication and feedback loops within the structures they have provided us. Thanks Mark!

I appreciate the feedback on this issue, and especially insight into User Voice, but as someone who is VERY good with formulas, I have to disagree with the analysis that it's an "easy work around to set up a formula field."  Any/All filtering would take me 5-20 minutes, while trying to translate that into checkboxes is taking me hours.  

One of the reasons we chose QuickBase is how quickly we can make required updates, but it's just not the case for this issue.  Plus, the QuickBase rep that sold it to us emphasized how easy it was to customize roles; months later, now that our growing company is really in need of quick role customization, it's quite frustrating.

I will say that I really do appreciate the updates QuickBase is making, and have generally been very useful, and their Tech Support is top notch.

On top of this, the checkbox field method is a little glitchy: one of our reps created two identical records.  The first kicked him out because he "didn't have access", the second was fine.  I triple checked everything, there is no reason that it should not have worked.  Frustrating for me, even worse for a sales rep who relies on QB when he's on the road.

TL;DR:  Work arounds are never simple.

UserVoice is a valuable tool we do often use to measure how common a given product problem really is. I have spoken to a member of the Product Development team and this issue is on their radar.  The belief is we need to reduce the need for formulas to be built often. Such as with permissions formulas, these formulas often bridge a feature gap. The PD team uses UserVoice to evaluate features and enhancements that are worked on and will continue to do so.