Where's the Next one ?

No question any more. For a while.

We will concentrate our efforts on a different kind of learning exercises and I will try to cover them here also. The conclusion post will be here also after I have spoken to each of them individually.

The most interesting question came from one of the testers and needs to be discussed.

"What good is discussing about theories we cannot use in practise?"

Meaning, that most of our question and discussions have been on abstract level and are therefore not easily applicable in practise. And as we are involved with embedded software, there are some testing techniques we cannot use and so on. This needs further discussion.

End of Round Eight

Why?

To explain your previous decisions.

My view.

Every once-in-a-while you have to explain something you did a while back. It might be a test plan you did or error you set as solved. How easy that would be to explain your actions from 2 weeks ago? 2 months ago? And if new information has emerged about the situation, what then? It is rather difficult to accept that your decision was wrong or inaccurate.

The explanation or reasoning must not look like babbling or looking-for-excuses, it must show the facts you were using and thought-process around that. And preferably a note for the future how to avoid problems from now on.



The following are the answeres I received:

Tester 1:
a) Testing has inference, which consists comparison of new to old results. - For example, when testing a bug fix. We are also verifying whether and how the behavior has changed compared to the previous results.

b) Intuition is a good beginning, but a inadequate conclusion. - Although it is grammatically incorrect, it means that when you have an intuition of something then it is a good start for doing it, because then you know where to start. But it is not enough for conclusion.

c) Without knowledge testing is an ignorance-based process. - You don't know how to test something if you have no knowledge of testing and the product.

d) You're not who's fool, if someone says you're a fool. - It's like that thing with shovel and a hole.

Tester 2:
a) Testing using inference, is the comparison of expectations to the results.
Reliable conclusions are based on accurate test results & comparison of your own expectations to the results.

b) Intuition is a fertile beginning for a good conclusion.
Sometimes the answers are not quite there. You need some intuition to get to the right track.

c) Releasing without testing is for ignorance-based organizations.
Being too self-confident can blow up in your face. The bigger they are, the higher they fall!

d) You're not a fool, if you think you're a fool. Socrates: "The more you know, the more you know you dont know". Knowing about not knowing something is more valuable than not knowing that you dont know something.

Tester 3:
a) If I look at my sentence now - then if I remove word "inference", then the sentence makes sense.
b) "Natural beginning -> advising definite conclusion" - if the starting presumptions are good enough, then the results are more accurate.
c) Beer plus testing - it can`t give objective results, so it can`t be real testing - so it is something else. For example testers holiday.
d) Admitting that something is wrong is the first step for solution. Even Murdock from the A-Team admitted that he was crazy.

Tester 4:
a) Testing and inference, essential for comparison of estimated to actual results. -
I picked and for the first cap because i tried to show that both, inference and testing are parts of the process. Testing as an active process and inference as a result. Both must be done to compare estimated and actual results which were my easy two picks for this sentence.

b) Intuition is a path beginning, report a test conclusion. -
Picked path for the first cap because there are numerous times when you intuition tells you what to test. Report and test were used on other caps because report follows and concludes every test session.

c) Unfocusing on testing is causing ignorance-based risks. -
The word combination ignorance-based do go hand in hand in many cases. The other caps were filled to make this sentence seem to make some sence.

d) You're a double fool, if dumbass thinks you're a fool. -
There is always a need for a bit of humour and populism. The sentence included words that are rather easy to use for generating something that others may like. Tested the possibility for populism in our small group, as voting showed, i failed.

Tester 5:
a) Testing is inference, it is comparison of expected to actual results.
You have to inference logically what could happen if you do something and then compare the results to what you expected.

b) Intuition is a good beginning, logic a good conclusion.
It is always good to follow your intuition, but you can not base your
conclusions on it. You need facts/proofs for that and logic is a good way to get them.

c) Without specifications testing is like ignorance-based wandering.
Good spec is a base for testing. I do not only mean by spec the requirements but
also specs how to test and what to test. If you do not have those its is just wandering.

d) You're considered a fool, if you think you're a fool.
If you think yourself as a fool, you will act accordingly subconsciously. Thus making
yourself seen as a fool.

Tester 6:
a) Testing results inference, obtained by comparison of reference to actual results.
- It’s clever to compare different situations and results to find commonality and differences. It’s much easier to operate in known environment.
b) Intuition is a simple beginning, resulting a complicated conclusion.
– Intuition is a part of all decisions.
c) Necessity of testing is avoiding ignorance-based errors.
– You shouldn’t make mistakes because you are just lazy or didn’t check twice.
d) You're not that fool, if you think you're a fool.
– It’s important to acknowledge your soft spots.

Tester 7:
a) Testing logical inference, is practical comparison of conclusions to actual results.
As inferences can be verified only by verifying actual results.

b) Intuition is a correct beginning, after a wrong conclusion.
As you can act correctly by intuition even if you don't have enough information to make correct conclusions.

c) Black box testing is not ignorance-based testing.
Testing without knowing inner structure of test object don't mean that you can test it without having enough information about it's expected behavior.

d) You're not a fool, if you think you're a fool.
Only person who accepts his fallibility, can reach to correct conclusions about himself.

Tester 8:
Testing for inference, aim is comparison of reference to actual results - One main aim in testing is to get an overview of tested product and it is achieved by comparing its functioning and behavior with a reference, manual or even own logic.

Intuition is a testing-process beginning, error-report a successful conclusion - Every testing-process should start with idea or aim and should end with conclusion (and with error-reports when bugs are found).

Despite theories, testing is totally ignorance-based activity - Testing theories may be followed and great ideas may be used, but tester himself with his activities will determinate the efficiency of his work.

You're testing as fool, if work-results states you're a fool - Different testing approaches should be used with different products and systems. Also there are not a complex system without a flaw or even minor error. Tester work-results are reflecting his ability to use his knowledge in testing-process.

Eighth Question

Why did You choose the words you did for the last week question ?
Explain your reasoning.

End of Round Seven

Why?

Creativity & English grammar

My view?

Well.
English grammar first. The sentences must make sense and not only in general, but also be grammatically correct. Which is harder than it looks for non-native speakers.
That is easy to understand and learn.

Creativity about making different statements about testing is more challenging. The pre-made sentences gave rough guidelines, but noting too specific.
The originals are:

· Testing requires inference, not just comparison of output to expected results.
· Intuition is a fine beginning, but a lousy conclusion.
· Black box testing is not ignorance-based testing.
· You're harder to fool, if you know you're a fool.

Explaining the deeper meaning of these will be a left as homework :p

The following are the answeres i received:

Tester 1:
a) Testing has inference,which consists comparison of new to old results.
b) Intuition is a good beginning, but a inadequate conclusion.
c) Without knowledge testing is an ignorance-based process.
d) You're not who's fool, if someone says you're a fool.

Tester 2:
a) Testing and inference, essential for comparison of estimated to actual results.
b) Intuition is a path beginning, report a test conclusion.
c) Unfocusing on testing is causing ignorance-based risks.
d) You're a double fool, if dumbass thinks you're a fool.

Tester 3:
a) Testing logical inference, is practical comparison of conclusions to actual results.
b) Intuition is a correct beginning, after a wrong conclusion.
c) Black box testing is not ignorance-based testing.
d) You're not a fool, if you think you're a fool.

Tester 4:
a) Testing any inference, is simply comparison of theory to actual results.
b) Intuition is a natural beginning, advising a definite conclusion.
c) Beer plus testing is abstractly ignorance-based fun.
d) You're not a fool, if you think you're a fool.

Tester 5:
a) Testing results inference, obtained by comparison of reference to actual results.
b) Intuition is a simple beginning, resulting a complicated conclusion.
c) Necessity of testing is avoiding ignorance-based errors.
d) You're not that fool, if you think you're a fool.

Tester 6:
a) Testing for inference, aim is comparison of reference to actual results.
b) Intuition is a testing-process beginning, error-report a successful conclusion.
c) Despite theories, testing is totally ignorance-based activity.
d) You're testing as fool, if work-results states you're a fool.

Tester 7:
a) Testing is inference, it is comparison of expected to actual results.
b) Intuition is a good beginning, logic a good conclusion.
c) Without specifications testing is like ignorance-based wandering.
d) You're considered a fool, if you think you're a fool.

Tester 8:
a) Testing using inference, is the comparison of expectations to the results.
b) Intuition is a fertile beginning for a good conclusion.
c) Releasing without testing is for ignorance-based organizations.
d) You're not a fool, if you think you're a fool.

Seventh Question

Complete the sentences, one word for each underlining.

a) Testing ____ inference, ____ ____ comparison of ____ to ____ results.

b) Intuition is a ____ beginning, ____ a ____ conclusion.

c) ____ ____ testing is ___ ignorance-based _____.

d) You're ____ ____ fool, if ____ ____ you're a fool.

End of Round Six

Why?

To make tester think before attempting to solve problems

My view.

Logical proof can be given from two points – first is that you can prove that the statement is true. The other is that you can prove that it is false. In this case it is quite problematic to prove logically that the sun rises, due to the fact that rising sun is optical illusion as the earth rotates around its axis. But which is more important – empirical knowledge that the sun has been rising as long as mankind remembers or that some scientist claim that earth is spinning and rotating the sun?

Logical proof is based on simple rules – if the precondition is false then even logically true conclusion is also false. Plus few other rules.

I would suggest to use the other solution and show that the sun does not rise.


The following are the answers I received:

Tester 1:
It is clearly a matter of fact and it seems logical that the earth’s
rotation on its axis as it goes around the sun causes the effect of the
sun rising each morning. But will it also continue rising tomorrow? Our
belief is that the sun will rise tomorrow because it always has done in
the past. But the future cannot be deduced by the past, so it is logically
possible that the sun will not rise tomorrow. We have no rational basis
for believing that the sun will rise tomorrow also.

Tester 2:
Rising Sun is only an optical illusion.
Actually Earth is turning so, that observer is starting to see Sun appearing after it was hidden by Earth.
So this effect can't be logically proofed. But it can be described and repeatedly verified by observers.

Tester 3:
The proof that sun rises in the morning is based on the fact that sun has been observed to raise in a very large number of times. Also, the history has not registered any occasions where the sun did not raise in the morning. The third component in that logical proof might be that the rotation of the earth is always a constant. That tells us the sun should rise on an expected time, which we usually define as the morning. Altho this is a logical proof to the question, it does not prove the fact that sun will always keep rising(in the mornings).

Tester 4:
Tester has to be precise and accurate. He can't give logical proofs or sweet talk to fuzzy questions or some facts that are false.
It is known that Earth is spinning around the Sun and Sun can be seen when earth surface is towards it. It is also known that Sun can be seen at day and cannot at night. Also in the morning Sun can be first seen at east and last beams can be seen in the evening from the west (it is caused by the Earth rotation).
Therefore there isn't accurate answer to this foggy question because the Sun is not rising from anywhere in the mornings, Earth movement is causing the sunrise effect.

Tester 5:
by definition: morning is the period of time between dawn and noon.
Empirical knowledge gathered by our ancestors during the last 200,000 years, states that sun rises on planet earth.
Therefore: Sun rises in the mornings on planet earth.

Tester 6:
Sun doesn’t rise at all. The Sun is stationary. Earth revolves around the Sun and rotates around itself. Rotation of Earth around itself causes days and nights. Morning is just the name we've given to the time when Earth spinning makes the Sun appear at the beginning of the day.

Tester 7:
As the Sun is so enormously huge, then:
SUN + RISING = SUN SUN + FALLING = SUN
SUN + MORNING = SUN
SUN + EVENING = SUN

So:
RISING = FALLING
MORNING = EVENING

And also:
MORNING = RISING
EVENING = FALLING

As Earth is so tiny, then:
EARTH < SUN

We can add the same argument to both sides:
EARTH + MORNING < SUN + MORNING
EARTH + MORNING < SUN + RISING

So it shows that there are less mornings on Earth than there are Sun risings, meaning that on some morning the Sun won`t rise...


Tester 8:
First of all we we can not define the sunrise for the planet as a whole. The sun is always present for half the Earth,
so the sunrise can be only defined for a small area on Earth.
All planets in solar system spin around their center. One turn that earth makes, is considered one day. Morning
is defined by sunrise (when current location on earth turns toward the sun). So until the earth keeps spinning
there is sunrise. Whether we call this moment a morning or evening or with some other word is question on agreement.

Sixth Question

Give a logical proof that the Sun rises in the mornings on planet Earth.

End of Round Five

Why?

To make testers ask questions.

My view:

The question was deliberately formed so confusing. Without real question or assignment. So that you would do what you would normally do when given confusing task.
After questioning the missing question that part was revealed – “Which are not true?”
The question itself is a bit weird as those four sentences are not logically true by themselves. More questions should have been asked J

Evil? Yes.

So the missing starts of those sentences are:
Exploration testing is A)
Test Condition is B).
Integration testing is best described as C)
Exploratory testing is D)

And so – which are note true?

Wait for it.



All of them are not true.



The following are the answers :
The first 3 testers came asking what was missing. But just one time.

Tester 1:
These four given points can be formed into two groups: A and C versus B and D.
1) A and C have a dot at the end of the sentence, which B and D do not have.
2) B and D are based mainly on guessing, systematic behavior is minimized.

Tester 2:
All of the answers are incorrect answers from ISTQB Foundation level mock exam.
Depending on the question however one of them might be true. Not knowing the question it is hard to know the correct answer.

Tester 3:
All tasks are part of testing (gathering information about product, possible configurations and weak-spots; setting system to start condition and verifying that this condition is the correct one).

a) A systematic approach to identifying specific equivalent classes of input - it is a task what is part of testing and done firstly after obtaining testing task - true
b) The steps to be taken to get the system to a given point - it is a task what is part of testing and what is done right before testing - true
c) Testing to verify that the test environment can be integrated with the product - it is a task what is part of testing and what is done right before testing - true
d) The process of anticipating or guessing where defects might occur - it is a task what is part of testing and done firstly after obtaining testing task – true

Tester 4:
If I had to choose one of those definitions, it would have to be the one, where the essence of exploratory testing shines through the brightest:
d) The process of anticipating or guessing where defects might occur

Tester 5:
At first there is no instructions what to do with given list.
As tester I can assume that this is a list of test technique descriptions for
a)Equivalence Partitioning
b)State Transitions
c)Integration Testing
d)Bug Hunting.

Tester 6:
All these steps are related with test case designing.
D - Select specific test cases draw on error guessing
A - Identify input values
B - Make test sequences
C - Be confirmed that test cases covers the testing area

Tester 7:
This weeks question requires the question itself. Question could be: Which of the following describes exploratory testing?

Tester 8:
Specifications are needed to perform these actions and use these methods for testing.

Fifth Question

a) A systematic approach to identifying specific equivalent classes of input.
b) The steps to be taken to get the system to a given point
c) Testing to verify that the test environment can be integrated with the product.
d) The process of anticipating or guessing where defects might occur.

End of Round Four

Why?
Two main points: creativity and assessment of situation.

My view
In that situation you are left with two options:
1) Tell the joke
2) Get out of telling it
Firstly, it is very hard to make a neutral joke in general. In the current situation You’d have to consider that can be joked about and whatnot. You ‘d have to consider what would happen if the CEO or someone at his side would be offended by the joke. Nor should it be something that the CEO does not understand – making him look bad/stupid. That does not leave much room for topics on what to joke about. Most probable should be something that everyone dislikes – computer problems or state bureaucracy for example. Or if you know anything about the CEO you can use that info to find a common “enemy” – violin players. Etc.

Secondly, getting out of it seems best way not to offend the CEO, but in the same time You should consider how it makes You (and Your company) look. You should not appear dim-witted or shy. Probably the best way to get out of it is by pointing the heat to someone else stating that he/she is the funniest guy here. That is easy for you but not so good for the company if the guy does not live up to your statement.

So there are no easy options. Be creative. And remember the CEO and others are just people too.

The following are the answers :

Tester 1:
“Sorry I'm a little busy at the moment, I just found a huge bug in the product you are using. Maybe a little bit later?“

Tester 2:
“In Estonia to make a joke, you need a joke tooth.
After verification I am sorry to admit that joke tooth is lost.”

Tester 3:
(When after introduction it can be recognized that CEO knows something about his company products and have a sense of humour)
”I have been using B&O DVD2 as an external source for two days now and it hasn't crash once!”

Tester 4:
“How many hardware engineers does it take to change a light bulb?
- None. We'll fix it in software."

Tester 5:
“Question: How many software testers does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: None. Software testers just noticed that the room was dark. Testers don't fix the problems, they just find them.”


Tester 6:
Choosing a joke for that kind of a conversation really depends on how well the conversation has evolved and how much i've noticed what my opponent actually likes. Without getting to know him well enough it is always easier to go with classic and rather simple jokes to be sure he understands it properly.
So here is what i'd tell him:

”Customer: Gee, if these machines are sold way under cost like you state they are, how do you make a living?"
Salesman: Simple.... we make our money fixing them."

Tester 7:
"Q: Homeless guy finds a computer and switches it on. What is the first thing he would check?
A: The content of Recycle Bin."

Tester 8:
“We cleaned our office four days for your half an hour tour around our company. And you looked only half of rooms.”

Fourth Question

Situation:

The company you work for is hosting their biggest client/partner CEO. The CEO is given a tour around your company, meeting everyone. After approaching your desk and introductions, the CEO asks: “Please, tell me a joke?”

What do you say?

End of Round Three

Why This Question:
Various approaches, reasons why people see different things.

My view:
This is all about changing the way you think. The movement is an optical illusion, on the actual picture the position of the girl is changed – it is either this or that. It does not show the movement from one position to the other. Your brain substitutes that so it is easier to comprehend.

As you can make yourself see the movement both ways – you should always try the same whilst testing or thinking what to test. This forces you to look at the problem from a different angle (in case of the spinning girl it is most obvious). Additionally, this is also why you notice some thing that others do not notice.



The following are the answers :

Tester 1:
In limited period of time girls image was verified:
Girls image is changing direction of spinning but by shadow girl is spinning counter clockwise.
So there is controversy or bug in moving image.

Tester 2:
The direction can be both, clockwise and counter-clockwise, depending on how to look at the picture. It is more easy to change the directions "in your mind" without looking at the picture first. After making up your mind, it should spin the way you want it. Changing the direction "on the fly" is tougher, but still managed to do it.

Tester 3:
According to the specification (Internet) the girl should spin clockwise and counter-clockwise, depend how to look.
Actual result:
5 min testing period 70% of the time I see that the girl spinning clockwise and rest of time counter-clockwise. It was really hard to change the spinning direction.
Note:
It’s not cool to confuse the user, that he doesn’t know any more what is a correct answer and he start to doubt his healthy mind.
Because of this we suggest to change the specification and behavior, that the girl not spinning any more at all.

Tester 4:
This image shows that the assumptions we make first, might not always be the right ones. We might see the girl spinning clockwise first, but after looking it for some time we see it spinning counter-clockwise. It is always important to make sure what is exactly happening.
After finding a bug it is very important to investigate what is the reason why something happens, because it could very easily be the outcome of some wrong configuration or setup.

Tester 5:
After a little staring I came to the conclusion that the direction of the girls spin is a question of perception. You can force your brain to interpret the incoming visual data both ways, although it is not easy to do so.
We do not have enough visual information to determine the absolute direction of spin (the one that is not dependent on the side of the brain we prefer to use). For us to do so, we would need an additional light source in the room, which would add texture to the girls curves.

Tester 6:
There are not any correct answer to this question or she is spinning both ways.
This .gif file is consisting of 34 frames and firstly girl is changing stretched legs (at certain moment shes right foot is stretched out and later left) and secondly stretched leg shadow is varying (at certain moment shadow is shown when shes back is toward us and later when shes bellybutton is).

Tester 7:
Girl changes its spinning direction, so it depends when you look at the image.
From testing point of view, it means that you have to take time to observe the situation for a while before making a decision. It can be that it is some kind of optical illusion again and the girl do not spin at all :)

Tester 8:
Spinning of the girl is ultimately relative.
Depending on the point of view there are at least 4 possibilities:
1.-2. The girl spins clockwise / counterclockwise.
3.-4. The viewer circles around the girl clockwise / counterclockwise (the girl stands still).

Third Question

Which way does the girl spin?

End of Round Two

Why This Question:
Point of view, perspective, focusing.

My view:
Yes - It is a old one. And Yes – there is a text between the shapes.
And it can be seen only from further away or blurring or by focusing on the space between. Too easy? Yes.
But this is the same way we miss important information while not investigating seemingly obvious “picture”.

The point is that one should Always look at least twice. And read twice as well. And well.. have more sex.



The following are the answers :

Tester 1:
Testing is like vodka - from a distance everything might seem bright and clear, but closer look gives errors.

Tester 2:
Picture is based on the optical effect and on the peculiarity of how human brain
interprets what we see. Actually the picture is no more than black shapes with some
black lines connected to it. Depending how we focus our sight, either on the objects
themselves or space between them we can see different things. Either three dimensional shapes or text forming out of the space between them. The same can be applied on testing. We can get different results from same area of testing by focusing on it differently!

Tester 3:
1. This picture is about 1/2 of A4 paper size.
2. This picture is monochrome.
3. Consist of tridimensional shapes.
4. Most of shapes are quadrangles.
5. These shapes look like strange characters.
6. It's seems that there are 3 row of text.

Tester 4:
Sometimes close observation does not tell us much about the phenomena we are observing. How do you describe an elephant when you've only seen its trunk? To gain perspective things sometimes need to be observed from afar. In this case the picture is talking to us on many levels. On the trivial level it seems like a pile of lego blocks. But when watching it while being a little further away from the monitor, a priceless aphorism can be observed.

Tester 5:
To see the words in this picture, you must close your eyes a little bit and look through your eyelashes or increase distance from the picture until it becomes readable. So, it is important to know "what" to do and "how" to do it, to understand the picture.

We have to know also how we can do things and what we need to know for doing these things. For that, we have spec., which, mostly, tells us what and how, and our own knowledge. We also have to look at things from a different point of view, from a different angle, because there is always a possibility to do things differently and for that we need to know what we can do and how we can do it.

Tester 6:
Sometimes it's important to read between the lines, do not be distractred by strong contoures. The cut pieces say NO SEX CAUSES BAD EYES

Tester 7:
On the picture there are three depressing situations of not well played complex Tetris game.
There are a number of different shape and size boxes with two white sides and one black side toward us when picture is examined impartially. However usually people are not looking things neutrally and mind is always trying to associate or assume everything with our own knowledge, experience or hunch. It may be positive or negative - it may lead us to a correct answer, however it may also disturb finding one. Things must be examined and described neutrally from different aspects when we like to be objective, precise and accurate.
Although, answers will also give a good describe of testers sexual habits..

Tester 8:
Describing a picture or testing a test object is always in context of previous experience and additional information we have.
As I don't know nothing about meaning or other parameters in sequence of objects visible in picture, then I concentrate on describing visual form of object sequence.

Picture description

I see a sequence of objects with different shapes.
Objects are located in three rows.
All objects are composed from limited selection of shapes.
Maine shapes are rectangular and triangular shapes. Additionally there are rounded corners and sharp(opposite to rounded) corners.

There can be seen some regularity:
If there is rounded corner in object, then there is always sharp corner in opposing side of second or previous object.
Triangular shapes are also opposing each other.

2nd Question

Describe the following picture:

End of Round One

Why this question:
To talk about usability of metrics.

Idea Behind:
Theoretically all aspects of any given process cannot be measured. Complete controllability would mean that all possible states could be achieved from all others states which of course is also practically impossible.

So what and how can be measured? Measuring can be qualitative or quantitative.
Example:

The speedometer of the car is needle pointing at number 60 – so you know that the speed of the car is around 60 km/h. You do not know exactly due to the number of small factors. You check the GPS and see that it shows 59,1 km/h.

You are very hungry, typically describable as “ I could eat a horse”. You do not know how hungry you are but you know it is very hungry and typically you know you’d have to eat 3 Big Macs to be satiated.

In both cases you can take control of the situation – you can brake if you see a sharp corner coming up and you could go and eat something.

The point is, that even if you cannot quantitatively measure the process you can still take rational measures to control the process.

We cannot exactly know how much we have tested or how many bugs are in the software – but based on the knowledge what we have done and previous experience we can make reasonable decisions on what to do next.


Below are the answers i received:

Tester 1:
b. - Process is controllable if it is measurable and controllable. Measurable means that we can gather useful information from particular situation (how was it done, what happened) and controllable means that we can reproduce that situation with certain action and it was not generated accidentally.
Even with simple process we can not assure that all variables are considered and because of that we can not state that our process is completely measurable or controllable.

Tester 2:
a) … it is measurable
If there is nothing that can be measured in the process then there is no way to control it.

Tester 3:
b) ... it is measurable and controllable

For the process to be controllable you'll have to be able to control it with an input signal. You will also have to be able to measure its parameters to determine if the process has achieved the desired state.

The control & measuring processes do not have to be absolute. In fact - they cannot be. There will always be a measurement error and therefore the current state of the process can only be estimated from a series of measurings.
The required accuracy for measuring depends on the process. Tolerance for measurement error is much lower in nuclear power plants than say... consumer thermometers. However both of these processes are controllable.

Tester 4:
My choice is b).
In real world only very limited processes can be completely measurable and controllable. Measuring is not enough to achieve control over a process.

Tester 5:
A-Process is controllable in range where it's measurable. It's not necessary that process should be completely measurable. B and D are not a correct because 'controllable' cannot be in same time a precondition and a result. (Similar example: Shape is _square_ if it is _square_ and have 4 right angles.)

Tester 6:
Correct answer is B. Process must be measurable to get the info
about it and controllable to be able to change the input based from measurement info.
The correct answer can not be D because no process can be fully measurable or controllable because of faults, time constraints or lack of accuracy.

Tester 7:
Process is completely controllable if it is completely measurable and completely controllable. If the process is fully measurable and controllable, the control system can use signals to send process to a desired state from any of the proccess's states, including initial state.

First Question

Only then is a process controllable if:
a) … it is measurable
b)… it is measurable and controllable
c)… it is completely measurable
d)… it is completely measurable and completely controllable

Conclusion time!

I was pretty cruel on the testers asking them to after 1-month vacation what they remember about the questions and answers. And more importantly what they think was important for them. And did this one-by-one as I told them what had thought of their answers.

Most of them did not remember much from the first look - but after reminding of the questions they seemed to recall the ideas behind them. Which is very good. I did not expect them to remember everything but to recall it when something triggered it.

Due to the voting of the best answers (to win a case of beer) one important trend was noticed:

"The winning answer does not have to be the most correct on, but it needs to be very well expressed."

Which in my mind goes a long way. When situation is complicated and the solutions are all not-so-good and/or confusing - the most understandable version is used.

For example:
When somebody asks You
"Where are the long arm and short arm of the chronometer pointing?"
Would you know to tell the time?


On the whole everyone agreed that these questions are good exercises:
*) Reminding to look stuff from another angle
*) Getting out of daily routine
*) Making their mind work on different things than usual.


I hope this has been good experience also to those following this blog.
New questions are coming soon...


PS. Changes for new "season" no winner will be selected each time, all votes that testers answers get over the 8 questions will be counted and whoever gets most - wins.
(Secret vote, naturally).

Where is the new one ?

Sorry. Not any more. At least for a while. It is vacation time now - go and rest and dream and imagine. Will be back in August.

Conclusion coming up before that.

End of Round Eight

Why this question ?
The point was to show that same thing can be named differently – tester has to understand the essence of things and thus see beyond the words and grasp the idea behind them.

My view:
In essence they are all the same.
“Ad Hoc” is the first that emerged in late 80s, then “Rapid” and “Exploratory” and then “Agile”. With the “Agile” being a derived from the agile development terminology that came with scrum and other rapid development models. Different testing gurus (or companies selling training) have been using a bit different words to make their idea stand out.

Actually I do not care what term is used for the testing as long as the basics are still the same:
· Explorative mindset
· Session-based
· Learning during testing
· All error related tasks (reporting, reproducing, regression testing, etc.)
· All kinds of different testing techniques can be used


Before the discussion the answer nr.10 was voted the best.

The following are all the answers I received :
(Spelling not corrected. )

Tester 1:
Rapid Testing- It is based on exploratory testing and is used when time limit is low. Finds the biggest bugs in the shortest time.

Tester 2:
Exploratory Testing is a testing method that is tester-specific in the sense that it relies heavily on the testers to find new approaches to testing and their ability to interpret the results obtained by those new approaches. It emphasizes the personal engagement of the tester to find out how software 'works' and to use that knowledge to pinpoint possible faults & bottlenecks in the software. In this sense Exploratory Testing is more like a mindset rather than a clearly defined testing method.

Tester 5:
Ad Hoc Testing:
Testing person have free hands to explore, twist, torture device as he likes and no documentation doesn't have to be written about it (only error reports). This method relies on tester improvisation and is most effective on finding quickly big bugs.

Tester 9:
Rapid testing - testing method to test the software with very limited resources (time, manpower, ...)
using the tester skills and heuristic methods.

Tester 10:
Ad Hoc Testing - tester most preferred testing method! It is part of exploratory testing but it is the least formal among others - free choice of path, performed with improvisation, no documentation, no reports - just pure fun of creative and productive testing!

Tester 11:
Agile testing - Testing the product from an end customers viewpoint rather than testers viewpoint. Testing the product as soon as possible, when the newest code becomes available.

Tester 13:
Exploratory testing is any testing to the extent that the tester actively
controls the design of the tests as those tests are performed and uses
information gained while testing to design new and better tests.
The heart of exploratory testing can be stated simply: "The outcome of
this test influences the design of the next test.