I have an RFI form that has a repeat section for consultants comments. In the marketing literature it shows a flow from the gatekeeper to the consultants in a parallel (non serial) workflow.
The problem I have encountered is when the form is sent to two or more consultants, and they open it roughly at the same time. The consultant who responds first will have their comments (in the form) stored on the working copy of the form. The last consultant (who may have spent the day resolving the RFI) looses there comments on the working version of the RFI. Their version is visible when you click on the version history but, the information is lost on the working version. The gatekeeper then has to spend time trying to resolve it.
If you have a Buzzsaw Site with many participants - the likelihood of this event is very high. If your plan to stay within the sites memory limit is to limit the number of versions (lets say 5). The problem is compounded since you run the risk of loosing a consultants comments when it gets rolled out as an older version. Consultant Billable Time is expensive. This is the main reason I built the from with the repeating section for comments. It does work fine when the consultants open them one after another. But I don't wnt series approval - I want parallel, like I paid for!
Question - Why doesn't Buzzsaw's Gatekeeper workflow, work as stated?
Will Autodesk prorate my contract based on unsupported features?