This post is a reminder for Michael Bolton and a trigger for more conversation about testers preventing problems. I do look forward for a full post by Michael as he is writing clever things in his reply to the tweet you see above on the picture and linked here.
I agree that there is no manual vs automated testing dichotomy and that all testing is exploratory. These notions make me say that exploring (a.k.a.: testing) an idea that someone at the company has is worth doing and can be called testing already. A crucial question can make grandiose ideas disappear. I would say I tested the idea and now it’s gone for the better. I’m testing already when I read a written spec.
If testing is “the process of evaluating a product by learning about it through exploration and experimentation, which includes to some degree: questioning, study, modeling, observation, inference, etc.”, which it is, according to the RST vocabulary one question remains: can I look at someone’s idea as a product?