On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Hagar Delest <hagar.del...@laposte.net> wrote: > Le 14/03/2013 15:10, Rob Weir a écrit : > >> But if only a small minority of users know about voting, and we have a >> large collection of ancient votes, then the votes are less meaningful >> and relevant. That's my main concern. I don't believe that the vote >> counts necessarily reflect current reality. Look at the requests we >> received when we did the Google Moderator feedback requests. To me >> that is more meaningful, since it is more current. > > > Argh, no! > The Google moderator was a total mess. At least the BZ is very detailed, not > that difficult to use, you can subscribe and have a discussion about the > problem.
Google Moderator was far easier to use for users than BZ is. That is why we received far more feedback with Moderator. I'm sorry that the troglodytes don't like that. > Voting in BZ is not more difficult than on Google Moderator. > Why should ancient votes be less valid? They are still the expression of a > large install base. > They are less valid because they are ancient and do not necessarily reflect what today's users want. > > >> One way to improve this might be to remind users about voting via a >> blog post. If we have more users involved in voting it becomes more >> meaningful. Maybe even wipe out old votes, so we are looking at >> actual current user wants. Then make votes more visible by creating >> periodic reports on issues with the most votes. And when we fix an >> issue that had a lot of votes, maybe we blog about that. > > > What nonsense! So because ASF took hold of the code they should restart from > scratch and annihilate all the previous feedback? Yes. That is an accurate statement of my belief here. Feedback from 2002 issues, no matter how many ancient votes were attached, is meaningless in 2013. Note: if you are correct, that these votes are still relevant, then new votes would quickly yield the same distribution and the same issues would quickly end up with the same prioritization. And if I am correct we would get a different distribution. But you must admit that if we did reset that votes and a different distributed emerged, then the new distribution would be the more accurate and more relevant one. So I don't see what you are afraid of. Why not get the most accurate feedback possible? > If we can't handle an issue, then let's tell it in the report itself what is > lacking (manpower / expertise / ...). > What would be the advantage of a blog post? No attachment allowed I guess, > so it would be a loss of interactivity with the users. > Read what I wrote. I suggested that we "remind users about voting via a blog post." I never said anything about collecting feedback via blog post comments. The idea would be to have a blog post that explains how voting works and inviting users to vote in BZ. In other words, making it so votes are not only filtered through forum volunteers and their recommendations. Open it up. > In the forums, we have always encouraged users to file reports and vote for > the issues so that they get attention from the developers. It has always > been said that the only interface between devs and users should be the BZ. > And even if it's not very user-friendly at first, I agree that this is the > best way: it makes the reporters state clearly what they want and this is > not that easy enough to filter the requests. Users who really wants to make > their problem known do bother filing a report, the others don't and it means > that it is not a really important idea. > How would a blog be analyzed by the devs exactly? > You misunderstand. We should still use BZ to collect feedback on BZ issues. My suggestions were aimed at making this feedback more relevant, so it is not just project insiders voting, but getting a greater representation of what users want. We have had over 40 million downloads. How many of these users having voted? How many even know they can vote. You asked why the votes are ignored. I'm suggesting that if the feedback is ancient and unrepresentative, that could be one reason. > Sometimes users wonder why bugs scoring many votes don't get any attention. > Any attempt to cancel the votes or change the way users chose their > priorities would be detrimental to the project credibility. I would > personally be very annoyed by such a behavior and would stop filing reports, > voting for bugs and I would also stop advising the use of BZ at all. > I'm telling you why I think the ancient votes are ignored. That's my belief. You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But I think we agree that the votes are ignored today. > If you consider the weeds as the myriad of reports with few votes, then we > have some rocks to concentrate on (the top rated by votes). Once the latter > are removed, then let's talk about how to handle the garden. > > Hagar > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
