On Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 10:39:01 AM UTC+1, Erik Bray wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Erik Bray <erik....@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 6:59 PM, Vincent Delecroix > > <20100.d...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > >> On 05/07/16 12:51, leif wrote: > >>> > >>> Vincent Delecroix wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 05/07/16 09:53, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> As an experiment, we would like to > >>>>> install https://trac-hacks.org/wiki/VotePlugin > >>>>> on trac.sagemath.org. This would allow voting on tickets (w.r.t. > their > >>>>> popularity, etc), > >>>>> and probably more. > >>>>> > >>>>> Voting would be restricted to people with a trac account. > >>>>> > >>>>> Any substantial objections to this? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes. What is the point of voting for tickets? > >>> > >>> > >>> Fun. > >> > >> > >> Except that: > >> > >> - It would be one more thing to maintain > > > > Not a problem. > > > >> - It would introduce a bias in ticket order (maybe good, maybe bad) > > > > Could go either way. I don't think it's binding. > > > >> - In the current proposal, it is not at all clear how these vote will > be > >> used > > > > That's why I suggested Dima bring it up here. It shouldn't be enabled > > without some discussion as to how it is used. > > > >> Anyway, if it is only for fun it is a -1 from me. > > > > Definitely not only for fun. +1 for me with the provision that we > > decide how best to use it (and with the further qualification that it > > may not be clear how best to use it until we go ahead and try it, and > > adjust the strategy as reflected by real world use). > > Also I'd be in favor of enabling it for anonymous users at first. I > think limiting it to people who already have Trac accounts limits its > usefulness. Yes, there's possibility for abuse, but if one person > really spams votes for a ticket, they either: >
Well, is it possible to require some kind of voter authentication, e.g. via an OpenID? One vote per OpenID seems to be reasonable. This would also prevent accidental multiple clicks. > > a) Must have a really good reason if they're that determined, so > maybe it's still worth looking at, ad > b) It will probably be obvious where there's been abuse > > I don't think we need to institute a policy that a ticket that has > high votes *must* be given priority. But it would be helpful to have > the metric (in principle). > > Anyways, if we enable it and it turns out to be a disaster it's about > 1 minute of my time to disable it and no harm is done. > > It is still worth discussing how best to use it though. On what > resources do we want to enable voting? Tickets, obviously. But others > are possible too. How do want to use the votes? Do we want to add > some reports that take number of votes into account? Etc., etc. I > don't know the answers to these questions. Dima might be best to put > out an initial proposal since it's in part to help his research. > I don't mind if votes are anonymised (this would hopefully take away all sorts of ethical issues arising potentially). Do you know if this plugin allows this? Thanks, Dima > > Best, > Erik > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
