What Changes to the new Feature Voting System should be made?

There are flaws in the new voting system. Uncle Linden has stated that LL is listening for us to lobby for changes, so here's our chance.

Please vote for all features you want to see added, or vote "None of the above".

For Linden responses, see:
/invalid_link.html

More of an addition than a change, but it'd be cool if you could sort the suggestions in different ways, say, by catagory, recently added, lowest rated, etc.

Also a Bug Fix catagory would be nice, since it was mentioned that some bugs were being added.

I don't think there should be an option to vote against something. If it's a truly horrible Idea it probably won't get voted. It's better to use your votes to support something needful or innovative ;0

*Negative votes are positive for the community; they are not abuseable if "props" are kept anonymous to the public
*As Linden Labs has the ability to cross-reference voting by account information, they have the ability and IMO obligation to eliminate duplicate votes
*Bugs and features should not be lumped together

The above is intended as positive feedback, instead of just saying the system should be scrapped because it was flawed from inception.

EDIT: Also meant to point out, proposals being "accepted" does give back votes. I believe they are given back when proposals are scrapped as well.

What about the case of props languishing in the system unattended...?

I paid for additional accounts, I paid more, therefore I should get to vote more. If the benefits of extra accounts , including additional votes, aren't worth ten more dollars per account to you then you don't deserve to have as much say as those willing to pay more.

While community feedback is undeniably important -- there are some things that people should not be allowed to vote on.

For example: joe binks votes on a highly technical subject. He has no technical knowledge of what he's voting on. At best he may know in "laymans" terms what he's voting on --

However joe binks has no idea on the actual reality of the situation. He has no idea of the technical challenges of supporting or developing x feature. It also allows joe binks the opportunity to participate in manipulating feature priorities along with hundreds or thousands more who are also in the same range of technical accumen.

Ultimately I think a segregation of the feature request/voting system if any system would provide more accurate feedback from the community. No use skewing results by allowing non-technical people voting on technical subjects. It could make development become inefficient and slow. Also, less flexible should the community voting on these subjects notice that you're not paying attention to their voted priorities.

I'm a believer that while profits are a motivating factor of business; the ultimate goal is efficiency. The more efficient you are at something, the more profits you can make either through reduction in cost, time, or increase in quality or reach.

To let customers dictate the priorities of your business is inefficient -- they will never fully understand the workings of your business. Only you and your board will understand the business plan, and your operations people will only ever understand the underpinnings of running the thing.

Someone sitting at their computer in timbucktoo can only speculate.

While you have to listen to your community of users and developers in order to keep tailoring your offerings to their needs; I don't think this system serves that function. To me it seems like it would hinder it.

The number of votes that are needed to make a propsition a priority should be relative to the ammount of effort it will take to impliment.

Havok 2 may have the most votes, but still only have a priority rating of 75, while a much simpler propsition with half the votes may have a rating of 95. This is just a suggestion ;0 I have no idea how propositions are rated by Linden Labs ;0

Considering the downright overwhelming number of proposals that have been received, I think we need a lot more votes to give.

I support proposals that cost more votes for greater implementation difficulty. DreamHost does this for its feature suggestion voting, and it works great. DH gives 20 votes to spend, and each proposal costs from 1 to 5 votes depending on difficulty.

I'd also like to see the proposal list be moderated by a Linden. This would prevent duplicates and filter out things that are already slated to be implemented or are really bug fixes. For example, there is a proposal now to enable turning off the mouseover hoverbox text, but this feature was already implemented as of 1.6 (CTRL-SHIFT-T).

> To let customers dictate the priorities of your business is inefficient -- they will never fully understand the workings of your business. Only you and your board will understand the business plan, and your operations people will only ever understand the underpinnings of running the thing.

Yes, actually I initially suggested to the Lindens that they could choose to not show the actual total number of votes for something, but merely a rough idea of how many ("a few" in red, "some" in orange, "lots" in green for example).

Give credit to the Lindens for having the guts to let us see how many votes there actually are! Though whether it will stay like that, time wil tell

Azelda

One thing to note Hiro; people already get their votes back when a proposal marked "approved", "can't do", or "inactive"deleted). Please read the fine MANUAL where it states:

Any idea on when we'll get some feed-back on some of these proposals? Part of the greatness of the vote page is the option to actualy get a reply on the status of suggestions, something that the Feature Suggestions forum is very painfully lacking.

I understand that Lindens are very busy people, but without actualy getting any response on each proposal other than forum posts about how great the Vote page is, its taking away a major part of the benefit to the community that this is (Part 1 of the benefit would be knowing how many other people share your wish for that feature. Part 2 is knowning where LL stands on the feature.).

At the very least I'd hope that the top few features could be commented on.

/bumpy

I'd like to see a time element placed into the voting system.

It's unclear to me how long existing propositions will remain on the list for voting. There's plenty of ideas flowing into the system, but an ambiguous and slow-draining sink. If I voted for a set of propositions last week, I need return this week to see what's new, and adjust my vote distribution. At 13+ pages, it's become too ungainly for all but the most rabidly civic minded.

I'm also unclear how the Lindens can evaluate and compare voting scores when the raw score of each is affected by different inception dates and can change from day to day -- e.g. 200 votes on an issue is a meaningless number unless qualified by saying "after one day on the ballot", or "after two weeks on the ballot", and "with a 12% gain despite the addition of 40 new propositions receiving 100 votes or more."

I'd like to see the system set up around voting periods -- where anything to be considered for vote is on the table at the start of the period, and remains until the end of that period. I have no opinion on how many voting periods are needed, or how long each should be -- but keep the list on the ballot stable within each period.

It's become clear to me that the voting is a mess, an absolute mess. It's a great idea but it doesn't seem to be serving anything but to be a "shiny=good" area filled with way too many unsorted ideas.

- It ignores technical ideas because few people want to read through 300 suggestions. And even if they did, most users wouldn't understand how cool certain technical suggestions would be, only developers.

- It lacks Negative voting.

- There's no organization.

- There's no demarcation between bugs and suggestions.

- Alts can abuse the vote.

...

I think it can be saved, but it needs to be organized now before it becomes any more of a jumbled mess.

Yes there is, see Robin's post in the Announcements. They've now agreed to remove bugs from the voting process entirely.

/3/70/43485/1.html#post461194

Just saw that.