Voting - Ticket System

[boecko]

I know,
but that's the only way it can work right now.
I've already implemented a max value. because this was unlimited in the original underlying sponsorhip model.

see
http://www.mantisbt.org/bugs/view.php?id=668

But I think.. we should try it first. I'm confident, that we will see a representative top-10orwhatever list.

Bye

[Kronzky]

Yeah, I don't really see the need for a "rated" vote (1-5).
Then it just comes down to who "screams" the loudest...

One person, one vote.
Keeps it easy, and then the total is a true representation of how popular that particular issue really is.

[boecko]

Ok ...
changed it to one vote.
This eradicates the need for a vote contingent for each user. This would be a problem with the unknown amount of ArmA Bugs .

Other changes:
* disabled email notification after voting
* disabled automatic monitoring
* reduced the Issue History-Activities for each vote

regards

[sbsmac]

>I've already implemented a max value

Boeko, why not just set the max-votes to 1 rather than 5 ? ***At least then you have the situation where users can either vote for an issue or not.

It would also be really interesting to see some stats eventually on how many active users of the system there are and how many are voting. ***I suspect that there might need to be a bit more promotion of the system before it gets enough use to start showing real preferences. ***I've taken to pointing people to the BTS whenever possible but there are still a lot of forum users who probably never visit it. ***Maybe you could also make the default filter sort by votes so that users are immediately exposed to the new functionality ?


*Edit* Ah - you did it whilst I was posting

[Kronzky]

Would it be possible to disable people voting on their own submissions?
Otherwise *every* report would end up with that mandatory self-vote to avoid being flushed into the abyss...

[boecko]

Na ...
it's not the reporters bug, it's a bug of ArmA.
So the reporter was the unfortunate to report it first.

I don't think this distorts the statistic.

[raedor]

I like this system as well. Now go ahead, make "Spread BTS voting" signatures and get some people voting, not only whining about bugs.

[Suma]

I like the concept but I'm not convinced that allowing a range of values for each user (1..5) is terribly useful. As I understand the system at the moment, users can vote for as many issues as they like. There's therefore no incentive not to add 5 votes for every issue a user is interested in.

This was my initial though as well. However, thinking about it somewhat more, actually adding 5 to all bugs is the same as adding nothing to any of them - it has no influence on sort ordering.

Still, it is true one dedicated person with a lot of spare time could influence a lot, but such think can be detected by the admin anyway (if it really happens).

[sbsmac]

Quote[/b] ]Still, it is true one dedicated person with a lot of spare time could influence a lot, but such think can be detected by the admin anyway (if it really happens).

Working on the weekend ?

My point was really that there was really very little information to be obtained from the fact that someone has given an issue the maximum number of votes so you might as well make the maximum number 1 as Boeko has done. As you say, the ability to vote on an unlimited number of issues means that 'gaming' of the system is currently possible in theory but the 'cost' (ie, effort) of doing so probably means that it won't happen.

The more interesting question is how (if) the community can do something to help with processing the large number of open issues (over 440). Even reading the details of each of these reports list probably takes the best part of a couple of days ! Clearly, addressing them all is unlikely. At our company we tend to assume an average of 1 resolved issue per man-day is pretty good going! Maybe some of us could move stuff into the 'confirmed' state after reproducing problems on the latest build and verifying sufficient information is present in the report ? This would at least cut out some of the initial investigation that would otherwise be required by BIS. I'd be happy to help with this as time permits.

*Edit* Ok so the discussion here
goes some way to addressing this by temporarily rejecting issues with not enough information. It doesn't handle issues which _have_ been confimed by others though.

*Edit again* Hmm - I should read the entire forum before posting Guidelines discussion talks about the 'acknowledged' state which I previously thought meant that BIS had acknowledged the issue.

[Suma]

I like this a lot. Such feedback is very important for us. I will be using the view sorted by the number of votes a lot.

Having sad that, it seems such sorting is not working now at all. I tried sorting both ascending and descending by Votes, but voted issues are never listed at the top.