Submission details
www.windows7taskforce.com - Suggestion Categories, Votes and General Prioritising
Does anyone else wish they could categorise submissions by severity or impact ? Personally I would love to filter out some of the 'lows'...
As we draw closer to the official release of W7 (and assuming these suggestions may have some influence) we need to be isolating the major issues that need addressing and I'm concerned the Votes aren't necessarily reflecting how serious the submission might be, but merely how many users are in agreement with it..
More often than not now, I find myself reluctant to vote on a what is a valid issue simply because I don't want to see it sit at the top of the popular list if it's just a low severity/impact aesthetic suggestion.
Long... is it possible to provide filters for severity and impact so we can monitor and vote on the truly important submissions? Maybe I'm missing something but I'd like to hear others thoughts...
High
High
Not fixed
Discussion (3 comments)
Changed title from [Suggestion Categories, Votes and General Prioritising] to [www.windowsseventaskforce.com - Suggestion Categories, Votes and General Prioritising].
Changed solution description.
Changed title from [www.windowsseventaskforce.com - Suggestion Categories, Votes and General Prioritising] to [www.windows7taskforce.com - Suggestion Categories, Votes and General Prioritising].
Good idea in theory, but in action, everyone would just set everything to high severity/impact just to get more votes. It's happening already, even without the filter. I don't think it would help much. Not that I don't agree, I just don't think it would change anything.
+1 anyway.
@Arayta: You're right of course... but I probably didn't explain the idea well enough; I think the popular list should still remain unchanged (i.e. highest votes to the top), but provide a filter in the category list for severity and impact.
On the topic of ppl setting impact or severity incorrectly, maybe the submitted shouldn't be allowed to specify them - make it part of the vote by allowing voters to indicate how they perceive the impact and severity and then take the average.
I think part of the issue is that there's no clear explanation of what we're actually voting for -
Do we vote up if we think it's important, valid or high priority or all of the above?
Should we vote down if it's unimportant, invalid or low priority?
Ideally I would like to vote almost everything up because they're mostly valid - but maybe I should be voting things I see as unimportant (yet still valid) down?
I think the taskforces are a great concept (give the the flaws some public exposure and you might garner enough attention to see a resolution) but I don't believe they're reflecting the true importance of the submissions.
What is everyone else voting for? Importance? Validity? Priority?
Windza wrote on February 25, 2009, 9:36pm
Please ?