I'm not sure if this idea will be popular or not considering it is certain to be a sensitive issue as it concerns the entire model of brainstorm.

The problem is that popular ideas are typically more popular when the level of traffic is up and less popular when the level of traffic is down.

The 13 most popular ideas ever were submitted within less than 24 hours of one another. I am guessing that's the day that Digg was made aware of Brainstorm.

In fact, at least five of the individuals considered to be the top 10 idea contributors per the algorithm, earning that ranking from submitting ideas around that period, have submitted less than 5 ideas a piece, and exactly two, from what I can deduce, have only submitted a single idea.

Yes, these ideas certainly are very popular, and I honestly believe that those ideas should be implemented. What makes me believe there is a problem with current working definition of popularity is its strong relation to overall traffic on Brainstorm.

Reason being: an idea that earns the same percentage of individual +1's and -1's from all users with the lower levels of traffic in relation to February 28th and 29th should be considered just as popular.

In essence:
There are 1000 people browsing Brainstorm today, 300 vote up an idea, 10 vote it down.
There are 10000 people browsing Brainstorm another day, 3000 vote up an idea, 100 vote it down.

Should these ideas be considered to have the same level of popularity? I believe so, you may not. Whether or not this can be considered a day-by-day, month-by-month problem is up for discussion. Whether consistency and simplicity are at issue, that's up for discussion too. This idea is meant to be vague in that sense because any solution would require a fair amount discussion.

I believe the problem is most visible in concern to "Most popular ideas ever."

[....]

First of all, this could be considered a partial solution to idea #8786, which expresses frustration toward a growing faction of "snobs." While I recognize the existence of such a faction, I do not agree that it has adverse effects toward the approval or disapproval to certain ideas. However, it's clearly making some users frustrated and unhappy when submitting ideas to Brainstorm, and I believe that may discourage individuals from participating.

Omega, in idea #8786, outlines certain attitudes that are counter-productive to a friendly atmosphere and have made him uncomfortable:
o An idea not being valid because it could "take up mindshare" (which to me seems kind of vulgar in essence).
o Disagreement based on preference.
o Disagreement based on lack of endearment to the situation or criteria.
o Cited qualifications as a valid basis for reasoning.


I believe that providing context to headers may be used as one tool to lessen this problem and promote a friendlier environment.


Something along the lines of:
Description Context: "Describe an enhancement or an inherent problem that is not considered a bug."

This context could also provide a link to the bug reporting tool or whatever other place that a user can be redirected to if he or she is accidentally posting with the wrong purpose. Such clarity could outright help a submitter avoid experiencing cognitive dissonance resulting from a simple and unintended mistake.

Comments Context: "Expand on the scope of the idea, inherent problems, and possible solutions; express yourself in clear, objective, and positive thought."


[....]

'n'st for numbers ending in 1 (except for numbers ending in 11).

'n'nd for numbers ending in 2 (except for numbers ending in 12).

'n'rd for numbers ending in 3 (except for numbers ending in 13).

Yea, I know, I'm writing exceptions to exceptions, but it's pretty simple to code and would definitely look better.

If one says, "improve recoverability" instead of, "improve recoverability, perhaps this way," people may be more agreeable to participating in the suggestions of possible solutions rather than ignoring the issue completely.

Example of my failure:
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/2349/

Someone commented:
"Not really a clean fix.. very messy, and wont fix the underlying issue really. Temp files should always be cleaned on reboot.

It would be better to change the programs to behave better "

Another person commented:
"Your thunderbird should have marked the file as read-only."


I'm confused as to why the idea gets demoted if individuals in the comments are agreeing that there is a problem, yet demoting the idea because they disagree with the possible solutions that I've listed.

I'm just saying that Brainstorm may be a bit more productive if problems and solutions were separated in some sense.