Developer comments
New front page, with a descending (nb of votes)/(time since creation) sorting.
This way, the newest ideas have their chance to stand up!
2709
votes
|
|
3273
0
564
|
|
|
|
|
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
AnRa
wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 20:39
|
|
|
|
I think that grades should appear after voting for the idea.
|
|
Veejay
wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 20:43
|
|
|
|
Damn right, showing the results from day one biases the results and so does showing the results from more popular to less popular.
|
|
speakman
wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 20:43
|
|
|
|
Yes, or specifically requested by either choosing "most popular" or click on the eventual placeholder between the arrows.
|
|
|
Would be smarter to have two different buttons like digg. New, and Popular, and 100 most popular. Since they use drigg? drupal module that would be easy to create.
That way we can se new popular now, what is new and the top 100 projects.
And think also why you have this brainstorm? It should maybe be a way for people to find projects that they want to participate in, not just a list of good ideas.
First get the ideas popular -> then make an entry for people to participate in those projects.
If there is no connection between those two, we will just get a most popular list. That is cool too, but getting people to work is great and improves Ubuntu way more. Like: sign up for testing, sign up to be a developer, sign up to become the project manager?
|
|
troc
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 00:56
|
|
|
|
Yep, the default 'popularity sort' really isn't helpful despite the fact it is what most people want. A forced vote on a random, anonymous and ranked-masked idea before browsing other ideas according to user preference could work. A tag cloud and a collaborative ranking such that ideas which are voted on frequently together could also help show any trends and duplicates.
|
|
Estesark
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 00:57
|
|
|
Whilst I can see the benefit of hiding an idea's score until the user has voted on it, I don't see how this could co-exist with the "most popular" feature, which I think is more important. It's useful as a filter which should, in theory, allow the user to spend more time focussing on the best ideas.
Also, this means you would never be able to see the score of an idea which you feel neutral about. For example, I don't think that Fingerprint recognition is a bad idea, but I know I'll never use it and I think that the developers should spend more time on something else, meaning I don't want to vote it up or down.
For these reasons, I'm clicking the down arrow on this idea.
|
|
moaxey
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 01:28
|
|
|
The brainstorm concept depends on freedom to put up whatever thoughts, regardless of their value. Even a ridiculous idea can lead on to a really useful concept.
The structure of this site blurs the brainstorm and idea selection process.
|
|
|
|
Yes, I strongly agree with you
|
|
Nulifier
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 03:01
|
|
|
How about a newly popular button.
That way it isn't the same ideas in the most popular section
|
|
Nat_Tuck
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 03:16
|
|
|
|
A good solution to this issue is a pre-requisite for this site actually being useful.
|
|
1word
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 03:42
|
|
|
|
yeah, this aint digg. we really do care about ubuntu's improvement. this is an excellent idea of discarding the most popular on top - that way we can avoid popular ones becoming more popular without merit. people eill then have to look at all ideas before they decide!
|
|
lelis718
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 04:53
|
|
|
|
A newly popular button would be great, but first brainstorm needs to get rid of the f### spammers.
|
|
|
|
What about grouping the brainstorms into categories to help people find ideas they are interested in (networking, GUI, boot issues, etc.)?
|
|
johno
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 06:16
|
|
|
Having the most popular first helps consolidate interest in a small number of projects, rather than having it spread thinly among a huge number of near-duplicates.
However, how about some metric approximately like score per sqrt(number of impressions)? That would help favour new ideas that have had good support since being introduced.
|
|
wolfier
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 07:08
|
|
|
|
For fairness we should also hide author until a vote is cast.
|
|
Graf
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 07:12
|
|
|
Totally.
Start off with marginal ideas.
You can have a few boxes with "largest movers" etc as well to show ideas with momentum.
But it shouldn't just be auto sorted to most popular. If 90% of people like it then it's probably allready a brilliant idea.
|
|
|
|
I agree with the tag-cloud concept (with popular items being larger text). It not only means that someone can narrow-in to their choice of topic as opposed to being guided, but it shows the most popular using an *un-ordered method*. Therefore I see all options (catgeories) without the expense of not seeing the less popular options.
|
|
|
Yes, I agree that it would be good to create some sort of algorithm that would include some upcoming ideas on the front page. But please allow an option to sort the ideas in a simple "Most Popular" order.
A while ago, Ideastorm changed its front page so that instead of simply listing most popular stories, it sorted stories by some esoteric algorithm. While it does allow newer stories to gain exposure, it is quite annoying to never be able to see the ideas in simple popularity order.
Including upcoming ideas is always good, but please also provide the visitors with the option of viewing a list based simply on popularity.
|
nand
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 09:28
|
|
|
Yes in fact I had in mind to implement that a few weeks later : a sorting algorithm where the votes are correlated with their date.
But it seems we will have to put it earlier than expected, due to the incredible success of the website!
Anyone have experience with digg-like algorithm? I will eventually figure out an algorithm, but some experience return would help :)
|
|
blindvic
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 09:38
|
|
|
|
I think their should me more choices than just agree or diasgree with an idea. Because i see many different ideas, but i think the criticality of each is different. I would like to mark each of the ideas with diferent mark. For example -3...+3
|
|
Tuxie
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 09:53
|
|
|
|
Before you've had time to implement a better algorithm, please change the front page to sort in a pure random order, quickly.
|
|
|
with random you would soon be lost with a lot of unpopular low rated ideas, maiking it boring to read (and navigation would be awfull... if I come back later and all is completly mixed up !....)
Of course, anyway, you should sometimes dig further to find unpopular ideas that may be interesting, but you're always free to do so.
But yes, indeed, sorting should take in account popularity, total number of votes, and date(s)
|
|
Tom Mann
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 11:20
|
|
|
|
How about a side panel with some top-ten lists?
|
|
kukuku
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 11:56
|
|
|
I don't like the current Brainstorm. The most critical problem to me is that after I vote on the stuff on the main page (I don't have problems voting a popular item down), it stays there and quickly clogs up the screen with grayed out items.
There's need for a "> Browse ideas" menu choice where you can select ordering by the idea scores, but also with "don't show items already voted on." A couple more selections for browse could be "show downvoted items" and "show upvoted items" and sorting for all of the various idea selections by score/submission date/# of votes in the last 7 days/# of votes in last 24 hours/etc.
|
|
Auzy
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 11:58
|
|
|
|
I agree entirely. but yeah, you definately want a random category. Otherwise, the popular posts get more popular, unless your own ideas get posted at a peak time (timezone wise), you have no chance of getting it popular enough in time to make the lists, as there may only be 2 people online at the time to vote for it, before it is washed away by other suggestions .
|
|
maltes
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 12:02
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't exactly do it your way, but the system is very far from perfect and could use some improvement. You are correct!
|
|
gouki
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 12:07
|
|
|
|
Great idea. Hope this gets implemented.
|
|
imsoper
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 13:52
|
|
|
I think you should have to columns:
Left: The latest additions or random ideas
Right: Most Popular
Right now too much screen real estate is being used by one column, this would make it more readable and give the user more items to look at up front.
|
|
|
I agree. In the classic The Wisdom of Crowds, James Surowiecki said that one of the key factors in order to gather the collective intelligence is that people's opinions should not be determined by those around them.
I think there should still be an option to list the most popular ideas, but it shouldn't be the default one.
I suggest an option called Random Ideas, in addition to the most popular and latest ideas.
|
|
|
The best way to not prejudice votes and not get swamped would be to make all posts appear in proportion to their rating (unless they have heavily negative values).
Thus highly rated ideas would show up often, and ones not yet highly rated would still occasionally appear. But glancing at the page would show all ideas on equal footing for fair evaluation.
|
|
|
Yep, I don't think there should be a rating shown before voting, and the author shouldn't be listed before voting either.
And there should be a purely random sorting as the default, it would make it FAR more fair than it is now.
|
|
nilgiri
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 15:51
|
|
|
I think the current system does a good job of allowing good ideas to gain momentum fast and care needs to be taken to keep that from begin broke. Several of the suggestions would possibly break this, so please consider this when reviewing these items.
That said, I do think there needs to be someway to ensure good ideas don't get lost. New ideas that happen to show up on a busy day should be OK, and bad ideas will be kill quickly or lost, which is OK as well. However, good ideas that go off the "recent" page before being seen by enough people will also get lost, and so there needs to be something to put older ideas back in the front for review occasionally. I expect the same mechanism to allow old, bad ideas to get demoted significantly to be removed, which is nice from a cleanliness stand point.
|
|
|
|
Had a similar idea. Suggesting to put random votes on the Frontpage and/or change the popular ideas algorithm to be vote rate based (how many + votes per hour) instead of vote count. http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/1567/
|
|
Lee
wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 20:05
|
|
|
|
I think "Least seen ideas" would be the best page for people to see by default. That way, it would naturally be fair -- as the least seen idea become more seen, other ideas would get more views instead, and so everything would get equal votes.
|
|
|
I think that having some categories on the front page will help . Within each category (networking, gnome, gaming etc...) a random idea will be displayed . The user will have the option to view by "most popular" or by "latest" ,however random should be the default.
Also I support hiding the grades. They influence people's votes
|
|
|
Anything that helps more people to view more ideas (as opposed to ideas they have already seen, or ideas that have been approved or rejected) is what we need.
I suggest not presenting ideas in numerical order but randomly to each user coupled with not showing the same idea twice (in the list regardless of whether the user chooses to vote or click on it)
Selecting 'Most Popular' and other lists would, of course, show you ideas regardless of whether you had seen them before.
The 'latest ideas' button should be got rid of completely.
There is nothing inherently better or more worthy of my time about an idea that was posted 5 minutes ago as opposed to one that was posted 5 days ago which I havent read yet.
And finally ... once an idea has been shown in the lists of a set number of people (1000? 10,000? ) then it is retired. After all it has had enough chance to get votes +/-, showing it endlessly to more people cannot be statistically significant.
|
|
dalhamir
(Idea reviewer)
wrote on the 1 Mar 08 at 02:32
|
|
|
The big problem is duplicate ideas!
If they are ranked by newest, you don't know if that idea is already in the site. 95% of the good mainstream ideas will be on the front page, which is an excellent place to start.
Once the excellent Ubuntu coders get that stuff in line, then we can worry about the other 5%
|
|
|
I'd suggest to grade ideas like this:
(how many positive votes for this idea - how many negative votes for this idea) / (how many votes for all ideas since this idea was posted)
Additionally, I would split the screen into two halves: one half for the most popular ideas, and the other half for the newest ideas.
Note: I've posted the same comment for idea http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/1567/
|
|
|
|
Grading is definitely important, but an elegant solution would be to put an attractive introduction of the forum for the above first half while maintaining a list of threads as discussed above in lthe lower half of the page, whaddya say?
|
|
|
Grade always affects the user voting, if he sees something with -20 votes, he will most probably vote for negative.
Monkey sees, monkey does.
|
|
|
Agree that seeing votes might/will influence other ppl vote.
More that than Categories/tags... some kind of organization system need to be put in place IMHO.
Also something more wiki-like might be a good idea. Once issue is who really takes the time with reading all the comments ?
I certainly doubt a developer has that time.
A page describing the proposal and the other user suggestion that has some rules in how it is laid out could be interesting idea.
Having user discuss is not a bad think but maybe it should be threaded ?
With the current system one person can come at the opening write "suspend/hibernation should be fixed" which get tons of vote and user comments... but that page is not really informative to someones that only has say 10minutes to look at it. There might be a technical user who made a really good remark but it will be most in the all the comments...
Just some though (maybe not very well laid out)... anyway I hope to see some improvement in the system as time passes.
|
|
AndiXng
wrote on the 2 Mar 08 at 18:31
|
|
|
|
You are so right. This voting is great, but is has nothing to do with real brainstorming.
|
|
henrik
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 3 Mar 08 at 19:23
|
|
|
|
The sorting order has been changed. We are unlikely to change the score display (we like it as it is :) ).
|
|
|
|
As long as the search function works properly (I don't think it does?!) then the most important ideas will 'naturally' gain votes because people will be looking for them. So I think the home-page should be used to help seed less-obvious ideas, i.e., display Least Viewed or maybe just a random assortment.
|
|
jdfoote
wrote on the 3 Mar 08 at 23:28
|
|
|
Great change! I think this is an intuitive way to give good new ideas a real chance, without forcing users to view a bunch of terrible ideas.
|
|
|
|
What about instead of the actual score, just display the total number of votes. That way you get a feel for the popularity and total interest of an idea without being swayed before you think about it.
|
|
|
@ben.wade
I second that opinion.
Total number of wotes is important.
Say 1000 people think something is a good idea, and 1003 think it is a bad idea. The total is a puny "-3"! That issue is probably highly controversial to the community and worthy of quite a bit of attention. Perhaps it is due to a common misconception and Ubuntu needs to clarify the issue better to the community?
|
|
phaed
wrote on the 27 Mar 08 at 04:29
|
|
|
The scores should be kept hidden until after you vote. I've read Surowiecki's _Wisdom of Crowds_ as well. He says that in order to get the least biased results from a group, have everybody think about the problem for as long as possible before sharing with everyone else. Otherwise, people tend to anchor to the first (or first few) suggestions.
I find myself agreeing with the +/- direction of the votes about 98% of the time. Do I naturally agree with the crowd that often? No, I'm being biased by the score.
It diminishes the power of this resource.
|
|
|
Why is this marked as DONE and IMPLEMENTED while it is not? Votes (grades) are not hidden prior to the act of voting.
The status of this idea is inaccurate and deceptive because it has not been implemented.
Voting decisions continue to be biased.
|
|
|
Totally agree that scores should be hidden until after you've voted, but that's not enough: if you're viewing a page that's sorted to only show popular ideas, then the mere fact that it's on the page is evidence it's already popular.
As a result, I think that voting should be disabled on any page that is sorted in *any* fashion. (I recognize this eliminates the avalanche-like "Digg-effect", but I personally feel that's a good thing.) Perhaps have a section along the right-edge of every page that has a completely random selection of ideas for voting. This way you can still browse well-sorted and categorized ideas (with voting disabled), but be exposed to a random pool for voting.
The Digg-effect is great when the goal is just about finding a constant stream of vaguely interesting stuff. But that's not what this is about: we're trying to find the *best*. So the idea of sorting ideas based on "vote velocity" (up votes)/(time posted) is solid, but only if the popularity-content element is eliminated.
|
|
jeypeyy
wrote on the 26 Nov 08 at 20:40
|
|
|
|
(nb of votes)/(time since creation) don't give the newest ideas a chance to stand up! Not as much as only time since creation! THIS SHOULD NOT BE MARKED AS DONE!
|
Post your comment
|
