The current scoring model is flawed. The only way to keep track of fresh ideas, is to wait while they roll by in the 'Last ideas' section. Popularity creates popularity. This generates polarization and bias to old ideas. I propose a better measurement and ranking system:
Each idea should be ranked against more dimensions than just popularity. Sure, appreciation is important, but so is controversy, clearness and time. Let's say we have a brainstorm idea X, which was posted 3 days ago and has 40 votes pro, 20 votes contra and 5 comments. We also have idea Y, 5 days old, which has 300 votes pro, 320 votes contra, and 100 comments. In the current situation, idea Y will be on top - forever. But we can derive several more useful indicators from these ideas.
Average appreciation (AA):
This is the current way of scoring, which is the amount of 'pro' voters minus the amount of 'contra' voters. This is how much the idea is liked by the brainstorm visitors. For idea X the AA would be +20, for idea Y it would be -20. This would indicate that action should be taken on idea X, rather than idea Y, because the nett amount of pro-votes was higher then the contra votes. This would however ignore the fact that idea Y has 300 pro votes, while idea X has left many people indifferent and generated only some 60 votes total. This brings us to another factor:
Controversy factor (CF):
Tells us something about the attention an idea gets from the BRAINSTORM visitors. Does the idea instantly 'trigger' the viewer? The amount of 'pro' voters plus the amount of 'contra' voters, divided by the absolute average appreciation. This would give idea X a CF of (40+20)/20 = 3. This is low compared to idea Y, which has a score of (300+320)/20, which results in 31. Now we see that idea Y has a higher visibility than idea X, even though the average appreciation of the idea is negative.
Comment-to-controversy factor (CC):
Tells us something about the completeness of an idea. If an idea is clear and evident, people will only vote. When information is missing, people will add comments. It would be wrong to confuse the comments with a discussion, because the current implementation of the comment system only allows for comments on the idea. Threaded comments (commenters commenting commenters) are not allowed. So the amount of all votes divided by the amount of comments would tell us something about how clearly scoped the idea is and what has to be done to implement it. Lower values mean sharper ideas.
Idea X would have a score of 3/5 = 0.6. Idea Y would have 31/100 = 0.31 Clearly, though the controversy about idea Y is way larger than the indifference surrounding idea X, it has only half of its CC. This makes sense. Obviously an idea with a clear description will create 'faster' opinions, therefore people will vote for idea Y without much hesitation, while idea X is just too confusing to vote for. Visitors have a short attention span. Which brings us to the next factor: time.
Gestation Time
On this site, new ideas will generate more votes on day 1 than they will do on any day after that. Ideas move to the background after 2 or 3 days, and will not be found back easily anymore. This is not how it should be. There should be two distict phases in the life of an idea (on BRAINSTORM). First, a 'gestation period'. The idea is new and needs a day or two to generate enough controversy AND/OR appreciation AND/OR comments per vote to be 'important'. The combined score on these 3 indicators will give it an 'importance' ranking, which is tied to more than just popularity. This will bring intriguing ideas to the top, while boring/unimportant ideas will stay low. As time marches on, ideas will lose importance (or better still: be implemented) and drop to lower ranks. Idea X, being 3 days old and having had 60 votes in total, would have 20 votes per day, while idea Y had 620/5=124 votes per day. Again, idea Y has a higher score then idea X, and therefore should be granted a place with 'the headlines'.
For an even better model, and taking half-life into consideration, only the votes and comments of the last 2 days or so should be taken into consideration. This prevents old ideas to remain on top.
Implementing something like this model would vastly increase the usability of this brainstorm, as well as encourage a lot of people to submit their ideas. Also, it would greatly decrease the amount of (relevant) duplicates, because people will only see relevant ideas. This means they don't need to search, which means they will just think of another idea to submit.
Also, ideas should be shorter ;)
Tags:
(none)
