Funny that the default implementation does not hide the individual votes...

-- MartinCleaver - 20 Sep 2004

Does too! You just pasted it wrong. You need the HTML comment block containing the DesireTarget as well.

-- CrawfordCurrie - 20 Sep 2004

May be I miss something here as well but what are we measuring here? Just trying to understand what we would like to get out of this vote.

-- PeterThoeny - 23 Sep 2004

The idea is to provide a way for the TWikiDotOrg community to quickly feed back their support for an idea, so it can be used when establishing the priority of different features when release planning. At present the only way people have of supporting an idea is to add a comment, which is hard work (especially when TWikiDotOrg is running like a slug) and soon gets lost in the thread. This proposal provides a way for yes/no feedback to be measured consistently between proposals, allowing prioritisation to be derived.

• Thanks for the clarifcation, I was just looking at the vote on this page and did not made the connection that the DesireMeter was an example to be used on other pages. -- Dummy me, PeterThoeny - 30 Sep 2004

-- CrawfordCurrie - 26 Sep 2004

I'm not so keen on weighted votes. I'd prefer a "one person, one vote" or at least a "one vote at a time" system. What I'd like to see for ProposedNewFormsInCodev is a CommunityVote field on topics with a template topic to include a button on the page to increment the count.

If AddCheckInComment was implemented then the comment for the revision could be "voted for by %WIKINAME%" which would then be available for searching and statistical type stuff.

-- SamHasler - 28 Sep 2004

Sam, that sounds dangerously like democracy. What are you, some sort of liberal?

I don't care too much what system we use, as long as we start using some system. I'm tired of not knowing how important things are to the community at large.

-- CrawfordCurrie - 01 Oct 2004

Hear, hear! I was just thinking how cool it would be to construct a search for topics that include the DesireMeter, along the lines of WebPoll, that displays a chart showing Average desireability & Number of votes. I'm not quite sure how, but it seems like you could do a little statistical wisardry to calculate the most desired features by the most people. Whouldn't that be something!

-- LynnwoodBrown - 01 Oct 2004

Thought about it some more and reversed my opinion. I decided that an average desireability, with number of votes so you know how large a sampling is involved, is a much better statistic to have than knowing the number of people that support something without knowing how many are against it.

My only concern is that unless they are included on every topic and there is an easy way to search for the gross statistics to include them in a table there is no way to sort FeaturesToDo or release tables by desireability.

-- SamHasler - 02 Oct 2004

Yes, they'll take some time to penetrate the public conciousness. We also have to be careful with the results; is a heavily voted topic that returns a 5.5 average more or less important than a topic voted 7.0 by only a couple of people with strong opinions? The answer is that these meters are a guide only. The final prioritisation has to be set by someone who knows, i.e. the core team (see PostCairoDevelopmentModel for more on this), rather than trying to use statistical analysis.

-- CrawfordCurrie - 02 Oct 2004

Is there any way that Average desireability and Number of votes could be pushed into form fields as static content so that they can be used in searches?

-- SamHasler - 02 Oct 2004

I prefer the AgreementScale because the desirescale does not allow you to voice disagreement. PleaseInstallPluginsAtTWikiDotOrg - does Crawford's vote mean neutral or wants it somewhere-between-itwouldbenice-and-iwantitsomuchithurts? Furthermore, there is no place for Peter's objecting vote, so he didn't vote at all.

Lastly, does one really need 9 shades between "want it a bit" and "want it so much it hurts"?

-- MartinCleaver - 21 Nov 2004