« What's Wrong With the Mentor Principles | Main | BANNED AND CENSORED! »

06/02/2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

jhurliman

http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/outrage.gif

Hehe, I agree though that they should allow no votes on items. My hosting provider has a similar setup for requested features. Each person is allotted 50 votes or so (you might get more if you are a more important customer, haven't looked at that angle) and you can vote yes or no on any feature proposal. This is important because some of the proposed features would break things of yours, so it's just as important to vote no as it is to vote for a feature that would help you.

Pingviini Saarinen

I'm inclined to think that in the case of the half-assed feature voting system there's foremostly the fact that it's unfinished and de-facto abandoned to blame for it being utterly useless for its intended use.

I suspect LL keeps it around because they apparently like to not axe stuff whenever possible and instead just let it fade into insignificance and because it serves well as some sort of punching ball for frustrated users (because, unlike bug-reports, you can at least see how your proposal is doing)* and maybe is good for a chuckle or two at coffee break time - who knows?

Bug-reporting/feature-wish systems can work okay without negative votes for what it's worth, as long as they support an even more important feature: (Verbose) feedback. My own experiences with bugtracking/feature-wish systems deployed for two large, popular open source software projects lead me to believe that the implicit requirement for some kind of reasoning instead of just a clicking a "please don't!" yields better results quicker.


* Wouldn't it be great if one could somehow manage to convince a sizeable part of the SL residents to boycott the in-client bug-report mechanism and instead file feature proposals? The lack of public bug tracking system makes me *very* unhappy.

Prokofy Neva

I used to think the problem was it was half-finished, and they didn't have the political will to really clean it up and fix it because they really have no motivation to have more than a decoration of democracy.

That was until yesterday, when I saw they had a very conscious, deliberate, and methodical concept which is *their* notion of "the wisdom of crowds* -- when they write, "The best part of this voting tool is that it allows for the 'wisdom of the crowd' to determine which requests are worthwhile via voting" -- and turn DOWN a proposal and say "IT CAN'T BE DONE" that is a profound, profound statement which goes to the heart of what's wrong with the Lab -- the enormous hubris of the California social engineer writ large.

Obviously, crowds could be wise in saying "no," too, duh -- didn't that occur to them? And crowds are wise when they can meet those three criteria -- obviously crowds voting for Hitler aren't wise crowds -- and that's the answer to all the dumb debating of citing "Hitler was elected" as an argument against democracy. This invocation of the crowd in justification of this or that Bolshevik social-engineering policy is really loathsome.

I realize trying to fight the Lindens head on like this when they've got such a deep-seated ideological bias on a problem is fairly hopeless, but as Khamon says, if you throw enough stones, you can get the chinks to losen.

What's working in our favour, too, is that likely *one* Linden or a *Linden faction* put this comment up and it doesn't necessarily have the whole Linden group-think collective consensus. So there's a chance to confront the more senior Lindens with the idiocy of this policy, and just whittle away with the more junior ones making them ashamed for presiding over an unjust system like this.

Cocoanut

It's truly insane.

LL doesn't really celebrate the wisdom of the crowds anyway. They celebrate the wisdom of themselves when they (or he or she) can write off something as ridiculous as this with that stupid phrase and actually manage to believe themselves.

I've seen this happen so much, and it is so paternalistic, so sort of smug, without even any reasoning to support the statements. It's like they get these words or phrases and don't even really think about them, just sort of accept them and spout them like a religion.

coco

Wayfinder Wishbringer

Good article. Voting system is for sure as lame as many other LL ideas over the past coupla years.

Oh, btw, it's Elf KING... LOL. Check da profile. XD

Prokofy Neva

Right, elf KING, got it, I'll fix that. I mixed up the different leaders there.

Guess what -- they are doing the SAME EXACT STUPID DAMN THING in their beta version of the new bug/features voter and I've already made a proposal to put in "No," and Rob Linden has already posted WON'T FIX as the official LL reply to my report of this "bug".

He then says if I can find a "plug in from JIRA" I can have it considered.

See how deeply fucked this is? JIRA itself of course has no "no" vote. It belongs to the same addle-brained school of crowdism as the Lindens. This is seriously messed up and I'll be writing more on it soon.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Blog powered by Typepad

Advertisements

Ads.text

  • Ads Text
    google.com, pub-2776838938932602, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0