Give a bug a hug

[Richmond]

On 8.10.19 11:35, Richmond wrote:
> "the severity of a bug be determined by the team"
>
> Presumably by "the team" you mean LiveCode Central?
>
> Somewhere in this discussion there was the idea that, perhaps, "the 
> team" already had so
> much on their plate that both determining the severity of bugs and 
> sorting them out
> were handled by people outwith "the team."

Ouch: sorry: ". . . sorting them out BE handled by people . . ."

Subjunctive woes!

>
> On 8.10.19 9:39, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote:
>> On 10/7/19 10:13 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>>
>> > I had extensive discussion about the Bugzilla voting system with 
>> Kevin, Mark Waddingham, and others there at LiveCode Ltd., in 
>> response to the reactions many members of our community (including 
>> yours truly) expressed when the voting was removed from the bug DB.
>> >
>> > What I learned was that although it seems like a good idea, in 
>> practice it winds up being a less useful indicator of the 
>> "importance" of a bug than one might intuitively think.
>> >
>> > In dry terms, one of the issues with it is that it conflates two 
>> very different signals: one for the severity of a bug to the 
>> individual experiencing it, and another for the number of people 
>> affected by the bug.
>>
>> Well, yes and no. But that's why I was suggesting that the severity 
>> of a bug be determined by the team, and not by a bug report's 
>> popularity. The CC field is somewhat useful, but nobody ever removes 
>> themselves from the field (is that even possible?), and stale votes 
>> can skew the benefits of the quantitative effects.
>>
>> Earlier I avoided commenting on the politicking and grandstanding 
>> issues concerning voting. There are interesting arguments around 
>> democracy and power in the Federalist Papers. For a voting framework 
>> we could do worse than adopt Scott Raney's proxyfor.me.
>>
>