+1! I'd vote your suggestion up, my friend, but I don't have any more *!@# votes left!!
Honestly though, 8 votes?? They give you just enough votes to suck you in and make you THINK you have a voice, but the voice they let you have feels about the size of a mouse trying to squeak a message to his friend on the other side of the jungle.
If not 8 then what number? Is there a case to be made that the quantity of votes should be relative to the number of suggestions the project has? Such as allocating enough votes so each user can vote for 25% of the suggestions? Or do votes represent some fixed quantity, like developer time per quarter, in which case quantity of suggestions is irrelevant.
I think admins should be able to set the number of votes admins get. We want to use UserVoice for internal feedback on our CMS development but can't with only 8 votes. LAME!
How about give them votes over time? Like one per day (but don't go over 10). This way those that stay active and current get to keep voting.
Either way, the admin should have more control over this. The total number of votes, how votes are returned, and the ability to give specific members votes.
One of the main reasons we're considering using Salesforce's IdeaExchange over this is because limiting our paying customers feedback is counterproductive. We need to allow our customers to express which things they're looking for, not limit them. Instead of limiting votes, simply only allow 1 vote per idea.
Limited voting is plain stupid, counter-intuitive, frustrating and plain stupid (twice stupid). What is the reason for this daft decision, I can see no explanation why I am not allowed to vote.
coderanger: I can see why, so you're able to vote ten things 1, or eight things 1 and one 2, and so on. If you voted 3 for everything, what's the point of different levels of voting? of course on the admin side (for your own uservoice page), I'd love to be able to grant 20 votes or so, or perhaps just have for/neutral/against voting as an option, perhaps with strong for and strong against too?
The voting model is completely BROKEN for long-tail sites. Unless you have a large and quickly growing community, the steady state is for all the dedicated users to have NO votes left--ie, just a forum or message board, but without all the normal forum features.
I'll have to keep looking for a service that works for open source projects.
1)One can argue the current vote limit, but not A vote limit
2)The state for all the really dedicated must be `0 votes'
3)If nothing gets done its not really the lack of votes to fault
4)People get their votes back when things gets done and BAM! 0 votes again
5)If there is no vote limit, then each vote will count less
6)One should vote not on everything he wants but on what is dearest
Limited votes might make more sense if you view it as an analogy for money. Say each user of the application is given $100 to spend on future development. Then if each suggestion had an associated cost, the community would decide which items they value the most by spending their votes on them. If votes are unlimited, this already tenuous "economy" breaks.
An economic model for votes also suggests that it is less relevant which suggestions have the most votes and more relevant whether a particular suggestion achieves enough votes to surpass its cost.
This also suggests a natural integration of fund raising for open source projects. You might grant all users 8 votes just for participating in the community, but have a PayPal buy button on your UserVoice page to sell 20 more votes for $20, or something like that. Where donors get to see a strong connection between their donation and their say over what gets developed could be a strong motivator.
TylerRick
+1! I'd vote your suggestion up, my friend, but I don't have any more *!@# votes left!!
Honestly though, 8 votes?? They give you just enough votes to suck you in and make you THINK you have a voice, but the voice they let you have feels about the size of a mouse trying to squeak a message to his friend on the other side of the jungle.
3 months ago
tmetro
If not 8 then what number? Is there a case to be made that the quantity of votes should be relative to the number of suggestions the project has? Such as allocating enough votes so each user can vote for 25% of the suggestions? Or do votes represent some fixed quantity, like developer time per quarter, in which case quantity of suggestions is irrelevant.
3 months ago
mollyoakley
I think admins should be able to set the number of votes admins get. We want to use UserVoice for internal feedback on our CMS development but can't with only 8 votes. LAME!
2 months ago
ryanb
How about give them votes over time? Like one per day (but don't go over 10). This way those that stay active and current get to keep voting.
Either way, the admin should have more control over this. The total number of votes, how votes are returned, and the ability to give specific members votes.
2 months ago
Avi
One of the main reasons we're considering using Salesforce's IdeaExchange over this is because limiting our paying customers feedback is counterproductive. We need to allow our customers to express which things they're looking for, not limit them. Instead of limiting votes, simply only allow 1 vote per idea.
2 months ago
coderanger
Limited voting is plain stupid, counter-intuitive, frustrating and plain stupid (twice stupid). What is the reason for this daft decision, I can see no explanation why I am not allowed to vote.
about 1 month ago
toby
coderanger: I can see why, so you're able to vote ten things 1, or eight things 1 and one 2, and so on. If you voted 3 for everything, what's the point of different levels of voting? of course on the admin side (for your own uservoice page), I'd love to be able to grant 20 votes or so, or perhaps just have for/neutral/against voting as an option, perhaps with strong for and strong against too?
about 1 month ago
novote
The voting model is completely BROKEN for long-tail sites. Unless you have a large and quickly growing community, the steady state is for all the dedicated users to have NO votes left--ie, just a forum or message board, but without all the normal forum features.
I'll have to keep looking for a service that works for open source projects.
Please correct me if I've misunderstood.
about 1 month ago
malk.zameth
1)One can argue the current vote limit, but not A vote limit
2)The state for all the really dedicated must be `0 votes'
3)If nothing gets done its not really the lack of votes to fault
4)People get their votes back when things gets done and BAM! 0 votes again
5)If there is no vote limit, then each vote will count less
6)One should vote not on everything he wants but on what is dearest
about 1 month ago
tmetro
Limited votes might make more sense if you view it as an analogy for money. Say each user of the application is given $100 to spend on future development. Then if each suggestion had an associated cost, the community would decide which items they value the most by spending their votes on them. If votes are unlimited, this already tenuous "economy" breaks.
29 days ago
tmetro
An economic model for votes also suggests that it is less relevant which suggestions have the most votes and more relevant whether a particular suggestion achieves enough votes to surpass its cost.
29 days ago
tmetro
This also suggests a natural integration of fund raising for open source projects. You might grant all users 8 votes just for participating in the community, but have a PayPal buy button on your UserVoice page to sell 20 more votes for $20, or something like that. Where donors get to see a strong connection between their donation and their say over what gets developed could be a strong motivator.
29 days ago
franckyinuk
I agree, see related post http://uservoice.uservoice.com/pages/general/suggestions/1438
10 days ago