Feature Suggestions with voting system

Something you want to see in a LiveCode product? Want a new forum set up for a specific topic? Talk about it here.

Moderators: Klaus, FourthWorld, heatherlaine, robinmiller, kevinmiller

ChrisMukrow
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:13 pm

Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by ChrisMukrow » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:07 pm

I haven't seen this feature request jet, hopefully I'm correct... I would like to see feature suggestions with a voting system, this will give the community more influence + Runrev can make a better priority-list. An example of this system: feature suggestions of Windows Phone 8.

What do you guys think?

Chris

richmond62
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 4018
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:17 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by richmond62 » Mon Aug 05, 2013 3:36 pm

Sounds like a good idea: However, Runrev will have to balance what the "Community" wants and their commercial requirements,
so things wouldn't be as simple as Athenian Democracy.

ChrisMukrow
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by ChrisMukrow » Tue Aug 06, 2013 9:21 am

Sure Runrev will balance what the "Community" wants and their commercial requirements, but maybe it's possible to give commercial licenses more voting power then the "Community"? Maybe this a solution for the problem, community and commercial.

Dixie
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by Dixie » Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:20 am

Sure Runrev will balance what the "Community" wants and their commercial requirements, but maybe it's possible to give commercial licenses more voting power then the "Community"? Maybe this a solution for the problem, community and commercial.
err.. the introduction of a class system determined not by knowledge of liveCode, but by how much 'filthy lucre' someone has... I don't think so !

andrewferguson
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 5:09 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by andrewferguson » Thu Aug 08, 2013 4:03 pm

I think that a voting system is a good idea.

But I think that everyone should have an equal vote, and it should be up to RunRev to place extra emphasis on certain features as they deem necessary.

Andrew

SteveTX
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by SteveTX » Thu Aug 08, 2013 10:03 pm

Richmond, It isn't just "Community" who aren't getting what they want.

I'm a commercial licensed user, have been for years, and I also would like a voting system of sorts. While RR is great and has done amazing things with metacard, LiveCode does not appear to actively seek development suggestions from their paying clients, either. The best I've gotten was a survey asking me how I prefer to buy academy lessons and conference passes. No problem, I've got a quick answer for that: I don't. I just want a working, powerful, natural language, mobile-enabled, cross-platform application development environment and I imagine the majority of existing paying clients feel the same way. I could be wrong, maybe everyone really does just want bootcamps for tweens making candycrush clones.

I would tell them:
1. stop giving excessive focus to iOS features while skipping core functionality for Android, ie Filesystem, Database, GPU, Externals, JNI. (If I wanted a game platform, I would use Unity3D, I'm here for app dev)
2. refactor their documentation and supply it via continuous automation as a downloadable PDF from the website (dictionary is super-buggy, always out of date, and requires an onrev acct [broken registration, btw] to even make comments/fixes)
3. Test LC installs (and mobile builds) for Linux and Windows devenv prior to release, the only environment LC seems to build and work consistently in is MacOS. I'm starting to get the impression that LC devs secretly worship at the cult of Apple.

But again, we aren't being asked these questions. So yes, any sort of meaningful feature suggestion system other than the current wishing-well forum would be nice.

jacque
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 5227
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 8:31 pm
Location: Minneapolis MN
Contact:

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by jacque » Fri Aug 09, 2013 6:05 pm

There used to be a voting system of sorts. It was part of the QCC and you could add votes to a feature request or the priority of a bug fix. What happened was that people would beg on the mailing list asking others to add votes if they thought it might be useful. The end result was more of a popularity contest (everyone's friends voted) rather than a true gauge of how useful the feature might be. That rendered the results useless, and it was discontinued.
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque at hyperactivesw dot com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

andrewferguson
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 5:09 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by andrewferguson » Fri Aug 09, 2013 6:37 pm

jacque wrote:There used to be a voting system of sorts. It was part of the QCC and you could add votes to a feature request or the priority of a bug fix. What happened was that people would beg on the mailing list asking others to add votes if they thought it might be useful. The end result was more of a popularity contest (everyone's friends voted) rather than a true gauge of how useful the feature might be. That rendered the results useless, and it was discontinued.
Ah... I never thought of that.
Shame, if a voting system worked it could actually be really useful.

Andrew

SteveTX
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by SteveTX » Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:03 pm

How about a voting system that requires a paid license to vote?

Dixie
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by Dixie » Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:43 pm

SteveTX wrote:How about a voting system that requires a paid license to vote?
This is a wind up ?... he asks... seriously hoping that the answer will be 'yes' !

FourthWorld
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 7295
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:05 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by FourthWorld » Sat Aug 10, 2013 11:13 pm

jacque wrote:There used to be a voting system of sorts. It was part of the QCC and you could add votes to a feature request or the priority of a bug fix. What happened was that people would beg on the mailing list asking others to add votes if they thought it might be useful. The end result was more of a popularity contest (everyone's friends voted) rather than a true gauge of how useful the feature might be. That rendered the results useless, and it was discontinued.
That was a criticism of the system raised by RunRev, but since folks were limited to 100 votes I doubt many just plopped them down to vote for issues that they had no interest in at all.

In my recollection, the items I saw with the most votes tended to be those related to issues frequently raised on the list by people who were directly affected by them.

So yes, one could say there was a relationship between list discussion and votes*, but to suggest the votes were for the "popularity" of whomever noted that they'd logged the bug rather than the bug itself is not a conclusion I would draw with any confidence. I suppose it may have happened now and then, but it would be such a strange waste of a vote that I doubt it was characteristic of how people used the system.


* To illustrate the difference between co-occurrence and causation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spa ... al_warming
Richard Gaskin
Community volunteer LiveCode Community Liaison

LiveCode development, training, and consulting services: Fourth World Systems: http://FourthWorld.com
LiveCode User Group on Facebook : http://FaceBook.com/groups/LiveCodeUsers/

SteveTX
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by SteveTX » Mon Aug 12, 2013 12:34 am

Dixie, of course it isn't a joke. RunRev has a duty to the people who are paying for their software/dev/jobs, and significantly less duty, if any, to those who aren't.

Dixie
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by Dixie » Mon Aug 12, 2013 3:27 am

Steve…

I have to disagree… until recently 'liveCode' was only a 'paid for' product, then along came the kickstarter campaign to take it open source thereby allowing and at the same time encouraging many more people to have access to it and use it…

So, hopefully we now have many more people coming to use 'liveCode'… and I hope that many of them coming to the platform are from 'many different walks of programming life'… many of these people, may and probably will, have their own thoughts about what 'liveCode' can do for them and at the same time, thought on what they would like to see in 'liveCode' as it goes forward… whether it is someone buying a commercial licence, because he wishes to keep his scripts from prying eyes, or just someone who uses the platform for 'in house' projects…mmm… or maybe in an educational environment where the kids are not yet up to speed on 'industrial espionage'…:-)

As I said in my first post in this thread… the introduction of a class system determined not by knowledge of liveCode, but by how much 'filthy lucre' someone has, would be wrong in my view and if such were instigated would make me wonder why 'liveCode' went 'open source' in the first place…

Or is it a question of 'all programmers are equal... but some are more equal than others' ?

FourthWorld
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 7295
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:05 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by FourthWorld » Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:44 am

Dixie wrote:Steve…

I have to disagree… until recently 'liveCode' was only a 'paid for' product, then along came the kickstarter campaign to take it open source thereby allowing and at the same time encouraging many more people to have access to it and use it…
Those who contributed to the Kickstarter campaign paid for it.
So, hopefully we now have many more people coming to use 'liveCode'… and I hope that many of them coming to the platform are from 'many different walks of programming life'… many of these people, may and probably will, have their own thoughts about what 'liveCode' can do for them and at the same time, thought on what they would like to see in 'liveCode' as it goes forward…
In the spirit of open source, I would go so far as to say that anyone who contributes to the project has also "paid" for it, with their labor.

And then if we consider those who would write useful libraries and share them with the community, I'd say they pay for it too.

And at that point, evaluating who paid and who didn't would be difficult, because everything made with the GPL-governed Community Edition becomes part of the world's knowledge base, and I wouldn't want to be in the position of trying to measure which of those merit inclusion in some sort of voting system and which don't. And I doubt anyone at RunRev would either.

So instead, it seems simpler to just let the voting system remain where it is: absent. :)

Instead of votes, we might consider bounties. After all, if a feature is really useful to a good many professionals, it's likely also profitable for them to pool a modest portion of the ROI they expect from it and have a programmer implement it for them.

But even that's an unclear proposition, raising the question of what we can expect from RunRev for the Kickstarter amounts and/or licensing fees we've paid in terms of new features, and which new features we might reasonably be willing to take on as bounties.

For myself, I'd consider anything listed among the Kickstarter goals as a good basis for what we can expect from RunRev. And beyond that, even frequently-asked-for items like SFTP would still be something I'd be willing to pay additionally for, because I know I can make more money back from it than it would cost me since I'd be paying only a portion of something that so many people have said they need.

Would such bounties seem a reasonable middle ground to anyone else here?
Richard Gaskin
Community volunteer LiveCode Community Liaison

LiveCode development, training, and consulting services: Fourth World Systems: http://FourthWorld.com
LiveCode User Group on Facebook : http://FaceBook.com/groups/LiveCodeUsers/

SteveTX
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Feature Suggestions with voting system

Post by SteveTX » Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:42 am

Both of you have good points, but lets take a step back. The kickstarter didn't create livecode, it existed prior to that and did so on a commercial license basis. The point of a kickstarter, as opposed to private financing, is to maintain equity & control over intellectual property, in exchange for providing something to "the community."

RR satisfied those obligations to me and all other kickstarter donors entirely by providing a "Community Edition" for free. The obvious tradeoff for LC is that it gets publicity, wider acceptance, and more opportunity to develop LC, and finally of course to make money through services and commercial offerings. Even after the kickstarter, LiveCode has not abandoned the pay-for-play model. So I think to some good degree we can separate the kickstarter / community interest, which was discharged by giving away the Community Edition, from the commercial interest, which is contingently affirmed by the perpetual pay-for-play model which still exists. At the end of the day, the intellectual property for the LiveCode codebase is still owned and copyrighted by Runtime Revolution (ie not "the community"/donors), which is a business and it exists for the same reason all businesses do. TL;DR: Money talks, "free" walks.

In the interest of business, your duty is to cater to your clients. Your clients are those from whom your future revenues are originated. So that begs the question, where is LiveCode getting their primary funding from? Is it kickstarters, licenses, boot camps/seminars, or accessories? If it is licenses, that suggests their primary obligation is to the license holders. If it is boot camps and seminars, well then that means it is to those attendees, in which case the survey they sent out makes sense. However, unless LC is planning on holding another kickstarter for the purpose to developing LC at the behest of donors, their duty isn't to those kickstarter donors.

Regarding bounties, I think that is an interesting idea. The problem is that unless those bounties are paid for by the community, they aren't obligated to be integrated into the community or the commercial edition. If the bounty is a feature I paid for personally, I'm also buying for the right to keep that feature to myself as I will be the owner of the intellectual property. When I advocate for a feature request from LC, I'm not advocating for just my personal benefit, but the benefit of all LC users. If the feature development cost is paid out of the license fee we pay to LC, a voting/feedback mechanism by paid licensees is our right. I maintain that a generic wishing-well is not sufficient to represent us, nor is it meaningful.

Post Reply

Return to “Feature Requests”