OT: simultaneous post

[Henrik_Volkers]

I vote for the idea that the Reply to Message window has a auto updating field that tell me who else has just hit the reply button to this thread. 😉

[muks]

---

Henrik Volkers wrote:
I vote for the idea that the Reply to Message window has a auto updating field that tell me who else has just hit the reply button to this thread. 😉

---

And leave it without replying if there was someone like ben in that list. Seriously the first step would be to correctly tell how many times the message has been viewed atleast. We have seen many times after replying that both the messages (original and the replied) showing "0" viewed. 

[Henrik_Volkers]

---

muks wrote:

---

Henrik Volkers wrote:
I vote for the idea that the Reply to Message window has a auto updating field that tell me who else has just hit the reply button to this thread. 😉

---

And leave it without replying if there was someone like ben in that list. Seriously the first step would be to correctly tell how many times the message has been viewed atleast. We have seen many times after replying that both the messages (original and the replied) showing "0" viewed. 

---

Well, at least I want the choice to wait until he's finished 😉   A BEN indicator might be just enough :o

Pssst, be quiet children while the knight is talking 😛 😄 

Message Edited by Henrik Volkers on 03-24-2010 02:01 PM

[muks]

---

Pssst, be quiet children while the knight is talking

---

LOL!!!

[Ben]

---

Henrik Volkers wrote:

---

muks wrote:

---

Henrik Volkers wrote:
I vote for the idea that the Reply to Message window has a auto updating field that tell me who else has just hit the reply button to this thread. 😉

---

And leave it without replying if there was someone like ben in that list. Seriously the first step would be to correctly tell how many times the message has been viewed atleast. We have seen many times after replying that both the messages (original and the replied) showing "0" viewed. 

---

Well, at least I want the choice to wait until he's finished 😉   A BEN indicator might be just enough 😮

Pssst, be quiet children while the knight is talking 😛 😄 

...

---

I happen to like the post collisions. When two pepole from different parts of the world react the same way at the same time...

Ben

[JackDunaway]

1. 20 votes is a good number, because this represents about the top quartile of votes. Roughly 75% of the ideas receive fewer than 20 votes.
2. 6 months is much too long. I would propose 1 month. Based on the chart below (which does not include Ideas that received no Kudos), roughly 2.7 Ideas have been posted each day since the Exchange began. Let's round it up to 3 Ideas per day. If 6 months were the threshhold, we would have at least 540 Ideas to sort through. If the ideas were archived after 1 month, we would have only around 100 Ideas to sort through
3. No! You need to be able to go back to old ideas to Kudos or comment. Actually, old ideas that eventually get Kudoe'd up need a new tag, like "Resurrected" or something
4. I like tagging them with "Archived", "Shelved", "Back Burner".... Ideas with these tags would have to excluded from the Hot Ideas, New Ideas, and Top Ideas sections. Also, In Beta should be removed from those three tabs, because they are locked from Kudo'ing further. There should also be a tab called "All Ideas", which shows all tabs.
5. I kinda like tst's "Back Burner", although it's an idiom that would not cleanly translate. Archived seems like a very fitting term.

[Darin.K]

The problem I see with the idea exchange is that there is little "exchange" that can be accomplished.  I'd suggest a 'sandbox' board for brainstorming ideas.  This should be a normal board, much like Breakpoint (Kudos, no solutions).  Vague ideas can be thrashed around, replies Kudoed comments easily followed without scrolling up and down.  Ideas vetted through this board with tweaks and comprimises could then be posted on the official Idea Exchange with a reasonable expectation of gaining some support.  I would expect this to cut some noise on the Idea Exchange.  Boosting the SNR would be useful for us as well as the NI engineers who read through it.

For example, I think that something needs to be done with For Loops.  There are a few ideas, but none that really get traction.  I want a specific function (reverse iteration).  This could be (1) useless to everyone but me (2) accomplished with a more general idea that we agree on (haven't yet) (3) stunningly simple and brilliant and halt shipment of LV10 to implement or (4) idea number 6 or 7 involving For Loops that get enough Kudos to raise awareness but not enough to get anything done.  (3) is about as likely as me winning the Lotto (and I never buy tickets so it would involve the additional step of finding one on the street), but with a little (or a lot of) discussion we could find some consensus of what we'd like to see done. Or we can wait for the usual fling mud and see what sticks process to work.

Look at the ideas that have "graduated", maybe one or two aren't cosmetic changes or cutting a few clicks.  No one person on a coffee break is going to get the idea for a substantive change that we all clamor for (if they did, NI should hire them now). We really like the eye candy, but substantive changes are hard to agree on.  For example, look at Jack's nice graph, the poor fellow had to resort to Excel to do that since we can't seem to get Text Labels with decent formatting on our XY graphs without a major hack.

[JackDunaway]

---

Darin.K wrote:

...look at Jack's nice graph, the poor fellow had to resort to Excel...

---

D'oh! I was ashamed to post that in Excel! At the time, all I had access to was the csv I posted last week of the top Ideas, and I didn't have the few extra minutes it would take to write the dummy program to import into LabVIEW and make a graph. (but you're right... Excel does make a better looking graph...)

I can't say I support having a sandbox board and a "real" Idea Exchange. I think a better solution is just to allow Kudos on replies on the Idea Exchange, so it would serve the purpose of the whole process: someone initiates a thread, conversation ensues that hones the idea, and the replies with the best features end up getting the most votes. This is a method not unlike Stack Overflow, where anyone can respond to a question, but the best replies quickly "float to the top."

The best way to decrease SNR is simply to add more tags. Particularly, I like Laura's "Archived", and we also need a tag that basically says "Reviewed by R&D and Rejected". Another tag would be "Just didn't gain enough support" to slap on the old Ideas that only have a vote or two. I would also like to see an "In Consideration" that would point the community to discuss Ideas that R&D is really considering, but they have some concerns about the ROI (that's Return On Investment, not Region Of Interest for all my IMAQ homies out there).

Well, back to Laura's original topic: does anyone have any feedback for her? Anyone have an opinion of 1 month versus 6 months for "Archived"?

[Darin.K]

---

JackDunaway wrote:

---

The best way to decrease SNR is simply to add more tags.

---

Decreasing SNR is bad. 

In principle I agree that Kudos to replies would be ideal.  I'll sit back, wait for this suggestion to gain enough Kudos on Lithium's Idea Exchange to be implemented, wait for NI to upgrade its software and the changes to take effect.  Then look out, LV2030 will rock.    The sandbox idea would be my "short-term" fix.  The current exchange is a pain-in-the-butt compared to using the other boards.

Personally, I don't see the need for archiving as much as a semi-functional search engine.  Let us filter and sort by date and or Kudos and we can see as little or as much as we please.   Better categories would help more than more tags (IMO).  What good are they when 819/930 ideas fall into one category?  That is where some focussing could occur.

[JackDunaway]

---

Darin.K wrote:

Decreasing SNR is bad. 

---

Did I type decrease SNR? I meant decrease NSR.... you know, just a simple keystroke miss.... all that NOT-logic is getting to me.