If you want our input on our priorities, give us at least 20-30 votes!!
Some feature voting systems allow for up to 3 votes per item if it is a high priority for you.
I agree. To only allow a total of 3 votes severely limits our abilities to express our support of ideas.
2 Likes
Good luck. The voting system may delay this lol
1 Like
For consideration: 
@tempest-weather without more votes, it significantly reduces the ability for us to provide our input/feedback. It seems currently that there is almost no benefit in voting for anything with less than 30 votes if we want our vote to actually make changes. Some systems allow for upto 3 votes on items that are important to participant. hmm, poll does not seem to work! 
More votes please
- 10 votes
- 20 votes
- leave as-is
0 voters
(fixed your poll, Eric)
actually there should be no limit. This whole limit system is only giving usable results, when there is a limited voting time, as in “casts your votes in the next week”, in which case people voting might go over all the feature requests and only vote for their top 5 items. Currently, after users cast their votes a long time ago, they are not likely going to change them. So the users don’t judge new features.
With unlimited voting time, the amounts of votes should be unlimited as well.
With unlimited votes, everything is fair, and sometimes I would give a vote and sometimes I won’t. That should give an up-to-date vote for the popularity of a feature request.
3 Likes
Or… perhaps it would help to have some limited number of votes that can be used within a given time period - say two per quarter or five per year or something. While I can see that unlimited votes might become an issue, @sunny is right that having a static number of votes that never changes means that people are likely to vote that many times in a short period and then never change their votes afterward.
For the votes to mean anything, it’s important to avoid either extreme.
What do you see is the problem with unlimited votes?
What if some request got 2000 votes? would that simply imply that it was very popular? Some other feature request might only get 100 votes.
The only hypothetical problem would be if everybody votes for every request, but I don’t think that will ever happen.
Maybe a dynamic number of votes where each user gets 1/4 to 1/2 the number of votes as there are open Feature Requests.
Why would that help??
Even if some user decide to vote for all requests, then that user isn’t very specific, but it also doesn’t change which feature is ahead.
As soon as you start limiting people for some other reason, there vote is blocked, even though they may like the feature. They are unlikely go over all there other votes to find a feature that the like the less, in order to cast a vote on the just blocked one.
Lets agree that the current limit of 5 isn’t very helpful and doesn’t give anybody any insight in what today the best feature is to work on. My votes and probably many others are very old, and are probably mostly for my own features.
Just don’t complicate a voting system when unlimited voting works just great. The only restriction is that you can only add a single vote to a feature. (I shouldn’t be able to vote 1000 times for my own requests 
)
So limiting the number of votes allows voting for all feature requests but unlimited voting does not? Your first paragraph doesn’t make sense with your last one. Maybe that isn’t what you meant but that is how I interpreted it.
I suggest something like say 1/2 of the votes as the number of feature requests so if there were say 16 requests, a user would have 8 votes. How could they vote on all of the requests? The whole point of not having enough votes for all requests is to force a user’s vote to actually mean something to the developers.
1 Like
Not there is exactly a problem with unlimited votes, but with some sort of constraint on voting, people will be more likely to choose those features that truly matter to them.
It can work any way you do it, but the data set is much noisier on either end of extremes (too much limitation or none at all).
2 Likes
it doesn’t work like that does it?. If the system blocks me from casting a vote because of some constraint (in any way), I will just not cast my vote. It is an illusion that I would change my past votings in order to unblock the voting. The system would actually would be less noisy with unlimited voting, as you just get more data.
@gizmoev sure I want my votes to be meaningful. That’s why I would only cast votes on feautures that I would value. Limiting only causes the system to miss my valued vote as I won’t be able to vote.
That is definitely not what I was saying, and I can’t see how you could read that into my text, so I cannot explain it better.
I agree with at least part of your assertion. This is why I would recommend a limited number of votes that is periodically refreshed. The constraint drives careful assessment but periodically getting NEW votes to cast means you don’t have to go back and change old votes - though conceivably (depending on how it’s handled), a person could go back and vote AGAIN for a feature that isn’t yet implemented and still important to them.
Not worth trying to convince anyone though who just sees it differently though and I don’t see that it’s worth stirring up trouble over. You’re not necessarily wrong about the unlimited votes - I just have never seen it work effectively without SOME sort of constraint.
of course you have seen many examples without constraints (because it is basically the best system ). Take youtube (but any other will do). You can see that some videos get many likes, but surely the amount of views isn’t the same. I could cast a like without any restriction, and the conclusions are very clear… some videos are liked a lot more than others. You could use that as a percentage of the amount of views.
just to be clear, and I stated that before, you can have a perfectly good system with constrains like having only 5 votes, but only if you do that in limited time, like “cast your 5 votes for all these features in the next week”. That would make users consider all those features before casting their 5 votes. But if the period is unlimited, a user cannot consider all the features before casting votes.