Excellent idea. I'm pretty sure we will implement an "upvote" feature or something similar.

This is a great idea! +1

Daniele Rosario

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Nikolai Plath notifications@github.comwrote:

Excellent idea. I'm pretty sure we will implement an "upvote" feature or
something similar.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub#105 (comment)
.

If we had an 'upvote' button I'd use it on this thread :)

-Chad

[image: Small Logo] http://www.s-go.net/
Chad Windnagle
s-go Consulting
607-330-2574 x103
607-229-6260 (Cell)
Website Design - SEO - Video http://www.s-go.net/
Follow Me: [image: Facebook] http://www.facebook.com/sgoconsulting [image:
LinkedIn] http://www.linkedin.com/in/drmmr763 [image:
Twitter]http://www.twitter.com/drmmr763

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Daniele Rosario
notifications@github.comwrote:

This is a great idea! +1

Daniele Rosario

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Nikolai Plath notifications@github.comwrote:

Excellent idea. I'm pretty sure we will implement an "upvote" feature or
something similar.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<
https://github.com/joomla/jissues/issues/105#issuecomment-17823757>
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub#105 (comment)
.

For an example of this feature in the real life see the PHP bug tracker: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=61483

Nice idea

Hacking at this unofficially as part of the CoderFaire hack-a-thon

The first cut at this feature is now implemented. Things to work out are preventing abuse on it (we don't want someone voting a thousand times in 2 minutes) and updating values when the vote data is displayed when a new vote is added.

@mbabker Nice to hear that you liked the idea.

A tiny concern on the "abuse" side: I think we should also store the username somewhere, not only to prevent abuse but also to remind the user that he/she has already voted for this issue.... Or maybe display a list of who has voted ?

Definitely some thinking to do on that. The voting is publicly accessible (the one on the php.net tracker is too), so usernames wouldn't work 100% of the time unless we want to restrict that to a registered users only option.

I think we should restrict to a registered users only. Showing the list will not help. And IMO people will "abuse" :(

Can you say what kind of "abuse" do you have in mind? Considering that larger communities have a similar open non-registration concept for their trackers, why shouldn't we have one?

I mean voting several times :)

What about setting a cookie when voting to prevent multiple votes? I know
it's not the best, but might help.

Or, maybe logging a guest's IP when voting?

I do agree that restricting voting to registered voters will help reduce
this abuse, but might also be a small barrier for participation.

Just a thought.

Best,

Matt Thomas
Founder betweenbrain™
Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework
Phone: 203.632.9322
Twitter: @betweenbrain
Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain

Sent from mobile. Please excuse any typos and brevity.
On Nov 2, 2013 7:14 AM, "Dmitry Rekun" notifications@github.com wrote:

I mean voting several times :)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub#105 (comment)
.

Anyone happen to know how bugs.php.net handles it, since that's how I practically modeled this?

I just tried and was able to vote three times for an issue on php.net - (maybe that's why they get hacked :P)

So, I would suggest we record every available info when submitting a vote (username if available, IP adress, date time, etc) so in case we get "suspicious votes" we might have some information to detect fraudes ...

That seems reasonable to me.

Agree

Sorry to be late to the discussion, but what if the "vote" was actually done via comment, either :+1: or a hash tag #metoo or #up or #down. On our side of things we can hide those types of comments but tally special hash tags. We can then remove any dupes passively or actively from the comment stream.

Sounds interesting, but IMO it's not too obvious for users.

Well, in the Issue Tracker UI, you'd have buttons for "Up Vote", "Down Vote", "Me Too", but to actually record them, you add a comment behind the scenes. On Github, you'd see a lists of comments with just that hash tag in them and that might look a bit strange but no stranger than people using :+1: shorthand like they do today in many repo's.

The point is though, it's an authenticated response so you don't have to do strange and wonderful workarounds to prevent duplicate voting.

Hmm... Might be the way. But if the user will click several times on the buttons we will record all these activity, right? If so I do not understand how to count these records correctly.

We can do some pretty cool stats by parsing hash-tags out of comments :) It's really easy to create a voting thread on an RFC issue (in fact, you could even set a time limit for voting, but that's for a future version, hehe).

Not a fan on this being open to anonymous voting. Can we not simply hide that block of information (or make it readonly) for non authorised users

So, before I start refactoring this, which route do we go?

• Voting based on specified hashtags in comments posted from GitHub based on @eddieajau suggestion
• Current form with a requirement for the user to be authenticated and only allowing the user to have one vote (user can "re-vote" (change values), but it updates their existing vote versus adding a new one)

More I think about it more I am against the voting in the comments. This will lead to a mess in the discussion.

Is there really a use case for down voting an item ?
Will the occasional user be aware of the possibility of using hash-tags to perform this action ?

Yesterday I visited the Mozilla support forum. They use a rather big button that is displayed twice on the page stating just this:

I have this problem, too

This button is also accessible to "guest" users, giving them the possibility to leave their e-mail address to receive status updates.

Example: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/975899

On the other hand I think the use of hash-tags is really cool for a voting thread and we definitely should start to implement the parsing logic (²)

Is there really a use case for down voting an item ?

Hard to tell. Do not see any currently.

Will the occasional user be aware of the possibility of using hash-tags to perform this action ?

That's a good note. Not everyone will be aware...

On the other hand I think the use of hash-tags is really cool for a voting thread and we definitely should start to implement the parsing logic

Do you mean that "I have this problem too" will be count based on the button and voting based on the parsing?

So in votingV2 I've dropped the ability to vote anonymously on an issue. Each vote is recorded individually and associated with a user. So if we wanted anonymous votes with this code, we'd have to come up with some sort of unique identifier, but at that point, the code's no better than what exists now.

Just updated my env to votingV2 branch and tested it. Works well - I can vote and vote is getting recorded. It allows me to vote many times, but this only updates my initial vote. So works as expected and anonymous can not vote.

If will stick with your code may be open a PR then?

Day late and dollar short, but #302 is open now.