- From: Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de>
- Date: 27 Feb 2015 06:59:31 +0100
- To: public-socialweb@w3.org
- Cc: a.kuckartz@ping.de
I think it has now become obvious that the meaning (semantic ;-) of a vote should better have been decided before the vote has taken place. But now we seem to have to live with the result. One major problem I see is that "-1" can mean very different things. In some cases it means that the voter considers the user story to be out of scope or bad and therefore is really against it. In other cases it means that the voter only is against consideration for the first version of the specification but likes it or is neutral regarding future versions. It leads to additional work but I think that this ambiguity of "-1" should be taken into account in the selection process. Cheers, Andreas
Received on Friday, 27 February 2015 05:59:56 UTC