Re: Sorting out User Stories

The meaning of the votes is always the same. +1: approve, 0: abstain, -1: 
object/veto.
It is fairly common for people to use variations a la +0.5 or -0 to 
express more nuanced opinions but these really don't change the outcome of 
the vote and votes can't simply be summed up.

I think Sandro's proposed categories make sense and I agree with Ben: it 
doesn't matter whether people veto'ed a story for this version only or 
not.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - 
IBM Software Group




From:   Ben <ben@thatmustbe.me>
To:     Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de>
Cc:     Social Web Working Group <public-socialweb@w3.org>
Date:   02/27/2015 04:22 AM
Subject:        Re: Sorting out User Stories
Sent by:        benjamin.a.roberts83@gmail.com



I suspect we will find that ambiguity in voting will not matter much.
I don't think we should want to throw any of these user stories away.  If 
a user story was created it shows that someone is interested in it.  
Anything that does not make it this round should likely be reviewed in any 
future iteration, it would also give a chance to rewrite some of the 
problematic user stories.

Ben



On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de> 
wrote:
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