Weighted Voting

I had been a Pro Subscriber for so long that with the update I now have 134 votes. That is over 2.5 pages  worth of votes.  In all my time on Roll20, I have never once gone to single-digit amounts of votes left, primarily because of the extremely high tendency for Suggestions to be closed without solution. I went from having about 12 votes that were constantly being refunded back to me to having 134 votes that will constantly be refunded back to me. Solution? Weighted votes. I do not want to tell Roll20 that I think 134 ideas are OK enough to look into, I want Roll20 to know that I think Two-Factor Authentication is worth all 134 of my votes.

Step one should be Roll20 proving that voting matters and that it is worth our time to review suggestions and add votes to them.  I did an analysis a couple of years ago on Roll20 voting that showed that many ideas with lots of votes never get implemented.  Those that do often take years. If they want users to take voting seriously they need to give us a reason. -Adam

This is a bit absurd actually. I've somehow managed to get 1042 votes just being a free member and there's outright not even enough suggestions to use  those unless I started a ton of threads. I'd vastly prefer if they let me allocate my votes either by numerical values or % of my total count rather than me saying "oh 1000 ideas here are good". Not to mention some of the most voted on suggestions are still ignored (transmogrify a page, foreground layer, card deck upgrades, finishing the External Journal which is only semi functional nowadays). Having an actual threshold of voting available for when a suggestion should/can start being researched and implemented would be wonderful if they could provide it beyond the 100 vote threshold of if a suggestion is valid or not.

Meta K. said: This is a bit absurd actually. I've somehow managed to get 1042 votes just being a free member and there's outright not even enough suggestions to use  those unless I started a ton of threads. Its because they are giving you 1 vote for every 50 hours played.  Some players just stay logged into Roll20 constantly, accruing hours even when they are not actively using the VTT.  For example, your 52,036 hours played over the course of 8 years since you created your Roll20 account is the equivalent of spending nearly 18 hours every day in Roll20 during that time. I would argue this lends credence to the fact that votes don't actually matter. -Adam

Meta K. said: This is a bit absurd actually. I've somehow managed to get 1042 votes just being a free member and there's outright not even enough suggestions to use  those unless I started a ton of threads. I'd vastly prefer if they let me allocate my votes either by numerical values or % of my total count rather than me saying "oh 1000 ideas here are good". Not to mention some of the most voted on suggestions are still ignored (transmogrify a page, foreground layer, card deck upgrades, finishing the External Journal which is only semi functional nowadays). Having an actual threshold of voting available for when a suggestion should/can start being researched and implemented would be wonderful if they could provide it beyond the 100 vote threshold of if a suggestion is valid or not. Please remember, each function deserves its own thread.  Don't suggest multiple new functions in one thread.  Let people vote for one thing at a time.  I, for one, am glad we have so many votes now, as having so few votes encouraged people to write suggestions for multiple new functions.

Weighted voting (allowing multiple Upvotes on a single suggestion... +100 instead of +1) Or other refinements to the new Suggestions Voting would be welcomed The important factor is Roll20 Team, Staff, Devs, carefully parsing the Suggestions & really understanding what Users want, what laypersons are asking for, beyond the Headline. Really being able to listen to what Users are saying in their-own-words and Parse that into Dev-Priorities with technical restatements. Regardless of the Number of Votes (there were plenty before, there are even more now), the key to this working well is for Roll20 Staff on Community Forums to continually demonstrate that the Users are being heard & their Requests are being Parsed, Understood, Translated, Prioritized, Passed-up the chain in an appropriate effective way. I think this forum is golden for Qualitative, Actual-user feedback in ordinary plain website user language. People who actually use the product heavily, responding with their own words. That is what I hope Roll20 can listen to & fellow users can support each other with +1 or +1000.

Strong agree on weighted voting. Got lots of votes. Would like to use them on something. When I saw the news system, I was shocked to find they WEREN'T using weighted voting.  I don't know if downvoting is something people want to get into, but I've seen some very BAD ideas floated, too, that I'd like to weigh in on.

The Foegetter said: I had been a Pro Subscriber for so long that with the update I now have 134 votes. That is over 2.5 pages  worth of votes.  In all my time on Roll20, I have never once gone to single-digit amounts of votes left, primarily because of the extremely high tendency for Suggestions to be closed without solution. I went from having about 12 votes that were constantly being refunded back to me to having 134 votes that will constantly be refunded back to me. Solution? Weighted votes. I do not want to tell Roll20 that I think 134 ideas are OK enough to look into, I want Roll20 to know that I think Two-Factor Authentication is worth all 134 of my votes. Literally everything said in this post, including the plug for 2FA. I recently gave up pro because I haven't seen movement on anything that has been remotely interesting or helpful to me, and after watching 2FA just sit in researching forever when as an engineer I know exactly how easy it is to deploy into just about any authentication architecture, I've lost faith that things that matter to me are getting done. John P said: Strong agree on weighted voting. Got lots of votes. Would like to use them on something. When I saw the news system, I was shocked to find they WEREN'T using weighted voting.  I don't know if downvoting is something people want to get into, but I've seen some very BAD ideas floated, too, that I'd like to weigh in on. Downvotes (perhaps it costs two votes or something to constrain trolling?) would be nice too. There's lots of noise in the suggestions. But, I think the larger issue is seeing movement on the things that are upvoted. Upvoting them harder or eliminating the noise is not necessarily going to move the needle on seeing things done that are specifically being asked for in the service.