Time to start getting conclusions.

I was actually thinking to send the link of the Brainstorm proposal and this thread to the maemo.org contributors that got a device discount last week. If a consensus doesn't come alone, then propose that someone from the Council would take the action of coming up with a decision during the November sprint.

Traffic on various threads show there are too many corner cases to come up with a solution that is better than the current one. Better in the sense that it provides developers of useful programs with a test device.

Is it possible to allow the community to thumb up on the entries in the Fremantle_Developer_Device_Queue?

You could Brainstorm for that.

I think it's a good idea, at least we can get more opinions/POV.

... but then I thought why bothering. If someone cares so much about karma and is so unhappy about the current way of handling it, he or she would be here active helping to get a solution. If you need to chase people is because they are not unhappy (one could say).

I have put this in the queue of the maemo.org development process: http://wiki.maemo.org/Maemo.org_prop...ew_.26_Renewed

I am afraid I have to say that I don't trust popularity contests. They are based on the false premise that popularity (what can be measured) truly correlates with quality (what people really want to use).

Couple points:

• What happens if application, although quite solution, is still the only mean to accomplish the something? Giving points and encouraging route towards road to nowhere surely can't be the correct thing to do!
• Even if there were nearly perfect applications many people would use and thus probably vote (knowingly or nonknowingly) even the worse ones due information asymmetry.
• The raw data lacks points for reasoning that could support strategic decision making. If proper marketing study would have to be made anyways why not then start with it and stop messing with the whole argumentum ad populum mess?

Tbh the setting of the original question in this thread and in brainstorm sets dangerous agenda. Liked probably because people instrisicly love being part of decision making process but misleading nevertheless. Experts are still experts. Dig that word "expert" from some better dictionary and ponder about that - I urge you all!

Let's take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Karma is not an 'excellence in engineering' award, nor is it a voting mechanism. Also, what you are suggesting is even more dangerous - someone 'higher up' classifying apps into 'worse' and 'near perfect' is basically a call to halt all innovation. Let developers scratch their itches the way the want to (within platform recommendations), and let people say what they think of those scratchers (+help improve them). As easy as that.

Karma based on measured software updates is a good metric because it is best measure of.

1) Userbase that actually wants to use the s/w
2) Development activity

Number two could be 'abused' by developers releasing many small updates. But even that is not such a bad thing.

I believe some of the downsides will end up being self-correcting anyway.

There seems to be quite many votes already. Any plans to actually implement this in the near future?