I love the name. It would have been funny if the first request would have been: “Make left click select the default” 
Can i kindly suggest Ordering(e.g most popular, newest) and ability to show more 20,40,80 features per page
Sry if i missed it, but i get Error 500 (misconfigured) by tryng to view the site at this moment, so cant confirm.
Baam !
I like it !!!
One thing - can we have a “sort by” button, by votes or date or…
The error 500s are because in less than 24 hours, we’ve apparently spiked the rate limit for the number of uploads or requests that are allowed from imgur if you’re using the free access to their API. I’ve pinged Francesco and Pablo and we’re looking into the best way to fix this. Like I said in the first post… be prepared for interesting breakages.
The example shows the use of crowd control tools XD, but that’s not the real point. Mine was just a joke.
There will always be duplicate, LQ, suggestions etc etc…
The point is: If you flag someone’s suggestion as LQ, you’re slapping in the poster’s face his incompetence. Result? Worst than how you may think. He most likely won’t post anything anymore even if he has a good idea. But if he goes butthurted he could become malicious.
Is it so hard to reply to a “popular proposal” in a nice way instead, and after the reply keep the discussion open for a while until it goes nowhere? Maybe the developers could think that the proposal is not so bad as they were thinking.
Prioritization will be always a developers decision, it doesn’t really matter how much votes has a proposal.
Example:
Title: “Make cycles good for interior rendering”.
Text: “Implement for cycles an alternative GI method that speed up interior rendering instead of denoising filters because they blur textures’ details”.
Probably you will see a good interest on it.
And developers: “We take it into account”
… while they think: “We don’t need it in our cartoons, it’s not worth the time required for it. Let’s wait some volunteer work”.
You know, my pessimistic nature makes me think that all the suggestion taken really in consideration will be the smallest ones.
Oh… and the ones made by “well known people” from the community, cause sheep use to eat every shit comes from them sayin that it taste good.
People won’t set priorities even if a suggestion is full of tech papers.
Great initiative!
Some quick remarks from me:
- +1 to sorting (votes and date at least)
- Add a “Committer” badge or similar to devs? (As far as I’ve seen that’s not part of Blender ID, but I could imagine it would be useful to immediately recognize a devs comments)
- Maybe this is the fault of the BlenderID but I was confused by only having Gravatar for my profile pic, I expected to be able to upload a profile picture in my account settings.
- Putting the logo/banner from right to the left hand site? I just realized there’s a “Home” button at the top but before that I was confused every time I wanted to go back to the index.
I’m sure I could come up with more, but I suppose you have enough work right now after “launch”. 
Not to be rude, but isn’t it important to get feedback for low quality performance? If some loud ignorant user has no concept of how much harm they are causing the community, they can keep on spamming everywhere with garbage. If I posted something, and it was flagged as low quality, I would try harder to make it better the next time.
I can understand if you really tried hard to do the best you can, only to be slapped down by an LQ label, how much that would suck. But I doubt that if anyone really put time and effort into their proposal that it would be low quality. Mostly I’m worried about loud trolls who post thoughtless garbage. If you don’t want your post flagged as low quality, don’t post low quality content. On the other hand, I think the down-vote/up-vote system would do a decent job of filtering out those LQ posts.
But some sort of actionability flag is totally important. In your example of “make cycles good for interior rendering”, I’m sure it would get a ton of votes, but what does that mean if there is no clear path forward on how to accomplish that? I think you will get a lot of frustrated users when they see “make cycles good at interior rendering” at the top of the list with 1000s of votes, but no action from the blender foundation. people will get pissed at the BF for not listening to the community, but when all the community is saying is “make it better” how are they supposed to respond to that? Perhaps a “complexity” flag would be useful. Then it would be much more clear to users when a proposal is very difficult to implement, and they would be able to set their expectations accordingly.
Hitting your points in order:
- Sorting would certainly be a big help. The number of posts people have made has been a lot more than I expected… especially in such a short period of time. It’s definitely something I’ll like to add.
- I have mixed feelings about highlighting developers on the site. There is a core team in Blender, but there is some flux to that. Also, there are occasional contributors and even add-on developers… not to mention the fact that regular user feedback is also really valuable. For now I think it’s best to just display everyone the same
- Yeah… I think Blender ID uses Gravatar to manage profile images. There may be a way to locally override that, but I don’t think I will. That folks keep the same avatar across all Blender sites that use Blender ID.
- For me, the important part of the site are the ideas that everyone’s posting. To that end, it makes sense to put the most important stuff where folks are going to look first. Of course, right now I’m just using a minimally customized version of the default Dillo theme. Further customization will come in time.
Of course, but does that mean there can’t also be more tools to deal with them? I don’t see the argument.
The point is: If you flag someone’s suggestion as LQ, you’re slapping in the poster’s face his incompetence. Result? Worst than how you may think. He most likely won’t post anything anymore even if he has a good idea. But if he goes butthurted he could become malicious.
Don’t get hung up on the words “low quality”. Of course, getting criticized in any way can hurt people’s feelings. However, I would find it much more insulting to not be criticized and instead be ignored.
A very similar thing happens in the bug tracker: Sometimes people post crap on there and the report needs to be closed and people get their feelings hurt.
If you want to get things done, you have to be able to say unpleasant things sometimes. If some people can’t learn to deal with that, they’ll be left by the wayside one way (leaving on their own) or another (getting ignored).
Is it so hard to reply to a “popular proposal” in a nice way instead, and after the reply keep the discussion open for a while until it goes nowhere? Maybe the developers could think that the proposal is not so bad as they were thinking.
Why do you assume it would “go nowhere”? It could become the #1 longstanding issue and eventually users will become discontent about that, as well.
Prioritization will be always a developers decision, it doesn’t really matter how much votes has a proposal.
Ultimately yes, but that doesn’t mean the votes are meaningless. If the votes meant nothing, the entire platform would be kind of pointless.
Example:
Title: “Make cycles good for interior rendering”.
Text: “Implement for cycles an alternative GI method that speed up interior rendering instead of denoising filters because they blur textures’ details”.
Probably you will see a good interest on it.
And developers: “We take it into account”
… while they think: “We don’t need it in our cartoons, it’s not worth the time required for it. Let’s wait some volunteer work”.
I don’t see why developers should be duplicitous like that. Don’t forget that external developers may be looking into the proposals as well. They may want to offer their services to the community, but they certainly won’t start looking at the bottom of the list and they won’t want to wade through useless proposals, either.
You know, my pessimistic nature makes me think that all the suggestion taken really in consideration will be the smallest ones.
Well, if something is a rather “low-hanging fruit” with surprisingly broad user support, wouldn’t it be good if features got implemented that way? That’s how the website could actually be useful. Would you prefer the website to be all about user fantasies that realistically cannot be implemented anyway?
Oh… and the ones made by “well known people” from the community, cause sheep use to eat every shit comes from them sayin that it taste good.
I don’t see evidence that this is happening, at all. Just look at Andrew Price. He’s a very well-known member of the community, but almost nothing happened after he proposed to do something about the UI.
On the other hand, if somebody is a truly esteemed artist and if they give a good proposal, their input should be given priority over the opinions of the unwashed masses. Meritocracy, if you will.
People won’t set priorities even if a suggestion is full of tech papers.
Nor should they, because most tech papers are worse than useless. They lure you in with a promising result but then they don’t mention a lot of the problems and details and they might expect you to implement the whole thing yourself, or they ship code that only builds successfully when the stars align under a full moon and you’re using an enchanted version of GCC on a very occult flavor of Linux… but I digress.
The point is, proposals don’t have to be technical at all. Rather they should be specific as to what sort of result/workflow is to be achieved. Sometimes the desired result is impossible, but users can’t be expected to know that and that’s not a problem. It just needs to be cleared up, no need for hurt feelings!
Regarding the idea for a ‘low quality’ flag, it does seem to be a little harsh in terms of word choice.
Rather, the developers can instead attach a needs clarification or needs more detail label to the request, it would illustrate the same point, but in a clearer way.
Now for the case where someone is just interested in spamming garbage, you can always have a system for banning users for that.
One thing I would like to say, regarding the design, is that I prefer the blender.today method of only showing images as post thumbnails instead of as ‘banners’ like Right-click Select. Aside from making some posts immediately more dominant simply because of their size, it makes the design slightly confusing for me as posts without images look like the titles for the posts with images. To explain this a bit better is the screenshot below, showing how these 4 different posts end up looking like two posts:
Posts with images don’t have a clear title because it’s fairly hidden up in the top right (though I understand this is emphasized by the fact that most of the images posted so far have dark backgrounds). I initially thought that these extra large posts were that big because they had been highlighted by the admin, almost like an ‘editors pick’. It was only after that I realised it was all posts that have images.
I also think that if all posts are subjected to the same formatting it pits them against each other slightly more evenly as people will have to read each title instead of just clicking on the post with the flashy image.
Attachments
I think it would be more constructive/productive that as a requirement to give a vote down, be mandatory/obligatory to enter to the entry and leave a comment.
The wide image thing is based on a few things. On blender.today and on rightclickselect it works the same way: posts with a large number of upvotes get the large banners… but they only get them if they’re submitted with an image. However, for the first 20 posts or so, I didn’t have image uploading working. That meant the feature wasn’t available. Now it is.
On a related matter, I personally don’t mind giving more attention to proposals that have images associated with them. That means (in most cases) that whomever made the submission actually took the time to think it through and make a mock-up. Right-Click Select is not meant to be a dumping ground for just random one-liner ideas. In the best case, these are well thought-out proposals that are clear, make sense, and fit well with Blender.
On an unrelated note, Francesco Siddi did a lot of work yesterday on Dillo to help fix the problems that Right-Click Select was having with maxing out on requests to imgur’s API. With any luck, we should see a lot less of those Error 500 messages. Big, huge thanks to Francesco for that.
And one last thing… I’m getting a lot of feedback on the site, but there’s not been a great place to collect it. What do you guys think of having a “meta” category (or perhaps a more clear name) where people could make suggestions on the site itself? Should that be there, or would that distract from the real purpose of posting ideas for Blender? The alternatives would be using this thread, a post on my website, or some social media thing. What do you think?
+1 for meta category.
Also, is the source code available anywhere? - Could be good to be able to accept contributions early on.
Include link to repository at bottom of page for eg, so people who are interested can check on making improvements.
Quality control isn’t about intimidation, people can a always edit their proposals to make them better quality.
Users may propose something useful but not give enough information for a developer to fully understand whats being asked (quite common in fact).
It’s not as simple as down-voting bad suggestions.
The StackExchange network puts a lot of emphasis on posts being good quality so anyone who reads them isn’t wasting time having to understand something which is poorly thought out.
Am very serious about this - longer term, if there is no way to flag posts as low quality/needing attention from the author. I expect most developers wont bother visiting the site at all, and it will end up becoming a lot of people shouting into the wind (as happened with BlenderStorm).
For now its starting up so its not reasonable to expect everything to be done immediately.
Good call. The site is basically Dillo with only a few small modifications. There are a few feature requests so far that are a bit site-specific for RCS, but I think quite a few would be happily accepted by the Dillo devs.
I’ll add a link to Dillo at the bottom of the page.
As Ace pointed out, the issue is primarily with the phrasing of “low quality” – describing someone’s proposal as low quality is too ambiguous (ironically). You can’t police bad communication with even shittier communication. Simply include enough flags so the mods/admins can communicate clearly what is actually wrong with the proposal. Too vague; too broad; unintelligible grammar; unclear use-case; etc.
Anyway, I wish the site luck. I think the name is perfect.
“low quality”–>Why not just “Incomplete”
Little burp in the system folks. Seems I’ve somehow broken the ability to edit posts. Hopefully I’ll get that fixed soon.
On the upside, all of the submit and comment fields (and editing once it’s fixed) now use Markdown syntax rather than the kind of bulky CKEditor that we were using. So there’s good news there.
That works too, though it may not be descriptive enough.
Some things I often miss from questions:
- Why is it needed? (in some cases a user-story)
- Why can’t existing features be used? (when there are existing ways to do whats being asked)
- Expand on: “Make it work like application ****”.
As long as you can say why its incomplete, should be ok.