Thanks for your kind words :) I don't have time to answer to all of this today, so I will just reply to the most important stuff.
On Friday, December 09, 2016 09:01:16 PM Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Why did you vote *0* on finishing the first iteration of the most > critical speed fixes?? (and why did you change that vote from its > earlier value of 200?) (That's about a WoT task) Because: - As promised I will fix this for free as a volunteer. - There is significant progress on it already: I have been pushing code for this very specific issue every day for weeks, if not months (check your IRC logs for the GitHub bots, it's the issue 3816 branch). While I would prefer to not get into the potential trap of promising a precise date when it will be finished; I can say that it is progressing nicely and I will be able to finish it long before it is due at the roadmap which the poll produced. I do plan to continue pushing code for it every day. - In the stage 3 discussion, nextgens had voiced concerns whether my votes were being influenced by self-interest. This is the item which I spent the most votes on, and much more than anybody else, so I removed them. > Which fms users did you exclude? your CSVs include all votes I saw. The ones whose names are marked with red color in the stage 3 spreadsheet, i.e. "poets", "SelfDestruct", "Smartyhall", "VV", "Lopp". So "excluded" means they are still included in the ZIP and spreadsheets as you observed, they're just not used in the calculations of the mean task votes. In the stage 4 spreadsheet, only individual values have been excluded, not whole users (as no FMS user contributed there). So there instead of usernames, individual values are marked with red for exclusion. > When I fix the removal of the 200 votes for WoT 1st iteration, I get a > 14 tasks which are robustly in the top 20 tasks, with finishing WoT 1st > iteration part of that. These 14 tasks are estimated as around 22 weeks > of development time. When I decided to forfeit my 200 votes I was completely OK with the decision and still am. You don't need to feel obliged to reset them back from 0 to 200, you can keep them at 0, I'm over it :) (and you should consider whether you want to get yourself into the potential stressful discussion of justifying to the others why you are changing individual votes of someone else in your evaluation :)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
