Thanks Kathy, that's the more direct way of asking what i was trying to verbalize. The only way to make brainstorm work is to make it a mechanism for project delegation; to require either the original proposer (your direct approach) or somebody who's just interested in pushing things along because there is a clearly delineated queue and they either are interested in helping and it's clear enough where to put their efforts, or they have their own pet proposal in the wings and know that the best way to get it to the front is by moving the line along. People need and want to see progress and results and the current fragmentation hides any of that and disenfranchises most would-be participants.

While in theory i like your direct approach better, i haven't been able to come up with a way to implement it, which is why i proposed a less direct but tractable approach (a queue or quota).

One way to meet in the middle is to have a group of Brainstorm Executors who are the only ones empowered to actually admit new proposals. Each could adopt some small number of proposals at a time and not take a new one from the pool until one of their batch was resolved. Perhaps they could increase the size of their batch as they demonstrate success at completing the ones given to their charge, thus integrating a feedback mechanism of sorts.

I agree, but I also think that what we have now is more of a brain tornado than a storm. As I previously suggested, some measures should be taken to condense the ideas of a single user rather than allowing him to chaotically post countless bits and pieces across multiple solutions.

I think this could be easily implemented via the brainstorm faq.

Precisely my concern if proposals are allowed to be too granular. High level proposal/various level scoped solutions is the way to do this IMO.

I don't like the Idea to only allow one Solution per User and Brainstorm. Some people have more skills on kreativity and UI desing than other or they are themself not sure which solution could be the best and want a decision from the community.

Just a example: I've added myself 2 Days ago a Brainstorm with 4 own solutions. I hope there could be more in the future. In my opinion they are totally different. And I don't know myself which could be the best solution. I hope the Brainstorm process could give a good answer for this.
You can judge yourself here. They are different. Could you agree?

It sounds like the idea to build a cave to keep the Brainstorm system running. But the Problem are not 5 Ideas from one person. If a Idea is only spam a Moderator could delete it and ban the user. Then everything is fine. The real problem is the actual system isn't working!

I think a own workflow for every (more than 66% positiv voted) Brainstorm "Solution" could be a huge improvement.
Something like this options for every Idea:

• "MOVED TO OTHER BRAINSTORM"
• "DECISION PENDING"
• "IMPLEMENTED IN 2.2010.05-1"
• "TARGET Harmattan"
• "WONTFIX (because of)"

With this we wouldn't have the problem: "Whats with the other 19 proposals when the first is implemented?" - it should be handled on "Solution"-Level, not on "Brainstorm"-Level.

Think of the initial post of a Brainstorm only as a Headline. It's the abstract of a problem. Perhaps lets have 2 kind of Brainstorms.
"Brainstorming" (for Calendar and maps improvement) and "Solution search" (for detailed discussion for a Idea from a Brainstorm)


Don't forget. The Community is fast growing, and the new N900 is not perfect. The people still missing many things on their new toy. This is the reason for the tornado instead of the brainstorm.


Mmh, I guess this could be marked as "Moved". It sounds like a enhancement request. "The scope of bugs are..."
Please add a Brainstorm! (sorry, just kidding, seen to often in the past 4 weeks for such kind of requests)

But in my opinion the problem of "spam" is selfmade. The users have a problem, they post it to bugs.maemo.org, then the answer is create a Brainstorm because there are to much undetailed bug reports. Now they are all creating Brainstorms. What could be a good solution? Where have they now to move?


2 more things I'm missing:

• When I change my decision after voted for a Solution and there is a new, better Solution a couple of weeks later. I should be able to change my decision and delete my own vote to appreciate the new, in my opinion, better solution.
  
• The Original Poster of a Brainstorm should have the potential to change the headline himself. (not important, but in my opinion a Brainstorm could change his direction during the discussion)

EDIT:
Thanks Texrat. I guess I was not fast enough writing my toughts down. But how many level could we need? I got the Idea of 2 Levels. But could this be enough?

Helmuth, WELL put! I think you would make a great moderator for the actual Brainstorm site.
The only quibble I really have is with the term "wontfix". That tends to be a psychological hot button. I'd rather see less hostile resolutions like "CAN'T do" or "no need (and here's why: ___)", etc.

As for levels... I want to make sure I'm clear on what you're asking. Do you mean proposal/solution, or 2 levels for solutions? Maybe "levels" was the wrong word for me to use for solutions... "scope" might be better.

Dont forget, some solutions could be a blocker for a other solution. (not only within a single brainstorm) There should be a posibility to illustrate such a system of dependencies.

Perhaps only the posibility to add Links to other solutions in different fields without a comment.

• Blocks this
• is blocker of this
• this is needed before

So when a developer looks at a Solution it should be easy to find at Brainstorm what affects else.
Sometimes there could only be ONE of a couple of solutions.

Oh Helmuth... what you are describing would be ideal. I wonder if there's a resource who could implement this fairly quickly...

That also leads me to think Solutions should have their own comments at the actual Brainstorm. I don't know that having them here is the best way.

Ouh, you are again to fast for me. I answer you two posts in a single one.

Yes, you're right. But we've got this psychological hot button also at bugs. So it looks more identical. But you're right. It was only a example. I don't like the WONTFIX there also. It's a hard decision. If this could become a canidate to implement it in the system, I'm sure, there is more time used to think about.

Mmh, yes. I'm sorry. I'm not a native speaker. I mean this:

Perhaps lets have 2 kind of Brainstorms.
"Brainstorming" (for Calendar and maps improvement) and "Solution search" (for detailed discussion for a Idea from a Brainstorm)

But I'm not sure. Could this really be a good Idea?


Yes, so the informations are spread all over the Site. Not a good solution. But the Brainstorm is not a forum. And a discussion on solution level is sometimes also not helpful. Which Solution is the best? Where would you discuss this?

In my opinion it should only be possible to add comments from Moderators, Developers and NOKIA staff. Short things like: "We have a internal meeting on Friday to discuss this.", "To expensive to implement." or "We're working on it." - More official comments and feedback.

You miss out that at a "per solution" based system you dismiss the other solutions for the same issue.

Why make it more complicated? Texrat, the dependencies tree was a request a while ago...


For universal brainstorms like "enhance the phone-app" it could be:
Moderators should be able to group solutions attached to a problem and developers should be able to pick those groups to create a child-storm, telling which solutions they pick and which dependencies they create or fulfill. Also an option to put a solution back to the mothers stack should be given.
Sounds easy... and will work for any proposal

Helmuth's post sounds good to me but it is about a brainstorm that contains solutions which could all come true only (bit harsh but it feels like a oneway). Like my constellation proposal; now one guy ports "stellarium", one day someone could port "cyclo astro" as they are just two different use-cases but its gone for then because the brainstorm will be archived as implemented some day soon. Only for those cases helmuth's ideas are very good. But what we need is a system working easy and for all cases. Split move and so on... are missing for me the one point of where did it come from and where will it go.

Kathy, I will have a 2 days internal annual workshop quiet soon and will have a look onto those mindmaps and brainstorms made over the last years, maybe I will learn from processes made how to propose new ones that they better fit.

If the answer is not what you like to here... change the question.

Brainstorm needs to be an easy to use, understandable for a 6year old and easy to manage process.

Most of the proposers are likely not able to read sticky threads in a forum so please think of them as a 6year old. They drop their problem and think its done with it. It has to be easy like that; however, we need those people to check back for their proposals.

Here's the thing chemist: there is an inverse relationship between solution complexity and interface usability. Pack enough power under the hood, and the interface can be deceptively simple. Fail to do that, and you wind up with huge complexities-- not all visible in the interface. This very discussion is a consequence of unnecessary complexity caused by solution deficiencies.

I think Helmuth is on the right track. I think there are two main things killing us here:

- difficulty/impossibility to manage the solutions the way they need to be managed (addressed in many points here)

- impossibility to assign solution ownerships in a project/task manner

Fixing those potentially fixes a great many things.

I don't see that...?