For the next version of Renoise, assuming there will be another possibility for the users to vote for features to be implemented, I propose the following:
Let ALL users, not just the registered ones, “vote with their wallets” – i.e. to buy votes. One vote could cost, say, $10.
Dedicate a special thread in the forum for this. The user posts a message, stating how many votes he’ll buy. When the transaction is confirmed, this is displayed in a public table of all future voters (in a forum post maintained by the Renoise team). For example:
Also let the users cast their votes in public, i.e. in a forum post. That way everybody can see who’s voting for what and also double-check/calculate/validate the final voting result for themselves.
EDIT: The voting would have to be based on a fixed list of features. That list itself could be suggested by the Renoise team, limiting it to say 2-3 big features (like an arranger) and 15-20 smaller ones.
But I’m not proposing that feature implementation should be bought.
No, I’m rather suggesting that the right to VOTE for features should be bought. That’s quite different, don’t you think?
(Such a voting procedure wouldn’t allow for features-on-demand, since taktik & co would compile a list over all available alternatives to vote for. I think this would be far more just system, giving better measurement over what features the users actually desperately want rather than “this might be cool, let’s vote for it”.)
Yes! very wrong! Some countries have it this way and it is called corruption and that is SO F****G WRONG!!!
People with big wallets can commit whatever crimes they like and then buy their innocence.
I really hope this suggestion is the biggest joke I will hear in 2008.
Everybody should have equal right to vote and thats it!
There is no democracy, just the illusion of it! But all right, I can sense the ideological reasons behind all possible arguments against my suggestion. (You should read this then.)
All right, I missed that thread from which the above text is quoted – sorry. But it still seems to me that taktik is primarily against the idea of “buying features” – i.e. the possibility of coding-on-demand, where the guy with most money can tailor the Renoise development process. Again, that’s NOT what I am proposing! (I am suggesting that the right to VOTE on items on a given list of features, compiled by taktik & co, should be purchased.)
And if plain money isn’t accepted or wanted, then I suggest that the votes are bought in some other currency. Why not let the Renoise users compile lists over THEIR “free donations”, as taktik puts it, and let those users be awarded accordingly (i.e. officially with more votes)? I just think it’s time to abandon the current “democracy” model for the next (assumed) voting session. I don’t see that it’s the optimal path to follow.
I just have to add that it’s utterly wrong to mix up politics with business. I get a bit upset when people seem to imply that just because I don’t like the current “democracy model” in regard to Renoise product development, I am therefore some sort of fascist or pro-corruption and oppression of the poor man in politics.
I argue from the point of JUSTICE. The current voting system isn’t optimal in that regard, according to me. So again: Let the users EARN the right to vote – for example by actually doing something “idealistic” for the marketing of Renoise (a YouTube video, a published article in a music magazine, a free .xrns-song, anything productive).
I can’t believe that many people actually seem to be AGAINST my suggestion. But then, saying that it is the “joke of 2008” etc doesn’t require much effort. I look forward to see an proper, rational argument against my suggestion. Please, tell me what’s so bad about it.
Pace has a LOT to do with this thread!!! Im not attacking you I am just giving you my oppinion on the subject.
I totally can not agree that some people should have more right to say which features should be implemented. We are ALL users and everyone should have the exact same value in their votes. And if my favourite feature does not win the voting then fine. I have the right to be angry for a couple of days but there will be a new voting some other time. The important thing is that everyones vote should be worth the same.
How would it be like if males where the only ones eligible to vote in public elections??? This was reallity in the many parts of the world some years ago and there is a reason that a huge part of the world got out of that paradigm.
Or how would it be if only people with record-deals where accepted to vote???
This discussed suggesttion is kind of like the same thing because the people that dont qualify (dont have money or other currency) cant make their words heard.
Because Renoise isn’t a political context, that’s why. If taktik & co decided to drop the entire voting procedure, that wouldn’t mean that any of your civilian rights were violated. There is no such “right”. But if your government said that your vote wouldn’t count, or count as much as that of Bill Gates’ vote, THEN your rights would be violated. There is a huge difference – the only common denominator here is the word “voting”.
If someone wants the right to vote on Renoise features, it’s very simple: they should just buy Renoise like the rest of us. The current voting system already works and is fair enough imho.
[Lecture points on human rights omitted – again, Renoise is not a political context]
Not if the currency is “free donations” in the form of articles, songs, videos, etcetera. Anyone can do that. I think it’s time to reward those people and send out clear and vital signals to this community. Give more incentives to the fans of Renoise other than a sense of idealism. The voting procedure is an excellent place to consider in this regard.
