|Re: [ide-dev] Survey results|
In my opinion, the warnings question was far too vague to be of much direct use. The best we can interpret is that the majority has a vague notion that they would like to see more warnings enabled by default. This is helpful, but not yet actionable. I recommend another survey that runs the list of disabled validations directly as separate questions and asks which of those the users would like to see enabled by default. Such a survey will give us confidence that responders fully understood their selection. Maybe do this in batches of a dozen or so to control for survey fatigue. I wager that we will find that the majority does not want all warnings enabled by default and we will find exactly which ones should be enabled.
On 12/09/2013 02:53 PM, Ian Skerrett wrote:
And what about the majority?
Also, due to the nature of the change, my assumption is that a subset of people that said ‘yes’ did not appreciate the impact of the change so when it is implemented they will wish they had voted ‘no’.
We've all reworked the question several times to make it explicit. I thought we've agreed the question was good enough so that we could trust the outcome of the survey and turn it into a concrete action (Yes or No to all warnings). Why deciding to almost ignore the vote now? Or why even asking the question if it's to ignore 65% of "Yes" ?
Back to the top