Transfer of acknowledged wishes to the new wish list

[thesleepofreason]

I hope that it is not just the top 100 liked wishes that get transferred to the new wish list but also every wish that has been previously acknowledged by GS and given an wish# - I mean that list should just be sitting there vetted and ready to go 🤔

[thesleepofreason]

---

@Barry Kelly wrote:

---

Unfortunately, you can no longer see the old wishes, so you won't be able to copy information from them.

I have been told that is not going to change, so lets just build an new and current wishlist.

---

Good for you - I haven't despite explicitly asking @Noemi Balogh about it twice in this tread. It's a simple yes/no question and I've put forward what I seem as a sufficient reason for a positive answer. If GS disagree - they disagree. But should we really be as gullible as to just assume that they have properly considered the effort spent and value created already by users and not even pose the question?

I'm not sure why you feel the need to interject with these lengthy and obvious explanations to a very simple question that you clearly aren't in a position to answer? Do I seem oblivious? Do you really think that I don't know how to post a wish using the new function? Do you really think I don't understand GS explanation of how voting and the rest of the process works? Do you really think that I can't conjecture assuring scenarios where every wish ever uttered is sitting in a database just waiting to be dealt with? If so then you are mistaken.

[Noemi Balogh]

@thesleepofreason There is no need to get into a heated debate with Barry about answering you. As a moderator, he is "in the position" to answer you about the Wishlist. 

What Barry said is true, the previous wishes are still in our internal system, and I'm also "not in a position" to make decisions over them - it is something that our Product Team is working with. The list of old wishes on the Community however is the Community Team's and therefore my responsibility, yes. It was announced in our Insights post that we will archive those posts that were not made to the new Wishlist. The spring clean up was not meant to be a silly exercise for all of you to "have fun" - we had over 2000 wishes per language, which was not only hard for you, the active Community members to review and follow up on, but for everyone else, including us.

We don't want to keep wishes just for the sake of keeping them - leaving the false hope behind that somebody someday might pick it up. Because this is what happened before, if you take a second to think about it.

We can't change the past, so let's look into the future. The new Wishlist is not only a rebranded interface, but most of the work was done in the background on the processes. The new roadmap is also coming very soon. 

[thesleepofreason]

Heated debate? Wait - what?

I posted a simple question to you if we could keep access to the old wishes for a while and the reason for it to which Barry simply interjects that i "should feel free to make a new wish in the new list".

I take issue with that as it obviously isn't an answer to the question and reiterate my reasoning for wanting access to the old wishes. I then get a long response about the how the spring clean worked, that Barry consider it pointless to have duplicates of old wishes and that if the wish was important it shouldn't be any issue to remember it and just rewrite it.

I indicate that neither that response is relevant to the question and once again reiterate the reasoning for wanting access stressing the difference between remembering a wish and actually redoing the effort of re-writing it. I get another long response talking about the process in general but that ends with that Barry "have been told" that we will not have access.

To me that isn't a debate but a derailment caused by someone disrespectfully injecting themselves into a conversation without taking the time to understand it. And now you are telling me that Barry does this not in the capacity of a regular community member but as someone in official position to give answers about the wishlist. I hope you see why that might not be obvious - and why then not give a straight answer? Should we assume that all Barrys post are official or is it more a ex-post kind of thing?

As for your answer to the actual question. I'm not asking for you to keep the wishes just for the sake of keeping them forever. Why do you assume that when I have repeatedly stated that I'm asking for them to be kept up for a definite time period so to avoid having to duplicate efforts? I gave as an example three well thought out and formulated wishes that I remember that didn't make the cut. How much time do you think it would take to rewrite them from scratch? And do you think that is reasonable when we could have just copied the old wish?

What I'm asking for would not make the spring clean a silly exercise any more than allowing old posts to be rewritten would as it granted the wish upvoted status instead of open status.

What I'm asking for has nothing to do with where all old wishes go or what is done with them. You can wipe out the stack and start fresh for all I care but the constant reference to obscure internal processes certainly undermines any confidence in the wishlist being anything more than a marketing exercise. I guess the proof will be in the delivery.

I'm also not sure where it was announced that we would loose access to the old wish forum so please give a reference to that. The last thing I read was that it would be closed and kept as a reference which would have to be stretched quite a bit to mean that we would loose access to our created content. 

[Barry Kelly]

---

@thesleepofreason wrote:

---

I'm not sure why you feel the need to interject with these lengthy and obvious explanations to a very simple question that you clearly aren't in a position to answer?

---

Just trying to help.

And you are not the only person reading, so I am trying to explain to everybody.

And if I didn't answer, you would probably just complain more that you don't get an answer.

---

@thesleepofreason wrote:

Do I seem oblivious? Do you really think that I don't know how to post a wish using the new function? Do you really think I don't understand GS explanation of how voting and the rest of the process works? Do you really think that I can't conjecture assuring scenarios where every wish ever uttered is sitting in a database just waiting to be dealt with? If so then you are mistaken.

---

No, I just think you are being rude.

But that is just my personal opinion.

You don't have to agree with that, as that is just your opinion.

There is a new wishlist with the most popular of the old wishes transferred across.

If you want to make a new wish (or a new old wish) go right ahead.

If it get enough votes, it will be dealt with.

Let's just start a new wishlist and move on please.

Barry.

[thesleepofreason]

So I ask a simple yes or no question for clarification (regarding the effect of archiving) in an ongoing conversation with @Noemi Balogh (see below) and you interject with a response that not only isn't a yes or no but that completely contradicts my clearly stated reason for asking the question in the first place. Meeting push back on that, you become dismissive of my understanding and concern. You then interject yourself into yet another another conversation by responding at length to something that wasn't even a question but a statement of fact (which you didn't even disagree with).

Now you are claiming that if you didn't do all this then I would probably just have complained more that i didn't get an answer. To what question? The one i posted to Noemi yesterday and quietly waited for an answer to until you came along with irrelevant responses? And do you have any support for this rather slandering claim or is it just based on your "personal opinion" of me being rude? Seems strange that I should start to complain now when the original posts implicit question which I made explicit to Noemi close to three months ago never was answered...

@Noemi Balogh - I think that the behaviour described above is unbecoming a moderator especially as an official account claim it to be in the position of answering questions pertaining to the topic. It was as simple as yes or no yet two people in the position to do so fail to answer in a way relevant to the question and instead choose to frame it as a "heated debate" instigated by the question asker / community member / costumer. Dismal to say the least... 

[mthd]

I would just like to say that @thesleepofreason makes very valuable contributions to the forum with his wishes. No need to waste time here debating when we can be more productive by making constructive wishes in the updated forum.

I look forward to the new roadmap !

[thesleepofreason]

---

@Noemi Balogh wrote:

It was announced in our Insights post that we will archive those posts that were not made to the new Wishlist.

---

So now that it is established that you have taken away my access to content I have spent time and energy creating. If this was clearly announced to be happening I would have been given a fair chance to look through the content, making copies as needed and if i missed this announcement  it would have been on me. But I have kept close track of information regarding the wish process and the only thing I have read about the old wish list was that it would be disabled for contribution/voting and kept as a reference giving no reason to predict a loss of access to my content.

So have I missed an announcement in addition to this?