I don’t think any of that is even close to being warranted. In my view, this would only be relevant when talking about gross transgressions and people willfully harming the community and greater ecosystem. I don’t think that’s the case here at all @Shigeyuki. Maybe if someone else did this repeatedly in the future after being asked no to, but definitely not in this case.
In terms of the other options you listed, it’s tricky.
As @Danika_Dakika says, from an even playing field perspective, removing all ratings since the vote-to-unlock changes were implemented would be the fairest move towards other add-on authors. It would also make sense in order to set a precedent and discourage future add-on authors from playing around with the same idea.
From a user perspective, I see two different viewpoints:
- I’m sure a lot of the votes were actually left in earnest by users who were happy with these add-ons, and taking those votes away is not ideal.
- However, these users would likely have done the same for other add-ons they love, if they had been nudged more strongly in that direction. These are votes missing from those add-ons, and this has real ramifications on add-on discoverability. E.g. users picking “Pokemanki” over “Ankimon”, because the latter stands no hope to ever organically reach the same like to download ratio. As Danika said, in order for ratings to be useful to users they have to be meaningful and comparable, and the current status would have a long term impact on the entire rating system.
Similarly, I see two viewpoints from an add-on ecosystem perspective:
- @Shigeyuki you’ve been doing a fantastic and important job in fixing and porting broken add-ons to Anki 23+, and the community is much better off for it. One could therefore argue that it’s to the benefit of the ecosystem at large for some of these add-ons to be signal boosted.
- At the same time, other authors have also done a lot of work both over the years and specifically for 23/24 to port their add-ons, keep them updated, and push out new features. So watching their own add-ons see much less attention, and knowing that they will likely never be able to reach the same success naturally is quite discouraging, which is not healthy for the dev ecosystem long-term.
So my thinking would be this (though I want to stress that I’m just one out of many add-on authors contributing to the ecosystem, and this is just one opinion):
I think it’s in the community’s best interest to be generous, while still fair, as long as we say that these are special allowances we are only willing to make once.
My recommendation would therefore be to do the following:
- Let’s split the five add-ons into two categories:
- Rapid growth: Pokemanki and Progress Bar
- Moderate growth: Anki Killstreaks, Zoom, and Always on Top
- For the add-ons in rapid growth, assume that had they grown organically, they would have grown twice as fast as the fastest growing add-ons.
- For the add-ons in moderate growth, assume that had they grown organically, they would have grown as fast as the fastest growing add-ons.
Review Heatmap has historically been one of the fastest growing add-ons. Right now it receives slightly less than a vote per day, so if we round that up, we get a nice number to work with.
Assuming that this is actually feasible and something you would be willing to do @dae, in practical terms, I would propose to:
- Determine when the change went live for each add-on (e.g. probably ≈2024-03-27
for Pokemanki and ≈2024-04-06 for Progress Bar - if you still know the exact dates @Shigeyuki that would be perfect)- Keep all votes before the change went live
- For Pokemanki and Progress Bar: Keep 2 votes per day since the change went live
- For Anki Killstreaks, Zoom, and Always on Top: Keep 1 vote per day since the change went live
- Set today as a cut-off for the vote compression, dropping any additional votes that might come in until then and/or until the add-ons have been updated
- To filter out empty or single letter reviews, ideally we’d pick the longest one(s) on each day
To make sure all votes are encompassed in this and that we don’t protract this any longer it would then indeed be important to disable the rating prompt quickly @Shigeyuki
WDYT @dae?