Idea:
Being able to pin/star decks and place them at the top under the “Starred/Pinned” heading.
You can set them by tapping next to or in the options list of the icon.
Utility:
There are times when you have to focus hard on just a few decks, so it’s great to have them accessible and not hidden within various levels of subdecks.
Tip:
Ideally, the “Pinned/Starred” header can also be collapsed and that way it doesn’t permanently move the rest of the decks down.
You should be able to pin just the deck (Pin this deck only) or the deck with all its subdecks (Pin with subdecks).
Also, you should be able to pin normal and filtered decks.
The idea of pinning is based on the fact that there are deck that are at very deep sublevels of organization, and in that case the display order would not work.
However, manually sorting by dragging them is something that should definitely be implemented.
“This is useless” is worded so harshly that people that are against the feature might avoid voting so that they don’t appear unkind. I’m against the feature and I don’t mind how I appear to random internet people. “Pinning” is kind of already possible by naming a filtered deck so it starts with “_” and using a search to include the decks you want. Way more flexible this way too
Totally agree with you. I’ll try to avoid such expressions in the future. I did try to change it but it is not editable anymore.
I just find that whole “renaming the deck to hide or pin a deck” to be a very weird workaround but hey if everybody likes it then who am I to judge?
If this feature doesn’t get enough votes I’ll just implement it on my fork.
Thank you for the productive reply
Yes, the strictly alphabetically sorted list can be awkward. But if Anki were to break with that, I think it should simply support reordering decks by drag and drop.
And how would pinning work for subdecks? It doesn’t seem compatible with the tree structure.
It’s not just a matter of popularity or ergonomics – there are functionality/usability issues that need to be considered too. Daily limits, gathering, display order, etc. are dependent on the tree relationship between parent decks and subdecks. Whether or not a visual-only move would be an issue for those options (I’ll defer to the devs on that), it would certainly be a challenge for users seeing inconsistent outcomes if they don’t understand the tree structure of their decks.
[And I didn’t vote, because some deck arrangement features might be useful – if they are implemented carefully and correctly.]
I do agree. At the end of the day, it’s whether you can finish and give in that deck on that particular. For example, if I have a exam coming up while I’m studying certain things outside of my exam, then I would focus on the exam before anything else
Pinning may seem useful, but if you have a higher priority of that deck, then you must have a plan ahead of the changes you would make in a certain deck: there’s tags (that can be named such as: exam_priority_HIGH), certain deck presets on certain decks, etc
I will add more here: it’s more broad that “useless” means that it will never be used. It can be said that it must have considerations in such feature.
I mean, hey, this type of feature must be a good thing since I have a “graveyard” deck used for testing certain features for my future cards, and don’t wanna lose it.
next to 
or in the options list of the 
I think any assortment of decks will do. Probably at least 3 levels deep, and with cards at multiple levels.