|
|
|
It's just as easy for someone to incorrectly close your issue as it is for you to reopen it. That said, if you reopen it without saying WHY you're reopening it, you'll often find it re-closed for you. Same goes for closing without comments... we need to telegraph our moves and describe our thinking. I think that's the best way to handle this.
To speak to WorkingOnIt's point: many hands don't necessarily make light work, they make a mob, and irresponsibility, and suppression of minority opinion which is often critical to keeping an open mind and a scientific approach.
It's odd to contrast the activism needed by residents to do the work of the JIRA, with the problem of the few who make arbitrary and even abusive decisions. There should be protection even of these few instances; it doesn't undermine a system where people go around closing what needs to be closed if you have either a) consent that is toggled by a notification with a time out if you fail to respond leading to automatic "resolution" or b) review by Lindens triggered if you have open/close/open/close happening excessively. I don't see why the default here has to be to the "prolific contributors". We can find other prolific people who will speak to the other side of the issue, which is that it is mob rule in some cases and heavily biased. Downgraded to "Major", though Normal might be more appropriate. Please read the notes available by clicking on the yellow help icon next to the priority box. Showstopper is reserved for the most critical issues effecting all or most residents ability to use SL.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
New Feature
Resolved
Major
lindens should only be able to close feature request tickets on jira
I am sure some of our more prolific contributors will have something to say on this, too.