Makes sense, looks useful.<p>The main issue that remains is that <i>voting</i> on the main remaining issues causes stuff that’s obvious to everyone to float up, and stuff that’s only visible to few will sink. Say, nuances in technical feasibility. Or intuitions for the users’ perspective from hands-on experience. Or simply something that has been tried before.<p>Voting on this sort of itemized stack is often quite lossy and risks putting important aspects behind a barrier of whether the company is lucky enough that the person who sees certain parts of the core issues is able to express that view on the fly.<p>The subtle things that aren’t obviously a problem are very often what defines progress in reality.<p>This is even before considering social aspects such as popularity, charm, the innate desire to please others, or personal friction.<p>To put another way. Like… why <i>voting</i>? What does <i>voting</i> capture? What is the meaning of the amount of votes from across the team for an entry of a particular list of definitions of the reality of work at the moment? – And this way of framing it, the way I’m asking a pretty demanding question – it isn’t very, mm, let’s say <i>harmonious</i>? And probably wouldn’t get many votes. :’)