h a l f b a k e r yNaturally low in facts.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Every so often, a new idea comes up, capturing the imagination, and getting lots of votes.
Sometime later, an older variant is discovered, and frequently, with a different level of acceptance. Perhaps it's not worded as cleverly, or the HB Zeitgeist was not receptive to it at the time, or in that
least likely of possibilities, it's the author that is less favored by the gods.
In any case, the new idea does get marked as redundant, and now, no one is happy.
Applying patent law, benefits derived from someone else's invention belong to the inventor.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
So you're saying that the votes on the redundant idea should be transferred to the original? |
|
| |
One can imagine a variety of ways in which this could work, from forced absorbtion, to linking of votes, to collapsing of ideas into a single one. |
|
| |
But what about the strange case of "Childproof Elevator Buttons"? It directly combines "Toggle Buttons" with "Elevator Cancel Button". When it is deleted, how should its votes (currently +7, -1) be distributed? |
|
| |
I've never been clear on why people vote for redundant ideas anyway (after the redundancy is evident - as is now occuring on "Childproof Elevator Buttons"). |
|
| |
In keeping with the patent infringement theme, the number of votes should be trebled. |
|
| |