RE: A proposal for a friendlier Emacs

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > Should we really conflate the set of Emacs
> > users with "registered repository users"?
> 
> Can you state your intended meaning in different words?

You asked Alexander what he meant by "favourites
count".  He replied that it's "the number of
registered repository user who have clicked on
'add to favorites' for the package in question."

I questioned how good counting such "likes" by 
registered users would be as a measure of how
much users in general might appreciate a given
package.

That's all.  Is counting registered users who
"like" a package a good proxy for its appreciation
by users in general?  Dunno.

> > If we're looking for a poll/sampling, is this a
> > helpful way to represent Emacs users in general?
> > Frankly, I don't know.  But I recognize that
> > there's a conflation - the two sets aren't the
> > same.
> 
> Each time you use the word conflate, I am unsure what meaning you have
> in mind.  What operation with these two sets that you mean?  Taking
> the union of them?  Treating then as intersubstitutable?  Something else?

Using one set as a proxy for the other.

One is a subset of the other.  Is such a sample
a good proxy?  Maybe; I don't know.  But the two
should at least be distinguished, not considered
the same (identified/conflated).  That's all.

Use whatever word you like, as I expect you now
understand.  If you want, consider the question
only as pointing out that not all users will
register and then "like" something.

As for the difference, I take it from Alexander:
"Favourites can only be granted by registered users
of a package repository web site."  Those are the
(only) "votes" that would be counted with this
approach, IIUC.
___

(Also, you've often expressed the view that, while
polls can be useful, we also want detailed feedback
and reasoned arguments before deciding something.
I agree with that.)