Thanks @James and @Quim for getting this started!
Two initial ideas for the process:
- just ape the CT wishlist. Same format, same voting system, ask the CT team to run the proposal randomizer bot for us.
- Pro: little effort, proven to work, relatively nitpicking-safe, wikitext is good at presenting long discussions in a very concise manner
- Con: probably a barrier to entry for devs who are not editors themselves, we don't learn much about voters
- run the first phase of the CT wishlist (solicit wishes and have discussions about them), possibly in Phabricator instead of a wiki, then set up a simple form (Google Forms?) for getting votes + demographic information of voters (core contributor? works with MediaWiki how often? for money? etc) + maybe information about the specific vote (how often are you obstructed by this issue?)
- Pro: more inclusive (I think?), gives a lot of information that's good for prioritizing, helps us understand what kind of people use MediaWiki which is something we know embarrassingly little about
- Con: voting is not transparent (if we actually make use of the extra information then not really a voting at all), lot of effort to process all the feedback