It hasn't been much of a problem in the past, but this vote especially I am concerned by the inability to vote for parts or aspects of a design. Specifically, with the current Rosetta designs I enjoy the hologram idea of the second design, but far prefer the chassis of the first (leftmost) design. However, I don't have a way to express that through the voting system. Admittedly, it would be somewhat of an engineering and design challenge to expand the vote system to allow for that sort of fine-tuned expression of opinion, however the result would be incredibly valuable.



Specifically, the goal of this thread is to ask that the little yellow Rosetta chassis be combined with the hologram idea, or at least that this option is offered as a vote to the community in some way.



Generically, the goal of this thread is to discuss any kind of workable UI to allow the G2G-Votes to accept this more complicated feedback about aspect combination.



--------------



The simplest naive solution I could come up with is simply allowing some kind of text entry where you tag some word, attribute that word to one of the choices, and then use N such tags to define your vote. This is of course a terrible system because of the nightmare it would be to evaluate at the end of the vote.



Alternately, the same concept could be leveraged if Amplitude predefined aspects of each submission as checkboxes, and voters could select the ones they like. This would be relatively easy to program, but demands work from Amplitude to figure out what aspects are relevant enough to make checkboxes for, and anything they don't think of or see as a relevant trait won't show up. You could try to fix this by adding an "other" box to the system, but then you run back into the problem from the first system of trying to evaluate and categorize the "other" responses.



What refinements to these systems or entire other systems could make aspect-voting viable to implement and use for G2G-Votes?