My guess would be the ones we vote on are "hard to implement" and thus the voting thing, and the low-voted ones are low-hanging fruit that were easy to do on their own, or made sense to do along with something else that got voted on.
I think completely bailing on the Idea Exchange/Innovation Lab/Whatever-it-is-this-year really isn't the answer. Let them ignore our pleas, but WE need to see what those pleas are and have the numbers to back it up (not to mention the comments below the submitted idea which often clarify the exact needs and implementation expected).
Though I do share your frustration when they mark somethig "not planned" when it has hundreds or even thousands of points behind it. Those would not seem to need any of the additional voting exercises and should be an obvious "drop what we're doing and do this first."
This system has gaping holes and WF/Adobe responsiveness and transparency are horrible, but it's at least a little better than the blind black hole where most feature requests go (to die) with most companies.
I also think the devs and product development need a creedo to guide their actions. Like "if it gets over a thousand points, it should automatically be started on" or "changes to make behavior more consistent should take precidence" or "10 QoL improvements should make it into each release" or things of that nature. Right now, they seem to have no guiding principles and are just fluttering in the wind after any shiney that catches their eye. Or they are chasing whichever feature a "big" client wants even if it would break some core ethos or screw-over the rest of us. They also seriously fail to realize that if they leave dozens of QoL things by the wayside that irritate us daily, their next new shiney isn't going to be met with the excitement they'd prefer.
I know you're frustrated, but we need folks like you to grumble and fume alongside us. Don't leave me out here to crab and complain by myself. ;-)
