Stop doing alphabetical ordering

[TommyTran732]

There is no reason to adopt this policy on some pages whatsoever. We should recommend the better product first. There is no reason to list something like the NitroKeys above the Yubikeys for example, these are objectively worse in every way possible except for the fact that the firmware is updatable and HEADS support.

[blacklight447]

Well there should be some stqndard in how we list things, what would you suggest? We had a small discussion before about rearranging the recommendations based on which one would be the best.

We decided against that as that would cause bickering with every addition, and the fact that the best for one person may not mean the best for the other.

[TommyTran732]

We put the best tool for the general use cases on top. When we are not sure, we do it alphabetically, but in most cases it would be very obvious. I am especially annoyed at how NitroKey is listed above the Yubikey despite of it being far inferior in most scenarios.

[TommyTran732]

Also, note that I am making suggestions to cut down on the tools recommendations as well. A lot of these are totally unnecessary and do not fit into any threat model.

[blacklight447]

We put the best tool for the general use cases on top. When we are not sure, we do it alphabetically, but in most cases it would be very obvious. I am especially annoyed at how NitroKey is listed above the Yubikey despite of it being far inferior in most scenarios.

Are there cases in switch nitrokey would be surprior to the yubikey? If not, then it would make more sense to delist the nitrokey don't you think?

[TommyTran732]

I do want to remove it, but there are some use cases where it is needed so I am hesitant to do it. These includes:

• Hardware backed encrypted storage (tho I am not sure how it is compared to just something like LUKS).
• Coreboot + HEADS support. It is the only hardware key with support for this set up.

[dngray]

I did provide some feedback on this in privacyguides/privacyguides.org#1377 (review) but it got merged anyway 🫤

[TommyTran732]

I didn't see it, I would have objected to it. This is so so bad. There is no way Proton Contact sync should be above Tutanota. Tutanota encrypts the contact names and emails, Proton doesn't.

Honestly we should just revert that PR.

[ghost]

Agree, the order should be based on the best overall options.

[dngray]

If we were voting, that would be @jonaharagon and @blacklight447 for alphabetical, @mfwmyfacewhen, @TommyTran732 @27lx and @dngray against.

PR is in privacyguides/privacyguides.org#1399

[TommyTran732]

We are reverting it. That PR is not okay, not agreed upon by the team, and is overwhelmingly unpopular.

[cryptocat8]

I am voting against alphabetical order too

[ghost]

Yeah. Even though we're already pretty much reverting the change, my thoughts are that we should easily be able to order by merit. If, for whatever reason we can't determine a good order for a page, it's probably because we don't know enough about the listings and should rethink the page completely.

[jonaharagon]

We put the best tool for the general use cases on top.

@TommyTran732 We already do this in the current version: https://www.privacyguides.org/email-clients/

If you think this change is bad, fix the shitty recommendations don't just move them around. Nobody expects the order to matter and it is a disservice to our readers if you revert this change.

[dngray]

Okay, so then as a compromise to both sides how bout we do this.

• Alphabetical if there is no particular order
• Ordered if there is a clear order, and state why the order is in the PR.

[jonaharagon]

It just has to be clear why the order exists, like the Thunderbird recommendation or the Android page. We could consider reviving the "Worth Mentioning" section for things like Nitrokey if we really don't feel comfortable removing it for niche use-cases.

[dngray]

I suppose alphabetical makes more sense with the table of contents down the side hmm.

[TommyTran732]

As said in the team chat, the "worth mentioning" section does not make sense and does not work. I have already written that the NitroKey is vulnerable to physical attack, you just didn't read it. The alphabetical ordering makes no sense whatsoever. Sure, there should be more elaboration on what should be listed first, and I have done my homework on some of the tools. I can reorganize and add nuances to those later. But listing worse products on top is doing a disservice to the readers.

With how PG is right now, a bunch of worse tools or god-knows-what tool appears on top and that does not make sense. I will be making PRs to merge all of the bad tools in the next few days, then we reorganize the rest.

Also, under this logic, why is Brave not above Firefox? There is no elaboration on why Firefox + Arkenfox is on top of Brave.

[TommyTran732]

Update: we are reverting the change. This has already happened and I do find it ridiculous as the reasoning is already listed on lots of pages prior to your PR. You just didn't read it.

[KevinAlcantara]

I agree.

It is well know that the first results in any content are often see as the best or most interesting.

[matchboxbananasynergy]

As Privacy Guides has been shifting into a guide-centric approach, with tool recommendations being the best for each category, and with a clear reason for listing alternatives (see non-GrapheneOS recommendations for non-Pixel devices), I think it makes sense to order the recommendations based on their quality.

If we recommend Yubikeys for most cases, except for niche usecases, for example, it makes sense for Yubikeys to be listed at the top.

[d4rklynk]

Yeahs it's pretty weird to have alphabetical order for a website that recommend other products. And when someone will see a product on top of the page, he will trust it more than others at the bottom. Like putting down Signal at the bottom, it seems now more untrustworthy.