I disagree.

Dups are some of the least glamorous and most important work we do. Inasmuch as this is a reward system (NB: as I've pointed out in other bugs, I don't think it should be much of a reward system) that is something that definitely ought to be rewarded.

Not sure that I quite understand your comment Luis.  To clarify, the proposal is to not count DUP, NOTGNOME, and NOTABUG bugs for the reporter, not the closer.

Ah. That makes more sense. I'd add to that list bugs that include 'nuff said' as the body of the initial report...

/me takes back his earlier disagreement and seconds luis' suggestion in comment 4

:).  Thinking again about it, it's probably not worth it.

It's not going to make much difference in the points with the log-scale system that it is now.  It can only prevent trivial cheating, but that's probably not going to happen anytime soon.

Feel free to close (or I'll close myself ;))

Not really worth the effort...

Reopening and retitling as it really isn't all that much effort and I think it's a good idea (counting dupes encourages people to open up new bugs when one has already been filed; while good citizens don't do that, it's a very poor idea to encourage bad behavior).  It won't make much difference in the points with the log-scale system, but it might cut down a bit on excess bug reports that eat up time.  

We should probably discount DUPLICATE, INCOMPLETE, and INVALID for sure; I think NOTABUG and NOTGNOME also make sense.

Fixed now.  :)

(In reply to comment #8)
> Reopening

And you took back my point for closing it :->.

which bug is considered the original bug?  The one that isn't marked as a duplicate or the lowest bug number in the set?  The former would make me feel bad for a lot of inconsistancy I've had in the past deciding which bug to mark as a duplicate.

"which bug is considered the original bug?  The one that isn't marked as a
duplicate or the lowest bug number in the set?"

Whichever is the *best* bug- most information, most cc's, most patches, whatever. :) Originality/bug # shouldn't be particularly important.

(In reply to comment #12)
> "which bug is considered the original bug?  The one that isn't marked as a
> duplicate or the lowest bug number in the set?"
> 
> Whichever is the *best* bug- most information, most cc's, most patches,
> whatever. :) Originality/bug # shouldn't be particularly important.

Well, from the "rewarding" point of view, the one reported first should only be rewarded.  Now instead of searching for dups, one can report the bug and then find and dup possible duplicates to his newly reported bug, reducing peoples' points :).

I agree with Luis in terms of which bug should be kept open if two have already been filed.  I agree with Larry as far as which one should be counted as the original reporter on the weekly-bug-summary (and thus also, by implication, on points).  I'll reopen again to get that handled.

I have no idea what this ticket is about and where "bugs reported" is counted / displayed.  Maybe this ticket was/is about the points system for each users?

In any case, sounds like wontfix. Also see comment 6.

Yes, it was about the point system.  And WONTFIX sounds about right for 2015 :).