Drop the insertion order option

[dae]

Now that we're v3-only, there's very little value in providing the old random approach with its gotchas. There will inevitably be a few users who prefer the way they're used to, but I don't think we can justify keep things confusing for the typical user for the benefit of a few.

I propose we change Anki so that sequential is forced, and the option is removed from the GUI. The internal setting would remain, so it continues to sync/persist when changed by older clients.

Originally reported on https://forums.ankiweb.net/t/confusing-message-about-sequential-due-number-on-v3/51668/3

[Danika-Dakika]

When I posted "In defense of Insertion order: Random" -- I genuinely thought the response might be, "no reason for the warning -- let's ditch it so folks feel free to use the option." 😅 Instead, we have somehow fast-forwarded to, "delete the option entirely." So I'm writing to beg you not to. 🥺

I can't tell you how many v3 users are using Random insertion order, so I can't claim to be representing more than just me in advocating for this to stick around. I can say that it's been the "right" answer for some user or another at least a dozen times in the past year or so.

But even without knowing how many users might be impacted by this, I'm certain that out of all the times I've asked about it, or someone else has asked about it -- I've never heard anyone suggest a better, or even just another, way to do these 3 things:

• Have New cards introduced in a random-ish/shuffled order (whether truly "random" or not);
• But, when you want to see a card introduced "sooner" or "later," the New-queue has a sequential order you can Reposition to;
• And, buried sibling cards are introduced relatively close-in-time.

This feels like basic functionality to me as a language learner. If someone could explain another way I could get there, I suppose I'll try to make that work. Right now, I'm trying to put together a next-best plan (for myself and others), and it might involve some combination of perpetually necessary manual Repositions, and a lot of fiddly procedures to dig up New cards that have been left behind when their siblings were introduced.

[brishtibheja]

Right now, I'm trying to put together a next-best plan (for myself and others), and it might involve some combination of perpetually necessary manual Repositions

From what I gather of OP, you'll just need to install an older client to change the setting.

[Danika-Dakika]

It seems like it would be less-than-ideal to offer that as a sequence of help steps 😅.
"Downgrade & quit -- install an older version -- change this setting in your deck options -- upgrade again -- [and you'll have to do this again whenever you want to create a new preset?]"

[brishtibheja]

[and you'll have to do this again whenever you want to create a new preset?]"

Here, maybe you can just clone the preset.

[dae]

When suggesting we remove the option, I wasn't thinking about people who manually reposition cards while set to random - I was thinking this would just be about removing duplicate functionality.

It wouldn't be a complete loss for such users, as they would be able to use 'set due date' to immediately introduce cards, and suspend them to approximate pushing them to the end. But it is a step backwards, so perhaps we'd be better off just moving it to advanced for now, and removing the v3 mention.

One possible way we could accomodate such workflows in the future is to have a range of due numbers in which randomness applies, e.g. 0-1 million, with items outside that range coming first/last. But that could potentially introduce new issues/confusion for users with high due numbers.

you'll just need to install an older client to change the setting.

What I was proposing is that the setting be ignored, so whatever older clients set it to, it would always be sequential on the newer version.

[brishtibheja]

It wouldn't be a complete loss for such users, as they would be able to use 'set due date' to immediately introduce cards

Not possible actually, because of open-spaced-repetition/fsrs4anki#675

If you use SDD like that, the cards will get really high D values. @Danika-Dakika something to keep in mind.

[brishtibheja]

One possible way we could accomodate such workflows in the future is to have a range of due numbers in which randomness applies

Another option might be a Learn now feature as @user1823 proposed in open-spaced-repetition/fsrs4anki#675 (comment).

[Danika-Dakika]

It wouldn't be a complete loss for such users, as they would be able to use 'set due date' to immediately introduce cards

"Set Due Date" has the major downside of skipping the Learn stage.