One improvement that I can see helping both idea suggesters and moderators: Help us know the scope of potential LabVIEW change.
Many ideas here are marked complete because they've been implemented in NXG. (Samples 1, 2, 3)
The message I get from this status is, "That's a great idea. We'll put resources toward making our next-generation product do that awesome thing, but it's more work that we want to do on the current generation product."
Many others are marked declined because significant changes to LabVIEW aren't planned (presumably in consideration of end-of-life). (Samples 1, 2, 3)
The message I get from this status is, "That's a great idea, but it would cost us more than we want to put into our current-generation product."
I think both of those messages are totally valid, but I find myself increasingly reserved about suggesting ideas here because I don't know where those thresholds lie. Could the community receive some guidelines on what type of change might make it into LabVIEW? If we had those guidelines, we could save our own time by only suggesting things that might make it in and we could save the moderator's time by reducing the number of ideas to have to process.