Hopefully they've also gotten better people triaging the bugs than in the past.
Too many times I've opened one-liner JS bugs with references to the specification that get closed because they need a public website to repro. I've even had bugs which link to the failing W3C spec test get closed as 'not repro'.
I used to work at MS and was often thanked for the quality of the bugs I opened (frequently IE bugs!). They must have different people triaging the publicly submitted bugs because I'm pretty sure they don't know how to even open the dev tools.
That issue has since been closed and "moved" to another URL. But the new URL is a broken link, and I cannot find the new issue via search (if it was created at all).
I've since spoken to Edge program managers about the issue, who've assured me it will be taken care of, but so far no progress has been made (possibly because it is no longer tracked).
(Raising this again here in hopes it will be noticed.)
The Edge platform team will be triaging them, I am one of them that has been triaging them. One suggestion is to ensure that it is truly a reduction, we built this for webdevs that have reductions and just don't want to file them and we don't want to miss out on those.
On your statement though regarding them being closed out. How long ago was that?
Is it really any better for other browsers though? I know I've encountered a fair share of webkit bugs that have been confirmed yet still left unresolved for years on end. And they also aren't above closing bugs as wontfix that clearly are genuine problems.
Obviously that's anecdotal, but I'd be curious to see someone do an analysis of turnaround times on the public bug trackers. It may not be feasible to detect incorrectly closed bugs, but a measure of the time taken to resolve confirmed bugs could be an interesting statistic.
I think this would be a nice thing to offer up as a product/service. As others mentioned it's susceptible to noise, but they've found ways to reduce that. As a person forced to use HP Quality Center for bug reporting, I'd be happy to send a tweet with a link to JSFiddle instead.
Namely, there's a set of sites like codepen, jsfiddle, etc. they'll take bugs from. If a link to one of those isn't present, their bot ignores it. This is how all the Microsoft people can use the hashtag to announce this without invoking the bot.
I have an Edge bug right now waiting for debug, but sadly, this hashtag can't help me, because it doesn't involve code or rendering, it's a browser UI flaw.
Too many times I've opened one-liner JS bugs with references to the specification that get closed because they need a public website to repro. I've even had bugs which link to the failing W3C spec test get closed as 'not repro'.
I used to work at MS and was often thanked for the quality of the bugs I opened (frequently IE bugs!). They must have different people triaging the publicly submitted bugs because I'm pretty sure they don't know how to even open the dev tools.