1503880 - Sponsored cards are wrongly moved to the 2nd and 1st positions if the first two cards are dismissed

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Firefox :: New Tab Page, defect, P2)

Description

[Ciprian Muresan [:cmuresan], Ecosystem QA]

Attachment: sponsored card in 2nd position.gif

[Affected versions]:
- Nightly v65.0a1, Build ID 20181030224027
- Beta 64
- Release 63

[Affected Platforms]:
- All Windows
- All Mac
- All Linux

[Prerequisites]:
- The "browser.search.region" is set to "US" on a clean new profile.

[Steps to reproduce]:
1. Open the browser with the profile from prerequisites and open a new tab.
2. Dismiss the first card from the Recommended by Pocket section.
3. Observe the 2nd card.

[Expected results]:
- A new Trending card has taken that position.

[Actual results]:
- The Sponsored card is in that position.

[Notes]:
- If the 1st card is also dismissed, the Sponsored card will be moved in the 1st position.
- If the page is refreshed a new Sponsored card will be displayed in the 3rd position.
- Attached a screen recording of the issue.

Comment 1

[tushar]

[:cmursesan] - this is expected behavior.  If a user chooses to dismiss the cards ahead of the SPOC, all cards will shift one position to the left.  This happens with both organic & SPOC placements.

Comment 2

[Ciprian Muresan [:cmuresan], Ecosystem QA]

@tushar, I can understand this behavior given how cards are supposed to interact once one is dismissed, but I thought that SPOCS were supposed to only and always be displayed on the 3rd position.

Still if this is the expected behavior, shouldn't refreshing the page not affect the SPOC's placement? Because right now, if a SPOC is in the 1st or 2nd positions it will be moved to the 3rd after a page refresh or in a new tab.

@aaron could you please weigh in on this?

Comment 3

[Aaron Benson]

I think in the current configuration of Pocket stories, having the SPOCs move organically, as would a *normal* Pocket story, is fine.

Comment 4

[Ciprian Muresan [:cmuresan], Ecosystem QA]

Closing as Resolved - Invalid based on comment 3 and other discussions from slack.