Great idea! Review posted. 
I’ve voted too. Thanks for posting this topic. Good publicity for Panda3D
Up to #9 in Open Source.
#8 with 6 reviews, good job everyone! Let’s keep this thread alive!
Com’on guys vote for panda. Make this engine poplar.
…of whom 172 (unfortunately) haven’t posted even once. Or fortunately, since there are also some link-SPAM entries. 
However, there are probably even more people just “lurking around” without an account, as I did myself for a couple of months. And since you don’t need a Panda3D forum account to vote for Panda3D - just go ahead, everyone! 
Marc: Spam-Links? Where? Found no more Spam-Bot Name-Entries…
As for the Vote: The problem is: You need to be registered at ANOTHER site… thats what might just frighten ppl away… another account, another “newsletter” may be… however, each account more just gets one account too much lately 
Regards, Bigfoot29
Who voted “No” and can he or she explain why.
Thanks Martin
Bigfoot: Oh, ok. Good job. But you still missed one, he he… 
#4 and 12 votes
Wow. But there’s still potential in there, isn’t there? Top 3 should be possible!
Down to 5 again - maybe some of the newer people around here might consider stating their opinion?
Can’t we stop that “I have a bigger e-one”? I support having Panda3D in the top ten - but thats it. Its visible for all, that there is a good Python System available, but I guess everybody needs to find out on their own if they want to run something else or Panda3D.
However, who am I to really stop you ? This were just my 2 cents…
Regards, Bigfoot29
Your right. But if Panda would be on the top 3. Maybe we get some more users. Because I think if some one looks for an game engine the would take the #1 engine or maybe the look for the top 3.
Martin
I wasn’t asking for good ratings, I was asking to have some more of the useful ratings already present in the Panda3D profile on DevMaster. I believe it’s good to show presence, as the saying goes in science: “Publish or perish”.
The best open source engine is useless if it cannot compensate for the inevitable loss of people over time. The same goes for companies, btw. There is no alternative to constant renewal (in people and ideas), otherwise the most abitious projects just fade away with the loss of market share.
To add my two cents, I think Panda3d is safe from the “publish or perish” idea because it’s really being maintained by Disney VR for their internal development and the Carnegie ETC for its own use. All of us outside of those two groups are just fortunate to get what we get from them. This is unlike other open source engines that need external developers to keep them afloat.
Panda3d will still be used internally by Disney VR and Carnegie ETC for their internal use without the rest of us.
I’m sure Josh from the ETC and David from Dinsey VR would and do appreciate any help others can provide with bug fixes and documentation help, however.
That is a downside to getting more people on the project. That means more questions on the forum that historically could only be answered by Josh, David and few others.
Steve