Terry Reedy writes:
As said above, the need to do this should be fixed. In the meantime, if people really care about having 'no selection' replaced by 'normal', I could do more. I have not bothered because I regard the two as synonyms and have not bothered.
Technically they're very close to synonymous (I find it hard to imagine that people specify "priority: normal" in searches very often), but it's not synonymous to the reporter in most cases. I've had users tell me that "unselected" looks untidy, so except for assignee, where "not assigned" is very significant information, I either provide a default (which is not hard to do), or require that the user provide values in my tracker (where I've managed to reduce those fields to two, the issue summary line and the component).
What a boring thing to give to a newcomer. [...] Issues are stalled by lack of review, not by blank priority fields.
Sure, some people would be massively turned off by such duty, but others hardly mind it at all. The newcomer can always just say no. I don't think the point was to find a person to be Priority-Setter- for-Life, but rather to familiarize dangerjim with the bug tracker, the issues, and do something at least a little bit useful.
Agreed, I doubt that setting priority would increase the amount of review done, since developers will generally disagree with the reporter (and non-dev third parties) about priority anyway. But getting bugs assigned to people so that they would appear in "my bugs" might help a little bit.