can you please please enable or add a feature so that I can assign cards to my team.

This would make StoriesOnBoard more user friendly. Now we have to put the responsible team member in the title text of the card.

This is something almost all of the competitive products do, so it represents a major feature gap

This would remove the need for the project manager/scrum master/BA to go into ADO and add assignments. We could use StoriesOnBoard as an end to end planning device.

Arpad asked for descriprtions of how we would use a task assignment feature. In my organization there are several reasons:
1. We rely on people outside the team who are a shared resource (meaning multiple projects will be demanding time from the same person). Being able to associate a name and giving that person ownership of the cards helps ensure they know what work is expected when and enables cross-team prioritization of their effort.
2. We have teams in multiple geographic locations, and even within teams there are remote developers. With the task assignment feature we would each be able to tell at a glance who is (or will be) working on a particular card.
3. We analyze our effort accomplishment history to get a sense of our run rate to assist in future planning. Knowing that rate by individual developer is helpful.

Our solution without task assignment (in StoriesOnBoard): We abuse the "Task" level (first level under the "Activity") so that each person has a column under each Activity.

Our solution (paper post-it notes on a physical wall): We subdivide each Release row into team member rows. In this layout, the iterations / sprints are columns. Activities are represented by the color of the Post-It.

I hope that's helpful.

Our engineering team uses Pivotal Tracker to manage development efforts, but it's impossible to get a 1,000 foot view of our entire product with Pivotal. Also, our design and research cadence is much longer than our development cadence, so using a ticket tracking system just isn't a good fit.

The user stories map however has proved to be a great way of communicating what we're working on to the rest of the company, and also for keeping the product team on track to get everything out the door.

It would be great to be able to assign specific cards to different members of the team as we move into the current sprint, so we know everything is being covered. That way, everyone can check in and see where we're at with any given project or feature we're working on.

I've a team of about 8... ideally each person could have there own "row" within a release, where I can drag cards... This would sum up the number of days per person, and give a good visual indication of a sensible spread. I'd also be happy if i could tag #cm (initials) to do assignment - but would still want summed totals per person. Maybe tagging with a row on the board per-tag would be a better feature.

Would be good assign the card to a team member simply click on a above Estimate Time new value.

Assigning tasks to team members is too detailed for a storyboard.
But imagine you're using the storyboard with multiple teams, then assigning the card to the team that will pick it up could be useful. Please keep this in mind if this gets implemented.

For all who'd like this feature:
Could you describe how would you use the assignment? What would be the purpose of assigning cards to team member? What's your solution now without the assignment?

A short story when I felt like it would be good to have team member assignments: we were planning the next sprint (release) and we tried to guess if the planned stories would fit into the release. We tried to decide in advance who will implement each story. We tried to assign resources like one would do with waterfall processes (which we found to be very brittle). In the end we chose not to rely on that, instead we tried to use previous sprints' team velocity and rough estimates of stories for deciding where to split the release. Then in the sprint, task level assignments were done on Kanban-like (real) board with stickies. We also tried administering it in Redmine, but for us that was "too much ado for (almost) nothing".