I'd like to state this more succinctly. Prioritisation can be whatever you want, scrum does not say what 'priority' means. That can be as silly, or as complex

I'd like to state this more succinctly. Prioritisation can be whatever you want, scrum does not say what 'priority' means. That can be as silly, or as complex as you want. There are many inputs to priority. In practice there seems to be an over-emphasis (near-obsession) over 'cost' rather than value provided. A good example of this are items that have deadlines to them. At some point, the "cost" of implementation is not the biggest factor, yet it often gets the most attention and time allocated (vs say, dollar cost of not implementing per day) My point with velocity is that it is inaccurate and using it will be just wild guessing. It's like saying, it's 65 degrees out - "cool, I'll wear a t-shirt". But, it's 65 degrees out plus or minus 30 degrees. As an engineer/scientist, we should already know that any number should always have error bars reported, otherwise it is meaningless. Similar to the temperature, you can look outside and infer the temperature through other means. It is likely then that "velocity" is noise compared to the true means we use to know if we have enough in the near backlog or not. Worse yet, velocity is often used as a cudgel to force overtime and declare a sprint "failed," even though velocity is so uncertain (yet is not treated as an uncertain value).