Radical idea for the PQ - Get rid of it
Gwiz665 already approached this idea recently, but I think it's worth further exploration. Jonny's idea, while interesting, still doesn't sufficiently reduce complexity, IMHO. And the current system (with PQ) sucks, because right now there are thousands of videos rotting in PQs, whose chance of seeing the light of day are slim at best, and if they somehow finally get sifted after languishing in PQ, does that mean they are suddenly quality videos, even though it might have taken them a year or more to get the 10 votes required for publication? There is absolutely no guarantee of that, of course.
So let's just get rid of PQs, mkay? Let's do it like this: Grandfather in all the PQ videos, i.e., let everyone's current PQ remain intact, but allow no more videos to enter PQ. And instead of *begging, let's bring back *requeue, but make it cost a power point, and only allow videos to be requeued ONCE, and that's it. With both power points and *requeue not being unlimited, this should hopefully force members to think carefully about which videos they want to requeue and which videos they let die.
When PQ was new I tried to go through at least one member's PQ on a daily basis, in the hopes of liberating one or two videos every day. But now we have members with PQs well in excess of 50 videos, and many of those have PQs over 100. I can't go through them any more. I don't have the time. I even used to sort PQ videos by highest vote count, but then I felt I was missing rare gems with one or two votes. So basically I rarely visit PQs these days. I'm sorry to admit that, but it's true. I have a feeling that many of you also rarely visit PQs unless it's a member you know fairly well. And yes, that means there are vote cliques. Shocking! Like vote cliques didn't exist before PQ was introduced, right?
I'm not going to post a poll because I want people just to think this suggestion over. Maybe when VideoSift 4.0 is rolled out a new queue system will be introduced that will significantly depart from the current system. At least I hope so. No matter what system we go with, there will always be flaws. ALWAYS. So don't think for a moment that you have an idea that will work perfectly. I know my idea isn't perfect. However that is just the nature of the beast. It's called democracy. Democracy doesn't work perfectly. Never has, never will. The 43rd president of the United States is proof of that. Still, I think we can do better, so that's all I'm hoping for, regardless of what queue idea or ideas are adopted.
So think it over, and feel free to knock the shit out of my idea if you think it's bad. I don't care, just as long as we're all focused on finding a better solution.
So let's just get rid of PQs, mkay? Let's do it like this: Grandfather in all the PQ videos, i.e., let everyone's current PQ remain intact, but allow no more videos to enter PQ. And instead of *begging, let's bring back *requeue, but make it cost a power point, and only allow videos to be requeued ONCE, and that's it. With both power points and *requeue not being unlimited, this should hopefully force members to think carefully about which videos they want to requeue and which videos they let die.
When PQ was new I tried to go through at least one member's PQ on a daily basis, in the hopes of liberating one or two videos every day. But now we have members with PQs well in excess of 50 videos, and many of those have PQs over 100. I can't go through them any more. I don't have the time. I even used to sort PQ videos by highest vote count, but then I felt I was missing rare gems with one or two votes. So basically I rarely visit PQs these days. I'm sorry to admit that, but it's true. I have a feeling that many of you also rarely visit PQs unless it's a member you know fairly well. And yes, that means there are vote cliques. Shocking! Like vote cliques didn't exist before PQ was introduced, right?
I'm not going to post a poll because I want people just to think this suggestion over. Maybe when VideoSift 4.0 is rolled out a new queue system will be introduced that will significantly depart from the current system. At least I hope so. No matter what system we go with, there will always be flaws. ALWAYS. So don't think for a moment that you have an idea that will work perfectly. I know my idea isn't perfect. However that is just the nature of the beast. It's called democracy. Democracy doesn't work perfectly. Never has, never will. The 43rd president of the United States is proof of that. Still, I think we can do better, so that's all I'm hoping for, regardless of what queue idea or ideas are adopted.
So think it over, and feel free to knock the shit out of my idea if you think it's bad. I don't care, just as long as we're all focused on finding a better solution.
30 Comments
kronosposeidon*promote
siftbotSelf promoting this Sift Talk post - promote requested by original submitter kronosposeidon.
rasch187There are many quality vids that had to be begged for or promoted numerous times before they sifted. I think it would be better if the PQ couldn't have more videos than 15-20 at a time.
2 examples of great vids that took a long time to sift:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Adriana-Calcanhoto-Fico-Assim-Sem-Voc - had to be begged for 4 times
http://www.videosift.com/video/Joe-Strummer-Redemption-Song - had to be begged for 3 times
There are many more examples out there.
kronosposeidon^I thought about limiting PQ size too, rasch. However once your PQ reaches its limit, then what happens after that? Do all videos that don't receive 10 votes in 48 hours get discarded, or does your oldest PQ video get "bumped" out, i.e., discarded, or what? You would still end up losing some videos that you might really like.
[edit] I'd like to think my proposed system will force us to queue what we consider the best videos that reflect our varied interests. We all have our own personal favorites, and many of us also have submitted videos that we could live without. I hope my proposed plan would force us to think harder about what we put in our queue, and then hopefully that will improve overall quality. It's just a hypothesis, which I admit isn't flawless.
RyjkyjEvery video in my PQ should be sifted.
gwiz665Either this or max size First In First Out.
*thumbs up*
dotdudeI think the problem lies more with folks waiting for others to sift videos in the regular queue. They wait for videos to hit the first page. We have been picking at this SCAB since the Sift began.
Also the word "personal" on personal queue does mean it's up to the sifter what he/she does with it or how he/she administrates it. Sorry, I take exception to any NANNIES telling me how to handle my PERSONAL QUEUE.
gwiz665^which is why it should no exist (as it is now).
MrFiskI'm quite proud of my PQ vids and I would be pissed if they were siftflushed, whereby, I would have to waste my time resifting them, and begging, and all that other shit.
dotdudeI still say BACK OFF! That represents MY TIME that I've taken to find videos.
alien_conceptSkidmata noun - The miraculous brown wounds which manifest themselves on the fingertips of one who is a martyr to thin bumwad
In other words, I can see you'll have a whole lotta shit on your hands if you try and take away the PQueue entirely
I reckon there needs to be a certain amount of begs you can use or that they can only stay in your queue for 2 months, something like that. If people like the videos so much, they shouldn't have a problem resubmitting. Whatever, I do agree it needs a revamp
campionidelmondo>> ^kronosposeidon:
Let's do it like this: Grandfather in all the PQ videos, i.e., let everyone's current PQ remain intact, but allow no more videos to enter PQ. And instead of *begging, let's bring back *requeue, but make it cost a power point, and only allow videos to be requeued ONCE, and that's it. With both power points and *requeue not being unlimited, this should hopefully force members to think carefully about which videos they want to requeue and which videos they let die.
I'm not sure about letting the videos die. I've seen videos get sifted after other people failed to get 10 votes on them and killed them, so I kinda think this whole idea plays into the hands of people who get alot of "clique votes", which is something that shouldn't be encouraged.
I do like the ideas of *requeue instead of *begging and the limit of pqueue size. The beggar's canyon can go imo, never been a big fan of it.
dotdudeWe should be focused MORE on the REGUALR QUEUE and the fact we are still reliant on "promotes," "begs," "link whoring," "playlists," and whatever other means to get videos sifted.
IT DOESN"T WORK!
We've turned this into GAMING of videos instead of SIFTING of videos.
mauz15It is called personal queue for a reason. gwizz wanted to get rid of it because of dupe issues. I posted in his talk that a promote and a search help to solve most of those issues.
A video going to a pqueue does not always have to do with quality. Have you even considered long videos? do you actually think a long video being requeued will make it? In most cases it will not. Do you think I don't think carefully about what to sift? Hell it is precisely because I think about it that I don't focus on short videos, and on videos with empty content. There are way too many of those, which is fine, but I think it is better to keep variety and balance so as a response to that situation most of my posts are long, this means 2/3 of my videos on queue don't make it to the front right away.
I am not saying the pqueue is perfect but to assume that getting rid of it will somehow have an effect in quality is to forget a lot factors that come into play when a video is able to get to the front.
There also needs to be more open mindedness and willingness to go through the queue. Right now the queue has 10 pages, and on the weekends it gets sometimes longer. How many of you take the time to at least quickly scan through it? or do you go to the first few pages and move on to the front because you assume there is the security that the videos at the front are worth watching?
How many long videos do you vote every month? Do you guys really use the channels? do you try to explore the content of this site outside of your preferences, at least every once in a while? How much emphasis do you give to the title in order to determine if a video deserves your attention, and are you aware of how flawed that could be?
Unfortunately other than a pq limit, there is no other alternative I could think of, but understand that I am responding to this because if you get rid of the queue then the type of videos that I am focusing on will suffer, because they are only being posted by a minority of people.
SagemindI agree on a possible restructure of the PQ solely/only for the sake of videos that disappear, possibly forever in someone's PQ.
BUT - I like the PQ, Don't get rid of it.
If I still like the video, I want it and I want it to sift because I think it is worthy - not because you do. ("you" being "anyone" - not anyone specific)
If I grow weary of a video, or have second thoughts (what was I thinking), or realize I posted something in haste because it tweaked my brain and never has since - the I can Kill it!!!! (or it can be down voted until we get the point).
We need to realize everyone has different tastes and we like OUR "Personal" Queues.
If this all because of lost, videos disappearing into PQueue, then just come up with a better idea of getting those videos seen by people. I like BEG but triple begging seems a crazy way for us to get our vid out there.
Idea:
What if we had a section of its own that featured a "PQueue of the day" - something that would randomly bring up someone's PQ. It could reset itself every time you hit reload and bring up someone else's PQueue. It's not a bad idea and it could be a fun way to encourage visits to PQueues that you otherwise would never have seen. AND it would be a great way to get acquainted to other members you never knew existed or took the time to explore!
Think on it!
dystopianfuturetodayMaybe there could be a 5 or 6 vote minimum requirement for a video to enter the PQ. The rest are discarded. That would cut the PQ riff-raff in half.
peggedbeai agree with all of the detractors.
. but that doesnt mean anything when i vote on the video. when i feel compelled i will browse through a few pqs, usually once a week or so.
i do not post videos i didnt think about first. im not throwing out videos like poo to a wall. i realize the things i post are not for everyone, but i also find them all to be extremely worthwhile and thought provoking. there are alot of factors that go into whether or not a video gets sifted its first time through. i think the time of day you sifted it is a huge one, i would say about 1/2 of my sifted videos didnt make it through their first time around. if my video doesnt make it through because i keep wierd hours and sift at wierd times, what makes you think it would have anymore luck the second time? i have 75 sifted and 12 pq's right now. all of them quality (imo). half of that 75 languished in my pq for a few weeks or a month or 2. i dont think any of them should ever be killed off or denied a chance for some attention especially since i post alot of worldaffairs things i feel are important but may not be immediately interesting. it takes time for them to gain exposure. it sounds like there is an assumption that if somethings been sitting in the pq too long it sucks.
the solution is actually downvoting downvote worthy videos. i heard another interesting idea, i dont know if i agree with it completely, but it is interesting: if you view a video, you must vote on it. period. if you didnt like it, dont be polite and back out quietly like you were never there, click the down arrow! if it gets negative votes, its not siftworthy, its gone. someone else is still free to try again at a later date, if its really crappy its gone. more room at the top for the quality videos and the tubes wont be clogged up with crap that will never get sifted because its no good. its ridiculous to have "notorious downvoters" downvoting should just be as big a part of the sift as upvoting. since alot of quality videos are posted i do expect more upvotes, but downvotes should not be regarded as personal or impolite and should just be very much a fact of life and should happen often.
are there really vote cliques??? i dont even look at who sifted a video when i vote on it. sure there are people i have spoken with more than others, e-like more than others, agree or am amused by their comments more than others, and sleep with more than others
dotdudeI repeat the PERSONAL QUEUE is PERSONAL. Leave it up to the sifters. The argument for having a minimum threshold for the PERSONAL QUEUE is POPPYCOCK. I've seen videos not get but a few votes under one screen name, but then skyrocket under other screen names.
We're hear to VOTE on the VIDEOS, not all the other nonsense that goes on. In particular I am referring to the CIRCLE JERK VOTING.
I wonder how many videos actually get watched with some of the carrying on that goes on!
dagComment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)
I enjoy browsing through personal queues because it gives me a better idea what the Sifter's passions are - they're usually not the kitty videos - those are already sifted.
And I also agree that since we've made the personal queue kind of a personal bookmark section, it would be unfair to yank it off people.
Edeot>> ^mauz15:
gwizz wanted to get rid of it because of dupe issues. I posted in his talk that a promote and a search help to solve most of those issues.
Gwizz is getting bashed pretty hard for not searching for the video before he posted it and that's unfortunate cuz it avoids the real issue.
Zifnab's video would not have gotten sifted because his video was sitting in his PQ for 3 months with only 6 votes.
Gwizz's video did get sifted because he had a superior title, and maybe even chose a better time of day to sift it.
The Sift should be a competitive place. We aren't rewarded with shiny trinkets and votes for nothing. We should have Capitalistic tendencies, but the PQ can be used for anti-competitive tactics by hoarding videos and just waiting for someone else to have success and then cry "dupe!"
kronosposeidonNow there's no call for the use of "poppycock." There are ladies present.
mauz15@Edeot: No one is bashing. Get real. It was a discussion with polarizing points of view; as simple as that.
EdeotI think you read that word with a little more intensity than I intended.
Gwizz is getting pies thrown at him.
JAPRBring back ReQueue and Save!
NetRunnerLook, just because we got hit on 3/11 by errorists doesn't mean we need to radically rethink the way our sift works.
Perhaps the true radical solution is to change our point of view.
Videos getting 10 votes used to go to the front page. Now only "hot" videos are on the front page.
Just consider every video posted as being sifted. You get a star point for videos that get 10 votes. Otherwise, there's no difference between sifted/unsifted anymore.
Boom, problem solved.
Maybe there should be a version of promote that bronze star+'s could use on people's pqueues. If the vid gets some number of fresh votes after the promote, the promoter gets a star point.
Then the people who rediscover a video that someone else sifted can get some credit for bringing fresh attention to it, without taking away the credit the original poster deserves. Hell, give both users credit for the upvotes.
That way fat cats like me who sit on a 100+ video pqueue doesn't have to tolerate parasites stealing the fruits of my hard work. *cough*
xxovercastxxI've had a number of ideas in the past about how to "fix" videosift, but I've come to the conclusion that videosift can't be fixed. There are plenty of things that could possibly improve the submission system, but none of it matters because the voters don't care. Votes will primarily go to the kitty videos and the videos submitted by friends and no new rules will make any difference.
I've come to begrudgingly accept that and enjoy VS in spite of itself. The discussions here are still top-notch and I spend most of my time invested in them rather than the videos.
MINK^better discussions on other sites, actually.
FUCK WHY AM I STILL LOGGED IN?
I TRIED TO FUCK THIS SHIT UP BUT NOW I AM DRUNK AND LOGGED IN
DAG FOR FUCKS SAKE YOU PROMISED ME I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO LOG IN.
EdeotSounds like cookies are a bitch.
dotdudehttp://www.lincolnsnacks.com/
ElJardineroAre you suggesting that all the boys that didn't make the football team and all the girls that didn't make it to the cheerleading squad be killed off?
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.