@ZappaDanMan

Been Fixing the Sift, have we?

Thanks for helping make videos successful! Congrats on your newest badge!

I am all for Fundraising for a cause, but could we fix the Sift Lounge before any new major venture is undertaken?

I can't even read the 5 on my 'F5' button anymore. It just says 'F' now, for 'Fuck I have to refresh again.'

Tags for this video have been changed from 'TED, talks, wisdom, morals' to 'TED, talks, wisdom, morals, how to fix the Sift' - edited by MINK

Wait, what the hell happened? How did this get discarded?

Hello?

Also, congrats lucky, my negative has been fixed - the "Sift Partners" bar now looks good! Also, the preponderance of power points seems to have gummed up the queue with a metric SiftTon of videos.

Thanks alot man, it embedded for me even though it doesnt seem to play. But am in Kuwait and its common for me.

In reply to this comment by Norsuelefantti:
I found an embed to replace your dead Sanjuro "quick draw" clip, but it is not a valid source for me to use. Maybe you want to use it to fix your sift though.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Samurai-Quick-Draw-Challange-Who-WiIl-Win

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=682TNJZP

I found an embed to replace your dead Sanjuro "quick draw" clip, but it is not a valid source for me to use. Maybe you want to use it to fix your sift though.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Samurai-Quick-Draw-Challange-Who-WiIl-Win

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=682TNJZP

OH NOOOO I've fixed my sift with a bad embed. I can't seem to find a good one.
Everyone on Youtube seem to think this is their original work cause they're all disabling their embeds. This one has a shark in it.

Someone Rickroll me!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

We do discard technical support type ST posts when they have been addressed. GorgonHeap's post while kind of emotive- was related to an issue that was addressed and fixed. His sifts were returned to the queue and the issue was closed. Leaving that kind of post up can sew confusion during the transition. So not out of line at all really to discard.

IF GH would like to provide feedback about the policy itself for the long-term, rather than his Sifts - this thread is the place to do it.

So what's the word on this? Sure would make it easier to fix "dead sifts" if we weren't restricted to just the approved sites. Not to mention all the sifts I've missed because when it was new it wasn't on an approved site and then someone sneaks in and snipes it because they got to it on an approved site first.

I suppose having 22 star points for dead fixes makes me the worst "abuser" of the system, and no doubt that I would not have hit gold in 2 months were it not for that. But...

deads are much quicker to fix than sifts are to sift.

I completely disagree with this. It took me much more time to fix most of the deads I have than to find and post my 'best' sift. Clips from Comedy Central, The Onion, etc. - these are all extremely easy to find and post, and are virtually guaranteed to get published. And, personally, I find that to be a much less significant contribution than fixing an obscure and great post that has died. Those sites already have their videos in one place, all nicely organized for everyone.

In the roughly 4 weeks the dead pool has been active, I have fixed a lot more than 22 posts, probably more than 4 times that many. I try to be very methodical about it. For an hour or two a night (depending on how tired I am), I pick a page in the pool with deads that I haven't seen yet, and start working my way down, spending at least 10-15 minutes (usually more) on each trying to find a fix.

I'm not trying to toot my own horn, but rather make a point - fixing deads is neither quick nor easy. And Dag's (and others) points above pretty well establish that fixing deads is not only beneficial, but ultimately crucial, to maintaining the integrity of the site over the long term. Furthermore, I don't think of it as "taking out the trash". I have found a lot of great posts (vids + comments) that I otherwise would not have seen because I searched for and found a fix.

the fixing thing is really not so important once a dead vid is discarded, as long as the tags are good so it isn't duped... then if someone tries to dupe it they can fix it instead.

Just last night I fixed a dead which had been duped with the exact same YT link that was left by someone else in the comments of the dead post. Were more deads being fixed, this would not happen. And the reason it shouldn't is because the original poster is denied recognition for their contribution.

Another point I disagree with is the notion of "here today, gone tomorrow". Some of my favorite sifts are classic tv and movie clips that I would never have otherwise seen again or at all. Why else would we have the vintage and 1sttube channels?
______________

What is the point of granting stars? To recognize the contributions of dedicated members of the community, not to give them benefits, but rather responsibilities. This is why only golds can discard posts, for instance. It is not an action to be taken lightly (and we've seen the consequences when it is). Point being, those responsibilities are given to members who have demonstrated themselves to be dedicated and responsible members of the community, and that can be demonstrated in many more ways than posting a lot of simpsons clips.

A number of folks have noted that any sort of time delay for the reward not only provides a disincentive, but unbalances the system in favor of those who would try to game it. This really should be a fractional point, whatever that fraction is (I recommend 1/5 point). If such a policy is going to be applied retroactively, then to be fair it needs to be applied retroactively for all fixes. And no offense Lucky, but changing the policy based on a 4 hour old thread before most people even had a chance to read it, much less respond to it, seems pretty hasty.

A quick point about sift money. I'd like to see the sift money be strictly for benefits like an extra slot in your queue, a self-promote, etc., and imnsho, should be gained in the same way charter members gain their benefits. Encouraging one-time monetary contributions could go a long way in maintaining the long term viability of VS.

To those who post lots of simpsons, TDS, or whatever, I like many of those clips and was only using them as examples to make a point. There are many other examples in the same vein. They are all good stuff - otherwise, it wouldn't get sifted.

I like the idea of another type of reward for fixing dead videos. I had suggested the possibility of earning a self save or a self promote in another thread. Here is something I posted two and a half weeks back that may have been missed as it was near the end of a sift talk discussion and I think it applies here:

__________________________________
It seems that star points changed with 3.0. I remember when a user would have say 5 quality sift talk posts and 46 published videos they would still be a silver star (and usually wonder why they didn't have a gold star as it would say 51 published). Now it seems that this user would get a Gold star at this point. With this change I worry a little bit about diluting the value of star points, which is why I was thinking about other possible rewards sifters could get for fixing dead videos.

Fixing a dead video is the only way a sifter can gain star points themselves. Every other method requires other sifters to "award" the star points either by up-voting their videos, awarding quality sift talk posts, or quality comments. Fixing dead sifts is, therefore, the one that jumps out as potentially abusable. So if a different type of reward was offered then I would think the potential abuse would not be as much of an issue.
__________________________________

just to clarify my misleading title... i like the dead pool, i just don't like the reward for fixing deads being the same as the reward for a successful sift, because deads are much quicker to fix than sifts are to sift.

i would argue that once you get to gold 100 any further increase in your star rating is kinda academic. the goal should be to suck people in with the incentive of going gold, and then to make that sufficiently rewarding that people stay and behave like good sifters.

BUT the number one problem i see in internet communities is this striving to be perfect, this utopianism, this failing to see the real point of the project.

i first came to videosift when fedquip described it as his "local bar". that is how i see it, and i think that is how most people act (conciously or otherwise)

after all, what is the point of earning star points if you are not involved in the community? i want to be proud to show my gold star, i want people to recognise it as a badge of honour, not just that i spent hours on the site whoring the system.

would the guy with most sift money really be the guy who makes our lives the most wonderful? or are we all slaving away for the perfect sifted archive that nobody actually needs?

this place is the new TV. it is not for archiving the old TV. it is to provide a way you can go to the internet, look for a video you will probably enjoy, find one fast, watch it and comment on it. after that, it's gone, it's disposable. this is why i rent DVDs, i don't buy them. world's changing fast, here today gone tomorrow, etc. i know a guy with all the Friends episodes on VHS who is feeling pretty stupid right now.

I kind of like Zifnab's idea, but I wonder if it goes a little against the VS philosophy against self-promotion.

It may be self-promotion, but you would have to first help your fellow sifters by fixing one or more dead vids before you earned a self-promote. I would expect there would still be a daily limit so people wouldn't be able to abuse the system.

It seems that star points changed with 3.0. I remember when a user would have say 5 quality sift talk posts and 46 published videos they would still be a silver star (and usually wonder why they didn't have a gold star as it would say 51 published). Now it seems that this user would get a Gold star at this point. With this change I worry a little bit about diluting the value of star points, which is why I was thinking about other possible rewards sifters could get for fixing dead videos.

Fixing a dead video is the only way a sifter can gain star points themselves. Every other method requires other sifters to "award" the star points either by up-voting their videos, awarding quality sift talk posts, or quality comments. Fixing dead sifts is, therefore, the one that jumps out as potentially abusable. So if a different type of reward was offered then I would think the potential abuse would not be as much of an issue.

Anyways just some thoughts...

thanks for the fix! nice sift.

I totally understand how theo feels - I have like a dozen plus deads too all of a sudden, but swampgirl. is right - the IDIOT media comapnies (WTF is up with the CANADIAN HOUSE OF IDIOT COMMONERS killing one of the VIDS. YOU WORK FOR ME YOU STUPID BITCHES- GAH!) - ah stress release. Anyway, yeah, annoying as hell. But James is also right - our links are more stable b/c they'll be fixed - yay sift. Boo idiot companies and hacks.

Until the new systems come online, I must share my method - all my siftbot e-mails skip my inbox and go straight into a gmail "Videosift" label. I then put the dead vids I want to try and fix into my inbox so I can keep track of them.

It's a kludge, but it helps me keep track of it all until a 'dead pool' of sorts comes online.