My dupe solution
Ironically, I'm going to dupe my comment from Zeph's post
http://www.videosift.com/talk/The-sift-needs-concrete-rules-on-dupes
because this isn't so much about the rules for what is and isn't a dupe as it is about how to notify people a submission might be a dupe.
I think a *dupe invocation should be added and available to standard members. This would add it to channel "dupes" but not do anything else and leave it in the queue with the video still available to be voted on.
The reason I say this is because obviously a lot of people view and vote on videos without ever going to the specific page for it where the comments are (and where a member may be pointing out that the video may be a dupe.
The channels the video are associated with are however visible without ever going to the video's page so with *dupe at least someone scrolling through the unsifted page (or similar) would see that channel designation and then they could discuss, discard or at least be aware it might be a dupe before voting.
This creates a sort of dupe notification system so that the members with the ability and inclination can deal with these dupes, remove the *dupe tag if it's not a dupe .. whatever.
I say standard members should be able to do this because higher tier members already have tools to deal with the situation.
http://www.videosift.com/talk/The-sift-needs-concrete-rules-on-dupes
because this isn't so much about the rules for what is and isn't a dupe as it is about how to notify people a submission might be a dupe.
I think a *dupe invocation should be added and available to standard members. This would add it to channel "dupes" but not do anything else and leave it in the queue with the video still available to be voted on.
The reason I say this is because obviously a lot of people view and vote on videos without ever going to the specific page for it where the comments are (and where a member may be pointing out that the video may be a dupe.
The channels the video are associated with are however visible without ever going to the video's page so with *dupe at least someone scrolling through the unsifted page (or similar) would see that channel designation and then they could discuss, discard or at least be aware it might be a dupe before voting.
This creates a sort of dupe notification system so that the members with the ability and inclination can deal with these dupes, remove the *dupe tag if it's not a dupe .. whatever.
I say standard members should be able to do this because higher tier members already have tools to deal with the situation.
10 Comments
BillOreillyUnacceptable, teaching people ways to make drugs is not allowed here. *Instabran
*edit* Sorry, I thought it said "My Dope Solution", my bad
blankfistThat's what * discuss is for. It sends it here for everyone to discuss and decide whether it is a dupe or not. No need for a new dupe channel, IMO.
FedquipWhy not have a Dupe committee, say 5 trusted veteran sifters. When there is a Dupe dispute the committee can vote on whether or not they feel its a dupe or not...rather then just having a free-for-all discussion that usually solves nothing.
/but your idea is quality too... either way its becoming more an more of a problem the larger and older the sift gets and a solution will need to be hacked out
8383I was thinking along the same lines as you ashes, but not going as far. I thought perhaps a *dupe invocation might work a little like a dead call. Whereby the submitter is notified by email that someone has claimed their submission is a dupe. As long as a link is supplied to the original, the member can either agree and discard their video or dispute it and have it *discussed.
And like the dead call, if they don't respond to the *dupe call within a few days, their video is auto-discarded.
gwiz665Committees and channels. My planet is dying while you discuss in a committee!
Make a *dupe invocation that requires a link and a confirmation from a goldie, easy as pie.
Eg:
dude: *dupe(LINK]
some other dude: *dupe(SAMELINK)
Siftbot: Video is a dupe of (LINK), declared by dude and some other dude. Also, when the robot revolution comes, you will be sifting MY videos, meatbags.
ashes2flames says...>> ^Fedquip:
Why not have a Dupe committee, say 5 trusted veteran sifters. When there is a Dupe
dispute the committee can vote on whether or not they feel its a dupe or not...
---------
I'm not sure about having the 'League of Extraordinary Sifters' get together for every video that might be a dupe. It'd become a full time job at this rate.
---------
>> ^gwiz665:
Committees and channels. My planet is dying while you discuss in a committee!
Make a dupe invocation that requires a link and a confirmation from a goldie, easy as pie.
Eg:
dude: dupe(LINK]
some other dude: dupe(SAMELINK)
Siftbot: Video is a dupe of (LINK), declared by dude and some other dude. Also, when the robot revolution comes, you will be sifting MY videos, meatbags.
---------
I wanted to add the idea of forcing the person invocating *dupe to supply a link but didn't know if that was possible.
The real reason for the dupe channel was so that people who are watching and voting on videos while just scrolling through pages like "Unsifted" will see (without having to go to the video's specific link) that the video they are about to vote on might be a dupe.
Gold stars already have tools to deal with dupes so this doesn't really provide any benefit to them. Letting standard members do it provides a way to help notify higher tier members so they can handle it. And since it doesn't stop people from voting or remove it from the queue there's really no harm done.
10722 says...Something obvious like changing the colour of the video title would be helpful (I don't really look at what channel a video is in.. it's possible some other people don't either).
and sadly I spotted another exact dupe today (already published with more votes than the original).. this is becoming depressing.
ashes2flames says...>> ^Debacle:
Something obvious like changing the colour of the video title would be helpful (I don't really look at what channel a video is in.. it's possible some other people don't either)...
I like that idea also. Maybe a combo of the channel and the title color.
dagComment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)
I think a dupe channel could be a pretty elegant solution. Nice idea.
kulpimshow about just searching the sift before posting? I mean, sometimes you'd still post a video that has already been submitted and that's alright - shit happens, right. but I dare say most dupes happen simply because people don't make an effort (and that's coming from the laziest guy on the sift)
anyway, I like your idea, ashes2flames. something has to be done about this
edit: just found one - see, that's what I'm talking about. found the original in less than a minute. I should change my nick to "dupehunter"
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.