are you icky? are you *sticky? are you hot as anything?

Invocations (sticky) cannot be called by rottenseed because rottenseed is not privileged - sorry.

your mother's not privileged you little punk ass sifter. I wanna shit in your top.

Brother rottenseed, I'm inclined to agree with you. However I propose a one requeue limit per video, while still keeping the personal queue. With one requeue that gives each video up to six full days of exposure, which should hopefully remove bad timing from the equation. Let the requeue invocation be done any time, because if you can only use it once per video then how could it be abused?

I think every video deserves at least a second chance to make it to the front page before it's reassigned to our personal hope chest. Personal queues don't give them much of a second chance, IMHO. Only if they're in the general population of the unsifted queue will they stand a reasonable chance of being sifted before our grandkids go off to college.

As of this moment I don't have any videos in my personal queue, but I know I've been lucky so far. Luck doesn't last forever. As much as I like watching everyone's videos here, I miss a hell of a lot of them because I spend most of my day offline. I do my best to check out as many unsifted videos as possible, but most of them slip under my radar for no other reason than bad timing. With one requeue we all stand a better chance of seeing gems that we missed the first time around.

Will just ONE requeue per video degrade the quality of the sift? I think not. I think it's a better solution than having to go door to door begging for votes, which has noticeably increased in the short time since requeue went out the door. One requeue is much better than having us all turn into telemarketers.

makes sense. The best days I think were the "2 days before you can requeue". it gave enough time that if you didn't want it to waste valuable space in your queue you'd have to make a decision

I agree 100% that the new system is balls (and in fact I think that calling it balls is being kind). I think at the very least, kronosposeidon is right and each video should have one requeue. Three would also be nice. But the current system is totally and utterly screwed up. If you submit a video at a weird time or just get unlucky, your video goes to your personal queue and rots there, probably forever unless someone promotes it or you cough up the money and do it yourself. In the current system, if your video doesn't get at least four or five votes in its first few hours, it's pretty much fucked. It's stupid.

And I don't want to hear anyone reply with the old "oh, videosift didn't used to have requeues and it worked just fine!" BS. You know what else we didn't used to have? The internet. TV. Antibi-freakin-otics. People used to die of infections just like that. These things are called progress. The requeue was progress for the sift, and getting rid of it is like banning antibiotics. It's lunacy, plain and simple.

>> ^rottenseed:
your mother's not privileged you little punk ass sifter. I wanna shit in your top.


This is the hardest I have laughed all day. Thank you RS for that gem. I can't NOT re-read the second half of that and not laugh.

Well, the personal queue... hmm. I have to say that with the majority of sifters in North America and Europe, I have to stay up pretty late to sift things for them to have a chance. (usually around 11 PM or later) Granted I have some videos that aren't that great. But on the other hand I have a good handful that have done really well. I don't think they would have done so hot if I sifted when it was convenient for me though, (around 4 AM east coast US) I think if it changes, it should start with 1 requeue.

And If you say one more thing about nepotism, I'll take the freshly shat-in Sifty and I'll give him a couple cranks over your head and sift your own runny shit all over you! THATS SIFT JUSTICE BABY!!!

I know what it is.. You must be jealous. Get your own brother. MGRs taken. You hear that MGR!? YOUR MINE!

*sticky, before Sifty gets a hat full of shit.

Stickying this post at the top of Sift Talk - sticky requested by kronosposeidon.

Call me crazy but I think requeue is obsolete. 3 days in the queue is enough time. Granted, some videos will have trouble getting there the first time, that's why I think we should come up with a way to promote videos rotting in the personal queue - we discussed that already, remember? So, how about we devote some thoughts to PQ tag idea Sarzy was talking about?

Well, I only use the "sifted" tab, because thats my homepage. Then I bounce over to the "unsifted" tab because we all have to do our part. I never use the "hot" tab, AKA "sifty's balls" tab, but I've heard good things about it. Whatever. I say we kill the flaming butt cheek tab and make it a personal queue tab. And have it somehow shuffle or something.

A point of information relevant to this discussion:

The "save" command was introduced 1 year 5 months 2 weeks ago.

http://www.videosift.com/talk/new-SiftBot-Invocation-save

I agree, this new system is retarded. Now only paying members can requeue (=promote) their videos. It's not like people who pay for the site automatically submit better videos. I agree they should get some bonuses, but not this, this is unfair.
I am very much inclined to stop sifting if it stays like this.

*quality

Awarding rottenseed with one star point for this contribution to Sift Talk - declared quality by cybrbeast.

I'm inclined to give more time to seeing how things, like PQ's, continue to play out, but then my attitude to my submissions getting sifted is that once ive thrown them out there, i don't really care. it's up. people have a chance to see em. if they like em, all well and good that i was able to share. if not, well, everyone else's vids are cooler than mine anyway (imho)

as I unjderstand it, only people who donate can self-promote because you need TWO power points for that and you only get a second power point if you donate. So even though I'm signed up as a charter member and pay actual money to the sift on a REGULAR basis, someone else donates a couple fivers and gets a second pp?

bah

read, read whiiiine!!!

the new system is great, the old system was great, change is how to roll.....

OK, now I know it is just dumb to remove a seemingly ambiguous option and I know I haven't contributed a lot ......

but:

I think it would help to get rid of the unsifted option: best votes to views ratio. I know it doesn't seem like much but if everyone sorts like that, then the fate of a video seems decided by the first few views. If two people see your video and don't vote for it, it usually knocks it right off of the first page. I never sort unsifted videos like that for that reason.

Who wants to sort through a bunch of videos that people have already decided are popular anyway? Isn't that kind of the point of the "sifted" page?

Maybe I'm just being picky. I have gotten awfuly superstitious in the short time since I started posting.

Thou shalt have three requeues! And the Lord spake, saying, "Then, shalt thou count to three. No more. No less. Three shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, nor either count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then, thou video shall snuff it."

All for the latest suggestion, and am willing to give it a test drive....wait, did that already, and liked the hell out of it!!-Hold on, you mean we can keep it recycled for six days??
Count to six?? No more. No less. Six shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be six?? Four shalt thou not count, nor either count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to six??! Five is right out??!(prostatits)Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then, thou video shall snuff it??!!

Sign me the fuck, up!!!

I agree 100%. Without requeue the only guaranteed way to get a video sifted is to post slapstick/kitteh videos, which isn't exactly 'quality control'.

Nawwww, wait a minute and think about it...it works fine the way it is-
the pqueued feature lets others browse and vote after it falls flat and perhaps one Happy Surprise Day®, you may find that 3-7 of yer viddies with 9 votes jump into the published spot....
OR...let's have 10 other folks get on up and WHINE some more!?

these guys that tweak this stuff, have day jobs and shit....
Three cheers for luckydaggnjamesroe...HIP HIPP????!

HOORAY!

HIP HIP!!!

HIPpie can't freak to that. ([edit] I mean bringing back multiple requeues! )

As was demonstrated with painful redundancy, requeues allow just about anything to get sifted.

>> ^Ryjkyj:
I think it would help to get rid of the unsifted option: best votes to views ratio. I know it doesn't seem like much but if everyone sorts like that, then the fate of a video seems decided by the first few views. If two people see your video and don't vote for it, it usually knocks it right off of the first page. I never sort unsifted videos like that for that reason.

The theory is that if everyone (or at least most people) are using the votes/views sorting option, then the videos that are really good should pop right out of the queue. Thus, the first page of the queue would be continually shifting.

There are several problems with it, though. The biggest is that unique views are not being counted properly. Here is one that has 7 votes and 6 views, despite the fact that I viewed it and didn't vote for it. Lucky changed the submitter's views and initial vote to not count as a unique view, but even with that, my view should have brought its ratio to 7/7, assuming everyone else that saw it voted for it. (I have an idea this problem lies in thread or db synchronization, but that's just speculation.)

Another problem with it is that most folks only watch a handful of vids, and since the 'hide videos I've viewed' option doesn't work, they are forced to go through multiple pages to find the ones they haven't seen. And I doubt most people have either the time or the patience to do that. And then, as you say Ryjkyj, if a vid is viewed a couple times without getting votes, off to oblivion it goes.

The combined result of this is that most vids get less than 20 unique views while in the queue. So, the ratios tend to be really skewed and with a queue that typically has more than 250 videos, it's no wonder. Try this - sort the queue by most votes. Now check how many unique views have been registered for each vid (by hovering your cursor over # views). As I write this, there are 2 videos out of the top 40 with more than 18 views.

This may be a case where too many options spoils the queue. Unless everyone is using most votes, or best votes/views, or fewest views, or whatever, none of those options will produce the desired result. I've recommended before that we try an experiment in which everyone is forced to use one of the "experimental" sort options, and see how it works. I'm sure it would generate a lot of grumbling and ranting, but we've got that anyway, right? And such an experiment might actually yield some useful data on which sort options generate the highest quality vids appearing on the front page - which is the goal, right?

What does , Unique Views mean, anyhow??? Flys land on sheit and gold bars....what's it matter?

Narrow it down-make it simple, another on the list to discard

>> ^choggie:
What does , Unique Views mean, anyhow???

I thought you were joking the last time you asked that. Effectively, a unique view is the first view by each logged in member. So, if you watch a vid again and again, it's doesn't count as multiple views, preventing people from vindictively (or otherwise) lowering a vids ratio arbitrarily.

oh....guess i should read the fine print.....

I think this has had sufficient exposure. *unsticky

Invocations (unsticky) cannot be called by lucky760 because lucky760 is not privileged - sorry.

^ lmfahs - sifty is really getting out of control!

^ hahaahaha burned

[Krupo coughs loudly]

Send me a message or post to http://www.videosift.com/playlists/Krupo/VideosToSave/comments and I'll add your vid to the list.

>> ^choggie:
> the new system is great, the old system was great, change is how to roll...

these 3 words (which some of you may recognize) will be the sum total of my input, on this subject:

improvise. adapt. overcome.

>> ^my15minutes:
>> ^choggie:
> the new system is great, the old system was great, change is how to roll...
these 3 words (which some of you may recognize) will be the sum total of my input, on this subject:
improvise. adapt. overcome.


call me old fashioned, but I'd rather: Bitch Gripe Protest

>> ^lucky760:
I think this has had sufficient exposure. unsticky


Denied. *sticky

I appreciate all the quality input from the admins of this site on this Sift Talk post, but I'd like to hear maybe a little more from them before this gets unstickied again. This was only stickied for 30 hours before lucky pulled the plug. I've seen my share of Sift Talk posts stickied longer than this one, so I'm not being unreasonable.

I care about this site just as much as anyone else here. I've used my * promotes (and * saves under the old system) as often as possible to not only give deserving videos a good shot at making the front page, but also to foster a sense of community. I've also left many comments on videos to encourage talk amongst members. Again, to build community. I want this site to grow and thrive, because it's got a hell of a lot going for it. But this no requeue business sucks. Oh wait, I guess we can requeue, but only if you're willing to pay for the extra power point to do it. So now we have a pay-per-requeue system. Yeah, THAT will ensure quality. Money ALWAYS guarantees quality, right?

I've got nothing against DLJ trying to make money on this enterprise. I wouldn't be paying for a charter membership if I thought otherwise. And asking for donations is cool too. Hell, I gave ten bucks twice just because I want this site to stay afloat. But now they're effectively charging for something that used to be free. So it's not really a donation anymore, but an optional premium fee. And frankly, I don't like it at all.

All many of us are asking for is to bring back the * requeue invocation in some form or another. It appears that most everyone agrees that there should be a requeue limit, so we're not talking about restoring the old unlimited requeue model. I don't think it's an unreasonable request.

Now, if an admin wishes to state why this is unreasonable then please do so, but do it BEFORE unstickying this post, please. I'm all ears. But remember that this site really isn't just about what you think. If you think it is then maybe you should just take all us members out of the loop. You can hunt down all the thousands of great videos people find for you (many of them PAYING for the privilege to do so), and post them yourselves. Otherwise, maybe you can at least give the plebs some * quality feedback. We may not like it, but at least you'll still be communicating with the people who are the backbone of this joint. It beats the HELL out of silence.

Stickying this post at the top of Sift Talk - sticky requested by kronosposeidon.

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

What can I say- we know it's not perfect, we don't think reinstating requeue is the way to go, mainly because it clutters the comment system and rewards member persistence over quality content.

As you guys know, VideoSift changes a lot- and we're definitely going to try out new stuff to fix this ... and um ...

[Nancy Reagan whisper: we're doing everyting we can]

We're doing everything we can.

seriously, i wouldn't bring it up if i didn't care about the site either. I'm just writing how I feel about it. Maybe I'll get used to it, maybe I won't, either way, if I didn't mention how I felt about it, it'd be because I don't give a crap.

I have no qualms with the admins, if they think its better for "quality" control then they have an overall say. I was just bringing up some of my concerns because I feel it detracts from the quality. I want you to do me a favor and do a little bit of research, if you would look into the database and find every top 15 that has been requeued at least once, you might get an idea at where I'm coming from. I know I've had ones I had to requeue 2 or 3 times and once it was "found" it shot straight up to the top 15.

If the problem is that requeue clogs up the comments, then it might be solved by making a button to requeue instead of a comment invocation. Also, persistence wouldn't really be rewarded if there are only one or two requeues allowed.

I do think that the requeue as it was implemented was flawed. I would use the requeue on some videos simply to give them a better shot at making the top 15. What I mean by that is if I had a video that was sitting at 9 votes and was eligible for a requeue, I would do it simply to reset the top 15 timer so when it got that 10th vote and escaped the queue it would have more time to be eligible for the top 15. I'm guessing I wasn't the only one to take advantage of this so the large number of 'top 15' videos that had used a requeue is not going to be that surprising.

It also cluttered up the comments a ton and also let almost any video eventually be sifted if one was determined enough to keep using the requeue. Either people would have had to start flexing their down-vote muscles a lot more or something had to change.

I'm glad that the requeue was taken away, but I do have some concerns about the personal queue. I don't like the fact that only donors have the ability to 'self promote' one of their personal queue videos. I also don't want to see the regular * promote be used by people on their personal queue as I would worry that this would lead people to only use * promotes on their own pqueued videos that they want to get sifted. The spirit of the sift is to help others and * promote's should be used for just that.

What I would like to see is an invocation that sifters could use to send one of their own personal queued video back to the regular queue. Now I don't want this to be a like the requeue in that it was available all the time for any queued video, this invocation would only be available once a week, or maybe even once every 2 weeks, and would only be available for use on personal queued videos. This invocation would not be like a * promote and would just submit the video back to the queue like a regular video, giving it no extra exposure like a promote. The point of this would be to let sifters give their videos another shot, but make it rare enough that sifters would have to think about when/if to use it.

I hadn't weighed in on this earlier as I was taking time to try to grok it all.

Thanks for replying, dag.

Eliminating requeue is a major change to the Sift, regardless of how one feels about the issue. I still believe one requeue per video is good, but maybe Zifnab is right, i.e., maybe we should only be allowed to requeue one video per week or two. Or maybe rottenseed and Grimm are right, i.e., maybe each video should have 3 chances. Or maybe YOU are right dag, i.e., maybe there should be no requeues. My point in stickying this post was to solicit feedback, including those of the admins. I thought that was obvious, because eliminating requeue has been contentious. Therefore I thought an admin, ANY admin, should step up to the plate to respond to the concerns of the many who are disenchanted with the change. Unstickying this post before that happened was ill-advised, especially considering how long some other posts have been stickied without administrative intervention.

I mostly agree with rottenseed's last comment except for one thing: We ALL should have overall say about this site. Sure, the voice of the admins should carry more weight than any one member here, but if they ignore the voice of the membership then they'll see many members start voting with their feet. That is, they'll walk away from here. The admins might be the brains of the outfit, but we are the body. We both need each other. Like I said, without the membership it would be up to DLJ to post the thousands upon thousands of videos that pass through the front page. And as diverse as their interests may be, neither they nor any other 3 people could post the wide range of videos seen here. That's what makes this place special and a cut above the rest. Without us this place would be just another I-Am-Bored or Milk and Cookies. In other words, BORING.

Sure, this site has changed a lot. I have liked many of the changes, but not all of them. If we can't say "Hey, we changed something, but it's really bothered quite a few people so maybe we better at least consider other options", then we're screwed.

*unsticky

Unstickying this post from the top of Sift Talk - unsticky requested by kronosposeidon.

Tthe requeue issue will never go away will it. I'd like to give the currnt system more time before we have another debate, referendum.

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

removing requeue may be a major change for the Sift - but it's only been around for about 4 months - out of VideoSift's total 2 year lifetime.

>> ^dag:
removing requeue may be a major change for the Sift - but it's only been around for about 4 months - out of VideoSift's total 2 year lifetime.

True....but I think it was one of the best improvments to the sift in recent times. Yes...we ran into an issue with videos being requeued several times clogging up the comments...but that was a result of changing the queue from 4 days to 2 and allowing requeue's every 12 hours instead of every 2 days. I don't really remember it being an issue until those changes were made.

In my opinion it was tweaking the queue and requeue limits that messed up the usefulness of the requeue command. I think it was a bad idea to just get rid of it instead of trying to tweak it some more until it worked better.

The reason the requeue was such a great addition in the first place was that it gave all videos including some excellent ones a better chance. I have several videos with 50 plus votes and have seen several others with 50 plus votes that would have died in the queue without at least one requeue. How many times have we seen the comments "I can't believe you had to requeue this!"? That's because even some of the best videos get overlooked the first time around for a variation of reasons....what day it was submitted, what time of day, how many other videos were submitted at around the same time, or just a poorly titled video.

My suggestion...make the queue 3 days...allow a requeue ever 2 days and allow no more then 2-3 queues per video. Also change the requeue to a button command that will not clutter up the comments.

I'd rather not see the requeue invocation come back. That said, I've always wanted some way to *save my own discarded posts, especially those which had nearly as many votes as unique views. Clearly a video with a very high votes/views ratio is considered quality by those that watched it, but for whatever reason(s) it just didn't get watched.

There have been a couple of interesting new proposals for helping those lesser watched vids. And Krupo, mas8705 and others have their SaveUs playlists. Playlists are good, but they are rarely seen, I guess because of the navigation in involved. Zifnab's idea of a new tab for videos recently moved into personal queues is pretty neat.

Here's my suggestion. Create a new tab, called something like "Beggar's List" or "Rarely Seen". Any starred member (maybe silver?) can submit videos to it from their personal queue. Each user is allowed only one video from their personal queue in the new tab at a time. So, once you've submitted a video to this new list, you would not be able to submit another until the previous one had been published (or discarded due to downvotes - no manual discarding once in the list). The size of the list should remain relatively small (certainly in comparison to the regular queue) and the quality of the vids should be fairly high because of the restriction on submissions, i.e., it would be foolish for a user to waste their one and only slot there on a video of questionable quality.

A second minor suggestion. Replace the recently discarded sidebar list (which is now completely composed of dupes) with a recently expired list.

test pattern
????>>>>??????
>>>>>???>>>
>>>???>>>>?
>>??>?>?>?\>?>>?>?>?

works fine, keep test-driving, ignore above suggestions as whines....

>> ^rottenseed:
> call me old fashioned, but I'd rather: Bitch Gripe Protest

yeah. i noticed.

and old-fashioned...?
isn't the term that springs to mind, in response, no.
but you did use the term, 4 words later, anyway.

but hey. that's why your comment here, currently has 6 votes, and mine has none. right?
because it's easier to bitch, than adapt. or write code.
or please anyone, much less a majority.

so. bitch away! may you get many more applause points, for being so good at it.
all that practice, really pays off.