It's strictly for revenue reasons. As luck would have it, non-members who click in almost exclusively bounce away without visiting a second VideoSift page, so we're using that opportunity in attempt to monetize that one visit as much as possible.

Our pretty single video page is too distracting for a one-time visitor and includes a lot of ancillary information a bouncing user doesn't need or care about, so we're just giving them the things we really care about them seeing: share widgets (facebook, twitter, etc.) and ads.

Isn't there sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on there too then? If there's no indication that you can go "deeper", then most people won't go deeper.

Having it this simplified, makes it not inviting to the few who want something more out odf the community, which is what Videosift does so well (disregarding the odd siftquisition here and there).

I'm all for making it simpler and directly targeted at bouncing users, but don't go overboard. It seems to me to overload a little on facebook stuff too,



>> ^lucky760:

It's strictly for revenue reasons. As luck would have it, non-members who click in almost exclusively bounce away without visiting a second VideoSift page, so we're using that opportunity in attempt to monetize that one visit as much as possible.
Our pretty single video page is too distracting for a one-time visitor and includes a lot of ancillary information a bouncing user doesn't need or care about, so we're just giving them the things we really care about them seeing: share widgets (facebook, twitter, etc.) and ads.

Wow, those non-committed types get a nice big video embed. I hope this is just a transitional thing and we're going to get bigger vids soon, too.

>> ^gwiz665:

Isn't there sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on there too then? If there's no indication that you can go "deeper", then most people won't go deeper.
Having it this simplified, makes it not inviting to the few who want something more out odf the community, which is what Videosift does so well (disregarding the odd siftquisition here and there).
I'm all for making it simpler and directly targeted at bouncing users, but don't go overboard. It seems to me to overload a little on facebook stuff too,

>> ^lucky760:
It's strictly for revenue reasons. As luck would have it, non-members who click in almost exclusively bounce away without visiting a second VideoSift page, so we're using that opportunity in attempt to monetize that one visit as much as possible.
Our pretty single video page is too distracting for a one-time visitor and includes a lot of ancillary information a bouncing user doesn't need or care about, so we're just giving them the things we really care about them seeing: share widgets (facebook, twitter, etc.) and ads.



Conventional wisdom might lead you to believe that, but in practice, we've tried doing lots of different things over the years on the non-member single-video page to entice a click-through to a second page and nothing changes the fact that most all people who land on VideoSift via a Google search just want to watch the video they were searching for and then leave immediately, no matter what else is on the page.

Our best bet is to gain more visitors via people posting Facebook comments (below the video) or sharing the post via their favorite social medium.

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

It's true - it does kind of look like ass with all of the ads splooged all over the page. After six years though - I've come to a conclusion: There's us, and there's them. There are the people we love who are the Sifters that find their way here - and there are the holipoli that rummage through our droppings as we forge a trail into the future.

That's a terrible way to think about site visitors - I know. Maybe it will be our eventual downfall - but have you seen the top 10 Google search terms that lead people to VideoSift? Here we go, for the past 30 days in descending order of popularity:


rape videos
rape video
hunger games trailer
rape scene
rape
irreversible
irreversible rape scene
rape scenes
inside vagina

There's our non-logged-in audience and it's kind of depressing. Google is 45% of our traffic. Fuck them. I'm a little happier about things that go nuts on Facebook for no apparent reason. Log out and look at the facebook comments on this moderately upvoted page. http://videosift.com/video/How-Belly-Dancers-Flip-Coins

So VideoSift is two worlds, the beautiful community where we live and make content and the other VideoSift that actually supports the site and pays the server bills.

There's an adage going around the Internet that if you aren't paying for a product or service ... you are the product or service. See Gmail for a good example of that. You are the product that's being offered to advertisers when you use Gmail. I hope that we have sidestepped that a little bit. It's true, that the content that we all create here does become a product that we offer to advertisers ... at least there is the option of Charter membership and at least we try and keep the ad saturation cordoned off to the non-logged in area.

My concern is that, if I'd seen this page structure when I was first checking out Videosift, I might never have registered and begun to participate in this community. I can't say for certain, but it's definitely possible, and I imagine it's possible for others, too.

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

You know - you would think that - but new sign-ups since we made this change are about double what they used to be. You could argue about the quality of members ... *cough* *meow* *cough* ... (I kid, I kid) >> ^Gallowflak:

My concern is that, if I'd seen this page structure when I was first checking out Videosift, I might never have registered and begun to participate in this community. I can't say for certain, but it's definitely possible, and I imagine it's possible for others, too.

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

For the record, I love cats. Seriously, love 'em.

What really stands out there is the Hunger Games trailer. That movie was just terrible.
>> ^dag:
Here we go, for the past 30 days in descending order of popularity:
rape videos
rape video
hunger games trailer
rape scene
rape
irreversible
irreversible rape scene
rape scenes
inside vagina
There's our non-logged-in audience and it's kind of depressing. Google is 45% of our traffic. Fuck them. I'm a little happier about things that go nuts on Facebook for no apparent reason. Log out and look at the facebook comments on this moderately upvoted page. http://videosift.com/video/How-Belly-Dancers-Flip-Coins

I think the Facebook commenting is a good idea and I understand having all the sharing options for revenue reasons, but damn that page is ugly. If it becomes any more bland simpler it might as well be wimp.com

Anyrate, it's not really an issue since I am a member of this awesome community. I just want to point my finger and laugh.

Anyone else curious about the ranking for "irreversible hunger games rape inside vagina scene"?

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

It will look better on VideoSift 5.>> ^Lann:

I think the Facebook commenting is a good idea and I understand having all the sharing options for revenue reasons, but damn that page is ugly. If it becomes any more bland simpler it might as well be wimp.com
Anyrate, it's not really an issue since I am a member of this awesome community. I just want to point my finger and laugh.

http://i.imgur.com/0pNy4.jpg>> ^dag:

It will look better on VideoSift 5.>> ^Lann:
I think the Facebook commenting is a good idea and I understand having all the sharing options for revenue reasons, but damn that page is ugly. If it becomes any more bland simpler it might as well be wimp.com
Anyrate, it's not really an issue since I am a member of this awesome community. I just want to point my finger and laugh.

"Irreversible" rape? What does that even mean?

Actually, I don't want to know.

Not sure if serious, but http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290673/

>> ^kymbos:

"Irreversible" rape? What does that even mean?
Actually, I don't want to know.

>> ^berticus:

Not sure if serious, but http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290673/
>> ^kymbos:
"Irreversible" rape? What does that even mean?
Actually, I don't want to know.



Yeah, not a fun movie by any means. I resisted watching it until about a year ago.

It's like...how many visitors come to this site totally unaware of the actual beauty and depth that is hidden right beneath them? You're sell-outs...but in my eyes I'm a beneficiary of your selling out, so thank you much >> ^lucky760:

>> ^gwiz665:
Isn't there sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on there too then? If there's no indication that you can go "deeper", then most people won't go deeper.
Having it this simplified, makes it not inviting to the few who want something more out odf the community, which is what Videosift does so well (disregarding the odd siftquisition here and there).
I'm all for making it simpler and directly targeted at bouncing users, but don't go overboard. It seems to me to overload a little on facebook stuff too,

>> ^lucky760:
It's strictly for revenue reasons. As luck would have it, non-members who click in almost exclusively bounce away without visiting a second VideoSift page, so we're using that opportunity in attempt to monetize that one visit as much as possible.
Our pretty single video page is too distracting for a one-time visitor and includes a lot of ancillary information a bouncing user doesn't need or care about, so we're just giving them the things we really care about them seeing: share widgets (facebook, twitter, etc.) and ads.


Conventional wisdom might lead you to believe that, but in practice, we've tried doing lots of different things over the years on the non-member single-video page to entice a click-through to a second page and nothing changes the fact that most all people who land on VideoSift via a Google search just want to watch the video they were searching for and then leave immediately, no matter what else is on the page.
Our best bet is to gain more visitors via people posting Facebook comments (below the video) or sharing the post via their favorite social medium.

Sooo... people are googling the rape scene from a movie? Presumably it gets them off. Sometimes the human character sickens me.

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

It's not just that one though - if you were to look at the top 100 search terms it would pretty much be rape, vaginas and sex all the way down. Or at least 75% of searches.>> ^kymbos:

Sooo... people are googling the rape scene from a movie? Presumably it gets them off. Sometimes the human character sickens me.

Hmm, I'm shocked that those are the top search words that bring people here.
BUT I want to know why. What is it about our search results in Google that makes us the destination for those searches?
People search for all kinds of crap, and I know šë× is one of them. But there must be something in the site that makes us a target for those search results.

I think some search strategies are needed here. Of all the videos people search for, I know those are not the only video searches. So why are those specific ones, the ones that result in VideoSift? Has anyone looked into this? Seven of the top 10 search words were rape related. No one is looking for other stuff? That seems strange to me.

Rape and Hunger Games. Really?
Something is broken - look closer at Google, don't blame the audience. Why are those searches not being led to sites that include that sort of content (does that exist?) - why are they being routed here?

The Google search is broken if it's sending those requests here to this site - that doesn't have that content.

>> ^dag:

Top 10 Google search terms that lead people to VideoSift. Here we go, for the past 30 days in descending order of popularity:
rape videos
rape video
hunger games trailer
rape scene
rape
irreversible
irreversible rape scene
rape scenes
inside vagina
There's our non-logged-in audience and it's kind of depressing. Google is 45% of our traffic. Fuck them.

Probably more of a reflection on the general content of the internet, I imagine.

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

You make some good points. I've thought about it quite a bit too. The first thing we should stipulate is that *a lot* of Google searches are about sex. The other point is that most of the time when people do search for sexy stuff on Google - they don't realise that Google Safe Search is enabled by default.

VideoSift doesn't have adult content so it falls in the realm of the Safe Search "Safe" sites. What people are really looking for are the search results that come up when Safe Search is disabled. The set of pages returned with sexual keywords that are "safe" is a much smaller set, so we rise to the top of the list. That's whay I think is going on.

>> ^Sagemind:

Hmm, I'm shocked that those are the top search words that bring people here.
BUT I want to know why. What is it about our search results in Google that makes us the destination for those searches?
People search for all kinds of crap, and I know šë× is one of them. But there must be something in the site that makes us a target for those search results.
I think some search strategies are needed here. Of all the videos people search for, I know those are not the only video searches. So why are those specific ones, the ones that result in VideoSift? Has anyone looked into this? Seven of the top 10 search words were rape related. No one is looking for other stuff? That seems strange to me.
Rape and Hunger Games. Really?
Something is broken - look closer at Google, don't blame the audience. Why are those searches not being led to sites that include that sort of content (does that exist?) - why are they being routed here?
The Google search is broken if it's sending those requests here to this site - that doesn't have that content.
>> ^dag:
Top 10 Google search terms that lead people to VideoSift. Here we go, for the past 30 days in descending order of popularity:
rape videos
rape video
hunger games trailer
rape scene
rape
irreversible
irreversible rape scene
rape scenes
inside vagina
There's our non-logged-in audience and it's kind of depressing. Google is 45% of our traffic. Fuck them.

When I share a video online, there's a good chance that it is a video that I saw first here. I know that some of the ad revenue goes back to help pay for the site. So I link to the sift hoping that it helps out a little bit, and that maybe a friend might get enticed to join as I did when I stopped being a lurker. I joined to participate in discussion after initially following @djsunkid's bread crumbs here. Looking at the non-logged-in video pages, I don't know if I would have made the same choice. I don't see the menu bar to "top sifts" or the other information on the home page to suggest that there's anything else to the site beyond just the one video. But maybe you guys are looking to draw people more from the http://www.facebook.com/videosift page? Either way, I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys do with the update.

>> ^dag:

It will look better on VideoSift 5.>> ^Lann:
I think the Facebook commenting is a good idea and I understand having all the sharing options for revenue reasons, but damn that page is ugly. If it becomes any more bland simpler it might as well be wimp.com
Anyrate, it's not really an issue since I am a member of this awesome community. I just want to point my finger and laugh.