hmm. i can live without requeue, but, as i said for the x-th time, we should find a way to give videos a fighting chance once they join the pq. what's wrong with giving them more exposure with the "PQ" tag (as you suggested in the first place if i'm not mistaken)?

I did indeed suggest that. I still think it's a good idea, but even if the PQ tab were implemented, I still think the requeue function would be good to have. I'm not saying we should go back to the unlimited requeue, but the PQ tab would only be able to do so much, and there are a lot of videos that, for whatever reason, need the slight nudge that one or two requeues can provide. These aren't crappy videos -- they're interesting, quality videos that might simply not have the kind of wide appeal needed to make it in one go. Or maybe they were just submitted at a weird time. Or maybe they were submitted at a time when lots of other people were submitting stuff. I don't know. But there are a lot of great videos that wouldn't be on the site right now if it weren't for the requeue function.

Shut it. Seriously. We had no requeue since Day 1 and things worked ok. Now we have PersonalQueues so instead of your video being dead, it will still be semi-active and prevent others from posting the same videos over and over again.

They can still vote on it in your pqueue so just consider it a long term queue. Instead of requeueing and clogging up the queue with something that NINE PEOPLE on the internet couldn't muster a vote for, it will probably end up with affinity groups of in cliques all upvoting each other sifters pqueues in a massive circle jerk of cliques and similar lame tastes in videos.

Whoa. What's up with the constant animosity on the Sift? You know, the other day I saw Grimm and MG battle it out about downvoting, and it ended with personal attacks. Now, joedirt, you're telling Sarzy to shut it? Come on, man. You're an awesome sifter, and I like your site contributions a lot. This site is a marketplace of ideas, and it is through us challenging the current status quo that allows for site improvements, no? If someone has an idea, whether it is considered bad or not, shouldn't we dispassionately argue for and against without making it appear as personal attacks? At least we can disguise it as dispassionate discourse.

As for Sarzy's idea, I agree with him. I'd like to be able to requeue. I miss that power. Personally, I have issues with this whole power point thing, and I'm kind of tired of seeing the site constantly in a state of feature flux, because although its meant to enhance the user's experience, it really detracts and complicates it. I'd personally like to roll the feature enhancements back about a month.

So then Joe Dirt... you never used the requeue function? Oh wait, you did? Okay.

The PQ is basically just a nicer way of discarding a video. How many videos have actually made it out of the personal queue, aside from maybe a few which had 8 or 9 votes when they expired? I don't have any numbers, obviously, but I'd be willing to bet not many.

I've already had a vid published out of my personal queue - an old, obscure animation piece. On the other hand, I had a silly sausage commercial eventually published after four requeues. Personally, I like them both, but it's clear to me which one is more deserving.
-----
I don't recall seeing an epidemic of unworthy videos on the front page. Do you?

yes I do.
-----
who cares what we did or didn't used to have. It was an improvement. It was progress.

In your opinion. Obscure and less watched vids got published at least as often before requeue came along. [In my opinion]
-----
I think the lack of a requeue will ultimately change the kinds of videos that people submit

That statement is what doesn't give enough credit to the community. It assumes that folks are more worried about their "rank" and how many votes they can catch rather than the quality of the videos they share.

[copied from previous talk post on this subject]
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.

I don't recall seeing an epidemic of unworthy videos on the front page. Do you?

yes I do.

Name some. I'm being serious. Post a link to a few videos which used the requeue, which you think are crappy and don't belong on the sift. Because I know I could easily list dozens of great videos which had to be requeued. It wouldn't take me very long, either. And I'd be willing to bet that some of your videos would be on that list, unless you've never requeued anything, which I highly doubt.

That statement is what doesn't give enough credit to the community. It assumes that folks are more worried about their "rank" and how many votes they can catch rather than the quality of the videos they share.

It's not about worrying about rank, or votes, it's about not wanting to waste slots/time on a video which probably won't make it. And there are a lot of good videos which are now much harder to get posted.

That statement is what doesn't give enough credit to the community. It assumes that folks are more worried about their "rank" and how many votes they can catch rather than the quality of the videos they share

seriously? I'm here for the rank kiddies. That's like saying "It assumes that folks are more worried about their earning a paycheck than their actual job"

Patience, grasshopper. There's a good chance we will grow the PQ into something much greater than sloppy, ugly, old requeue ever could have wished to become.

For example, some of what jonny described above could be great. We could have a special listing somewhere (maybe a tab, maybe not) where perhaps for 1 Power Point you could *beg a PQ video up where it'll be listed temporarily before returning to PQ if not published. This will be great exposure without creating an overfull list that'd be as impossible to fully parse, and also keep the main queue non-stale and uncluttered with only fresh stuff.

*Kudos to jonny for the suggestion.

From time to time there are lots of rl hindrances (including violent strains of influenza) that serve to limit the amount of effort we are able to put into bettering the Sift at a given time. Afford us a little slack as we do our best with what availability we have to do what we feel is best for everyone and the future of the Sift. Thanks.

(Keep in mind that from time to time we make unpopular decisions that end up being loved by all or at the very least make the Sift so much better. Try to think objectively once in a while. It's great to be passionate about this place, but it sometimes helps to think about the grand scheme of things.)

>> ^Sarzy:
Name some. I'm being serious. Post a link to a few videos which used the requeue, which you think are crappy and don't belong on the sift.

That's a fair challenge. But I'm too lazy. More to the point, I'll concede that the requeue invocation didn't have as much to do with the less than worthy videos (as I see them) getting published as other factors.

I know I could easily list dozens of great videos which had to be requeued.

I'm sure you could, but I would disagree with the notion that they had to be requeued to get published. They could just as easily have been saved or promoted or reposted in most cases. Yes, some great videos slip through the cracks, but that's not a problem with invocations. I'd argue it's a problem with how most folks use the site and with a time-based expiration from the queue. Kronos has repeatedly made attempts to get people to look through the queue more often, as have I, in particular by using the "hide videos I've viewed" filter. Unfortunately, that filter isn't working perfectly, and viewed vids reappear after a day or two. Fix that, get people to use it, and I'd be willing to bet those cracks would close up quite a bit. Another idea I've championed is to remove the time limit on the queue entirely and replace it with a view limit. In other words, a video would only expire after, say, 15 people viewed and didn't vote for it (or downvoted it).

And I'd be willing to bet that some of your videos would be on that list, unless you've never requeued anything, which I highly doubt.

Of course I used it. If someone gives you free money, would you refuse it? I'm as susceptible to attachment (to my vids) and rank watching as anyone. But it's not the reason I'm here. And I don't think it's the reason most people are here, rottenseed's silly comment notwithstanding.

That statement is what doesn't give enough credit to the community. It assumes that folks are more worried about their "rank" and how many votes they can catch rather than the quality of the videos they share.
It's not about worrying about rank, or votes, it's about not wanting to waste slots/time on a video which probably won't make it.

I'm confused by the notion that posting a video is ever a waste. Even if it doesn't get published, you've done your part, you've shared it with the community. After that, it's up to the community to respond. Being able to requeue just gives the community more time to respond. But I think we can accomplish the same goal in better ways.

And there are a lot of good videos which are now much harder to get posted.

A voting and ranking system like this will never be perfect. I know you're not suggesting requeue will make it so, but I'm arguing that there are better ways to improve the site. Ones which will not only improve the chances of certain vids to get published, but provide an overall better user experience. Basically, it's a tradeoff situation, and I think the requeue invocation doesn't provide enough benefit to justify itself. Many of the vids you write about required several requeues, so I doubt allowing 1 or 2 requeus will help those much.

I used *requeue, but I felt somewhat guilty whenever I used it, like I was forcing something onto the other sifters. I'd like the *beg option.

^jonny:
I don't recall seeing an epidemic of unworthy videos on the front page. Do you?
yes I do.


O RLY?

lucky760:
For example, some of what jonny described above could be great. We could have a special listing somewhere (maybe a tab, maybe not) where perhaps for 1 Power Point you could *beg a PQ video up where it'll be listed temporarily before returning to PQ if not published. This will be great exposure without creating an overfull list that'd be as impossible to fully parse, and also keep the main queue non-stale and uncluttered with only fresh stuff.

first of all, videos that after 3 days in the unsifted section don't get at least two votes should just be killed on spot - them videos shall be no more. so if anyone else wants to bother with them and submit them back to the queue, let the fool do that, who cares... can you give us a round estimate in percentage (repeating of course) on how many videos that go to pq have less than 2 votes?

next: whats wrong with just throwing all remaining pq videos under one PQ tag and give each sifter, say silver star and up, a chance to promote it (yes, there would be a button) to the top of the queue for a limited time (or we have the 5 top spots reserved for those promotes that would then rotate so that each video gets the same exposure time)? each privileged member would get one chance a month to do so, gold twice a month, gold100 once a week, and so on. if a video after 6 such promotions still lingers in the pq, it should be viciously executed. except videos, that have 9 votes and are just short of that ticket to sifted paradise. those we give one more chance at the top (labeled sort of "last chance to see" or something). if they fail, they finaly expire and are no more.

another thing is time limit: 3 months after it got posted, any video gets a bullet in the back of the head, regardless of the number of promotions they still have left - again, except those lucky 9 vote bastards who get labeled as such and auto-promoted one last time.

[edit] forgot about charter members, haven't I? let's say they get same 6 promotes in 3 months period, but they can use them anytime they choose. heck, give them 10 promotes. just an idea

>> ^lucky760:
Patience, grasshopper. There's a good chance we will grow the PQ into something much greater than sloppy, ugly, old requeue ever could have wished to become.
For example, some of what jonny described above could be great. We could have a special listing somewhere (maybe a tab, maybe not) where perhaps for 1 Power Point you could beg a PQ video up where it'll be listed temporarily before returning to PQ if not published. This will be great exposure without creating an overfull list that'd be as impossible to fully parse, and also keep the main queue non-stale and uncluttered with only fresh stuff.
Kudos to jonny for the suggestion.


*beg = awesome

Also, permit me to cough violently for a minute.

*cough* http://www.videosift.com/playlists/Krupo/VideosToSave *cough*

Woo, sorry.

Joedirt is right, there wasn't a requeue function back when VS started all until now. But then there weren't that many sifters as there are now either.

Joedirt also failed to mention that queue time used to be four days and escape threshold used to be a lot lower. Yes, things have changed since the beginning. To hold up what used to be as a shining example of how things ought to be now is what conservatives do.

That oughta draw him out.

I like the new system because it's quicker for me to find all the unsifted that need attention. I just wish more people viewed videos the way I do. To be repetitive:

Go to advanced search, select "personal queued". Now choose order "newest". Now search. You don't need to put anything in the search field.

I do this every time I log on, and I love it. There are plenty of videos I *only* see in the personal queues because I've been busy like mad lately, so I mostly see the videos I try to sift but are already there, and the personal queue videos. Also, if I find any video I really like, for any reason, I go look at that person's personal queue, except I've almost always already seen those videos' titles, though I might not have been tempted to hit play.

>> ^Farhad2000:
Joedirt is right, there wasn't a requeue function back when VS started all until now. But then there weren't that many sifters as there are now either.

Exactly. Now, assuming you're looking at the unsifted videos by date added, a video has something like two hours on the first page of the unsifted tab, depending on the time submitted. That's two hours to get five or six votes, because if it doesn't get that many, it's never going to show up in the Top 15 Videos Expiring Soon sidebar, and is a longshot to get 10 votes. Basically, without a requeue, that video is dead, no matter how good it is.

I tend to agree.

>> ^kronosposeidon:
Joedirt also failed to mention that queue time used to be four days and escape threshold used to be a lot lower.

Exactly. I'm always looking at videos published a year or 9 months or whatever ago, and they all have 5 votes or 9. So to say that we got along with out it is only halfway true.
[Edit] And by we I mean the preexisting community.

The shut it.. is in reference to the repeated over and over again in like five different sifttalks about "requeue" this and "queue limit" that and "number of days" and "number of votes".

Just shut it. It is what it is. It will be different in the future. There is always a shifting algorithm for number of sifters, number of frontpage videos, number of queued videos, and number of people voting on queued videos. Those four things will always be making changing tradeoffs of how the queue is handled. There are three or four things which you are trading off and trying to balance. Queue size (rot & hard to sift out good videos) is being balanced with too many frontpage videos (quality goes down and people cannot keep up with front page).

Fact, the queue is too large and useless now. The metric should "does a frontpage / good video make it out of the queue in 6 hrs". If I were the admin I would tailor all the settings to achieve this. But I think we don't have enough sifters voting queued videos, or at least the good ones are being mixed in with too many crappy videos. I personally think the problem is only having an upvote (the downvote is mostly taboo). So the only input to the systems is YES or blah-do-not-care. We need a super-upvote, an upvote, a no vote, a this sucks, and a downvote, get rid of this spam crap. The "this sucks" vote should only be a minor penalty and not as catastropic as today's downvote.

A futher advancement would be like slashdot where a person's accuracy is weighted, so if you upvote videos that tend to make it to the front page, your votes carry more weight. This can be gamed and cannot enter into a formula once a video has, say 5 votes. I personally think you should not be able to see how many votes a video in the queue has until after you vote for it to remove some polling bias, or basically make those 8 & 9's are really a 10 thereby reducing the efficacy of a 10 vote threshold (auto upvote 9s policy leads to crap that might not have gotten a tenth vote).

^ I like the "not being able to see the votes" idea by joedirt
I like the requeue ideas that Sarzy suggested
I'd be interested to hear more about the new features that Lucky hinted at

If "requeue" was such a crappy feature then why does it still exist for people willing to pay money for it?

Seems to me you charge people for the good or coveted features not the crappy ones.