azron123
I can break you with my mind. Watch, I'll do it.   SSHOLE |
Posts: 1505 Registered: 3/6/2003 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 17:12  |
Here are my ideas on how to fix the current problems and dissatisfaction with the Alpha Que.
I think that the Alpha Que as it exists now is based upon an erroneous assumption which simply stated is "A person who pays $30 for an alpha membership will usually have the best interests of the LinkSwarm community in mind, especially when he votes for or against a given link."
Not True. The two aren't related at all.
There are newbies whom we don't know and have no reason to trust who can toss out $30 without a second thought. Some of them have never posted anything or ever submitted a link. They have no LS track record.
On the other hand, there are a lot of members who contribute a lot to the site and to the community as a whole for whom $30 is a big investment.
The current chaos and general dissatisfaction with the Alpha Que is, I think, a result of giving the power to determine what LinkSwarm looks like on a day to day basis to people who don't deserve it, who abuse it and who don't give a shit.
Again, this is just my opinion, but this is how it can be repaired.
1. Take the que out of the hands of the general alpha population. Give the alpha members something else to play with in compensation.
2. Leave the mechanics of the que pretty much alone because that part seems to work fairly well. The only change I'd suggest would be to double the required number of reject votes.
3. Give the vote only to members with a record of contributing. This is subjective. Maybe we could vote on who gets to vote. Or maybe the admins could decide.
4. Keep track of the votes and take voting rights away from anyone who's reject votes are out of control.
This is just an idea and I expect it to get ripped up but I think it could work.
____________________
If you give a man a fire you keep him warm for one night.
If you set him on fire you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
|
| |
vasudeva
Bad Taste in your Mouth  SSHOLEPosts: 4538 Registered: 3/8/2002 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 17:29 |
Here are my ideas on how to fix the current problems and dissatisfaction with the Alpha Que.
I think that the Alpha Que as it exists now is based upon an erroneous assumption which simply stated is "A person who pays $30 for an alpha membership will usually have the best interests of the LinkSwarm community in mind, especially when he votes for or against a given link."
Not True. The two aren't related at all.
I think you're dead right. I've realized this as we get more and more Alphas who are in some cases people we didn't know the week before. The only thing I can think to do to fix it temporarily is up the price and outprice the stooges out there trying to get and screw things up for us. If that takes away from the cash flow, so be it. I think we need a more sensible handle than dollars, though, because ultimately that's just an arms race. We've just required that the asshats not be dirt-poor ones.
As for the rest of your suggestions, I like them. Not sure how to implement them though. Perhaps, rather than take the AQ away from the Alphas, it would make more sense to apply the vetting to the Alpha pool itself. Require a majority of yes votes from current Alphas before accepting a new one. Require 200 forum posts. Require 3 months of tenure and 100 links. I dunno. There's got to be some way to quantify value and contribution; I'm not convinced the RadFactor is it.
Also, I'm uncomfortable giving someone the option to send me money. "Hey, lucky you, you now have the privilege of emailing me $60." You know what I'm saying? I guess a little message popping up on their profile page or an automated system PM would do it; I really just don't want to email someone and tell them. It'd feel yucky,
1. Take the que out of the hands of the general alpha population. Give the alpha members something else to play with in compensation.
I think this would cause a lot of unhappiness, unless the "something else" were cool. Have any ideas?
4. Keep track of the votes and take voting rights away from anyone who's reject votes are out of control.
I think this will be part of requiring and displaying reasons for all rejects. If over time someone is obviously being a lazy cunt, it will be my job to try and fix it.
____________________
slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you. |
| |
ghostrider
liberal exit  SSHOLEPosts: 2502 Registered: 7/29/2004 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 17:37  |
What you do is set it up so some foeks only have 1/8 or less voting power, ONLY THEY AIN'T KNOWING IT !
____________________
LSD? Heck no, those were Opal Thompson's dinner rolls. |
| |
Crackalackin
SENATOR BABYHEAD  Posts: 389 Registered: 7/19/2004 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 17:54 |
ghostrider: What you do is set it up so some foeks only have 1/8 or less voting power, ONLY THEY AIN'T KNOWING IT !
That is a neat idea, once properly generalized. What you should do, Vas, is make the voting contribution a floating point number, and weigh it by the total number of links/posts by this person relative to the sum of that quantity for all the swarmers eligible to vote.
So new Alphas get some baseline weight to their vote, X. Posting on the forums, journals, comments, and submitting (accepted) links makes their weight grow, you can tweak the coefficients to assure fairness. You normalize the voting weight by the total sum of the weights of all the alphas which have voted on the link.
If the sum of 'pro' vote weights > sum of 'con' vote weights, the link makes it to the front page (given that the link accumulates enough total weight/votes).
You can also go the Google route and have members rate other members, and multiply their weight by the 'respect' factor that they get from others. That way, n00bs that make sense from the start can quickly ramp up their value.
[Edited on 29/9/2005 by Crackalackin]
____________________
^ Internet Porn Star |
| |
qwerty
DARTH MENSES  Posts: 628 Registered: 9/8/2004 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 18:05  |
or you can just list who votes for what and their reasons.
Lot less mathematical. Plus I get the feeling that I'm going to end up with the ass of this new respect system even tho I + vote majority of links so long as they're new and not from shitty dump-a-link sites or college stunt movies.
____________________
fnord linkswarm fnord |
| |
ghostrider
liberal exit SSHOLEPosts: 2502 Registered: 7/29/2004 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 18:10 |
WWVID?
____________________
LSD? Heck no, those were Opal Thompson's dinner rolls. |
| |
Uart
DARTH MENSES  Posts: 1228 Registered: 3/5/2005 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 18:17 |
vasudeva: I said a lot of stuff
I'm mostly with Qwerty on this one. HOWEVER, if you wanted to limit the alpha membership, why not up the ante. Make it like Azron's idea...
Instead of Alpha and Beta, make it either just one level of paid membership, or like Beta and Beta+. Alpha level would become an upgrade when the user achieves whatever the requirements are.
You'd have to pay to get Alpha Pool access, but you wouldn't be able to buy alpha-dom.
OR, just rock out the multiple-reject reasons and see how things change.
I don't really buy that the alpha que is failing in any way. How many links actually get unrejected anyway? Not a huge number -- some stuff is rejected because it sucks. |
| |
mundhra
dread pirate neckbeard  SSHOLEPosts: 1666 Registered: 3/25/2002 Online
|
9/29/2005 at 18:20 |
vasudeva: azron: Here are my ideas on how to fix the current problems and dissatisfaction with the Alpha Que.
I think that the Alpha Que as it exists now is based upon an erroneous assumption which simply stated is "A person who pays $30 for an alpha membership will usually have the best interests of the LinkSwarm community in mind, especially when he votes for or against a given link."
Not True. The two aren't related at all.
I think you're dead right.
as do i.
Also, I'm uncomfortable giving someone the option to send me money. "Hey, lucky you, you now have the privilege of emailing me $60." You know what I'm saying? I guess a little message popping up on their profile page or an automated system PM would do it; I really just don't want to email someone and tell them. It'd feel yucky,
i'd feel yucky for you, as well.
1. Take the que out of the hands of the general alpha population. Give the alpha members something else to play with in compensation.
I think this would cause a lot of unhappiness, unless the "something else" were cool. Have any ideas?
you're right, but i have no ideas.
i think the bottom line is making people responsible, whether it's listing how they voted or sanctions or both (or whatnot).
vas: you have a pm from me about weighting.
____________________
Amero and New World Order: the libertarian version of the rapture. |
| |
vasudeva
Bad Taste in your Mouth SSHOLEPosts: 4538 Registered: 3/8/2002 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 18:31 |
Uart: vasudeva: I said a lot of stuff
I'm mostly with Qwerty on this one.
About getting the ass end? Unwarranted. This system could be perfectly anonymous -- "user 5613 has made 400 - votes (54 of which needed unrejection) and 560 + votes" -- and would still work just as good.
Instead of Alpha and Beta, make it either just one level of paid membership, or like Beta and Beta+. Alpha level would become an upgrade when the user achieves whatever the requirements are.
You'd have to pay to get Alpha Pool access, but you wouldn't be able to buy alpha-dom.
Now that is an awesome idea.
mundhra: vas: you have a pm from me about weighting.
And it was delicious.
____________________
slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you. |
| |
JohnLenin
Putting the semen in amusement  SSHOLEPosts: 1103 Registered: 7/8/2005 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 22:11 |
LS is getting complicated.
An overall Alpha improvement, IMO, would be to offer monthly AND annual payment options. Just sayin'.
____________________
[Clavis_A] he's one of the few people i've ever seen that bear a striking resemblence to their own dick |
| |
Wotak
You + Fava Beans = Yum  SSHOLEPosts: 815 Registered: 5/27/2005 Offline
|
9/29/2005 at 22:35 |
I think I like the Beta/Beta+ concept with Alpha being an upgrade available to those who last long enough to deserve it.
Perhaps the Alpha "recruit" should have to pay for the AQ access upgrade... I dunno how I feel about that. Maybe it should be a gift for proper behavior.
Beware: complication and to much red tape can be a filter but it can also become a hurdle that will scare away a lotta good participation.
I mean, face it, we can all be pretty lazy on the internet at times. Is access to the AQ really a pot of gold worth walking through coals for?
The idea has merit in theory and could create a better content base.
Alas, I fear it could also be a slow death.
I thin more ballsy unrejects from the mods are in order... and more often.
I also think that the AQ voters that vote -1 should be required to comment as to why before they can enter a -1.
I also think their rejection reason should be attached to their user id in the "rejection reason" area of the comment's dialog when the rejected link hit's the front page.
That will let the mods know who the fuckaloos are and give them anger toward their -1's.
Accountability is always a good thing.
____________________
"silly linux users. sharts for you" --hobo |
| |
azron123
I can break you with my mind. Watch, I'll do it. SSHOLEPosts: 1505 Registered: 3/6/2003 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 00:45 |
Uart: vasudeva: I said a lot of stuff
I'm mostly with Qwerty on this one.
It takes a strong man to admit to agreeing with Qwerty about anything.
Uart:
HOWEVER, if you wanted to limit the alpha membership, why not up the ante. Make it like Azron's idea...
Instead of Alpha and Beta, make it either just one level of paid membership, or like Beta and Beta+. Alpha level would become an upgrade when the user achieves whatever the requirements are.
You'd have to pay to get Alpha Pool access, but you wouldn't be able to buy alpha-dom.
I like it.
There could still be alpha and beta memberships. You could still buy beta but to be an alpha you would have to earn it. I think the rad factor could be revived, revised and put to work there.
Uart:
I don't really buy that the alpha que is failing in any way. How many links actually get unrejected anyway? Not a huge number -- some stuff is rejected because it sucks.
Too much good stuff is getting rejected for spurious reasons. The front page that guests see has become so mainstream it looks like fark-lite. An infrequent visitor would think that we have all lost our edge and have decided to do a straight news site with a few silly fluff pieces thrown it.
I yearn to bring back the days of ass-eels and octo-pussy, evil clowns and body parts on the highway. Where are the articles about zipper heads with 90 pound nuts and multiple assholes. Where are the stories about par-boiled spics and sand niggers throwing rocks at guys in bags. Where are the pics of road kill, wrecked cars, assholes shoving stuff up their assholes. What happened to the really funny, sick, bizzarre wonderful stuff that we all love so dearly?
Are we all turning into limp wristed pussies? Are we all going PC? Is our beloved LinkSwarm to be filled with polite bullshit?
Are we to become Farkers? I shudder at the thought.
The alpha que has been systematically filtering out all the cool, edgy, wild and wooly fun stuff and leaving us to look like a bunch of wimps to the casual observer.
What the fuck is going on? Have we been infiltrated by EggBurger?
Vas has given us his backyard to play in and allowed all of us to play with his cool toys and stuff with hardly any rules at all to worry about. So let's get back on track and play with the kick ass cool stuff. That's what we're here for. Isn't it?
If you don't want to play with the cool stuff, run with the big rude dogs and maintain our image as a bunch of crazy elitist pricks then you can go next door, hang out with the fark fags and play Disney Princess Tea Party.
____________________
If you give a man a fire you keep him warm for one night.
If you set him on fire you keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
| |
SexNinja
the illest nigga  SSHOLEPosts: 1537 Registered: 10/28/2007 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 02:06 |
azron: Too much good stuff is getting rejected for spurious reasons. The front page that guests see has become so mainstream it looks like fark-lite. An infrequent visitor would think that we have all lost our edge and have decided to do a straight news site with a few silly fluff pieces thrown it.
Yes yes and yes. I mentioned this in the other thread. Part of it is the responsibility of those who submit regularly. I seem to remember an email I recieved a long time ago from vasudeva shortly after I had a million "bizarre" news links submitted. He wanted a change of pace, so I tried to give the site that. I think that's what we need now, excessive submitters.
As for me, I will try to filter this stuff more. If it means the generic, fark-style news links of "man bites dog, then fucks it" have to be deleted, I'll do it. I've actually been doing more of this recently because I was concerned about so many rejections filling up the page and pushing the good stuff off for the alphas. I think more is needed. I remember when I was submitting the generic crap and DR^3 wisely just deleted the shit like the wise faggot that he is. I got the message.
____________________
HAMFIGHTER> He shrugged, and started finishing himself off, on my breasts, while I was crying. |
| |
azron123
I can break you with my mind. Watch, I'll do it. SSHOLEPosts: 1505 Registered: 3/6/2003 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 02:27 |
SexNinjaMcDeath: azron: Too much good stuff is getting rejected for spurious reasons. The front page that guests see has become so mainstream it looks like fark-lite. An infrequent visitor would think that we have all lost our edge and have decided to do a straight news site with a few silly fluff pieces thrown it.
Yes yes and yes. I mentioned this in the other thread. Part of it is the responsibility of those who submit regularly. I seem to remember an email I recieved a long time ago from vasudeva shortly after I had a million "bizarre" news links submitted. He wanted a change of pace, so I tried to give the site that. I think that's what we need now, excessive submitters.
As for me, I will try to filter this stuff more. If it means the generic, fark-style news links of "man bites dog, then fucks it" have to be deleted, I'll do it. I've actually been doing more of this recently because I was concerned about so many rejections filling up the page and pushing the good stuff off for the alphas. I think more is needed. I remember when I was submitting the generic crap and DR^3 wisely just deleted the shit like the wise faggot that he is. I got the message.
That's why I like you, grasshopper.
____________________
If you give a man a fire you keep him warm for one night.
If you set him on fire you keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
| |
qwerty
DARTH MENSES Posts: 628 Registered: 9/8/2004 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 05:47 |
Wotak: I think I like the Beta/Beta+ concept with Alpha being an upgrade available to those who last long enough to deserve it.
Perhaps the Alpha "recruit" should have to pay for the AQ access upgrade... I dunno how I feel about that. Maybe it should be a gift for proper behavior.
Beware: complication and to much red tape can be a filter but it can also become a hurdle that will scare away a lotta good participation.
I mean, face it, we can all be pretty lazy on the internet at times. Is access to the AQ really a pot of gold worth walking through coals for?
The idea has merit in theory and could create a better content base.
Alas, I fear it could also be a slow death.
I thin more ballsy unrejects from the mods are in order... and more often.
I also think that the AQ voters that vote -1 should be required to comment as to why before they can enter a -1.
I also think their rejection reason should be attached to their user id in the "rejection reason" area of the comment's dialog when the rejected link hit's the front page.
That will let the mods know who the fuckaloos are and give them anger toward their -1's.
Accountability is always a good thing.
____________________
fnord linkswarm fnord |
| |
Acidburn
I am El Chupacabra  SSHOLEPosts: 804 Registered: 8/1/2004 Online
|
9/30/2005 at 06:01 |
Good ideas. Are we required to vote?
____________________
No you can't have my rights. I'm not through with them!
You got Down Syndrome so bad you probably have up,left and right too.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
This is Rabbit. and it kills everyday.
|
| |
tantrum
I'm a big boy now!  SSHOLEPosts: 474 Registered: 11/23/2003 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 06:02 |
I think the quality of link submissions may have gone down slightly . But it will go up again soon. There is probaly a ebb and flow of available internet goodeness that we are subject to. Cool stuff on the internet comes in two catagories: new and old.
New stuff comes in at a set pace and the old stuff is floating out there for anyone to find. Other variable factors are such as determination and taste of the submitter will affect what we see in the AQ.
IT'S THE INTERNET'S FAULT, NOT OURS. |
| |
azron123
I can break you with my mind. Watch, I'll do it. SSHOLEPosts: 1505 Registered: 3/6/2003 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 06:15 |
Oh sure! Blame the entire rest of the universe why don't you!
____________________
If you give a man a fire you keep him warm for one night.
If you set him on fire you keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
| |
BeachGoat
DARTH MENSES  Posts: 431 Registered: 10/31/2003 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 06:46 |
"I yearn to bring back the days of ass-eels and octo-pussy, evil clowns and body parts on the highway. Where are the articles about zipper heads with 90 pound nuts and multiple assholes. Where are the stories about par-boiled spics and sand niggers throwing rocks at guys in bags. Where are the pics of road kill, wrecked cars, assholes shoving stuff up their assholes. What happened to the really funny, sick, bizzarre wonderful stuff that we all love so dearly?"
For one, we have found most of the worst and posted it.
The stupidest stunts, the most famous deformities, the most graphic splatterings have been posted and run to the ground. Now their links bring cries of repeat and boredom.
For two, most of us are now jaded to the point that its hard to find anything shocking anymore.
I can still find beheadings, highway gore and deformities. I can still find stupid, laughable gay shit. But none of it has the same impact as when we haadn't seen the eels, the 90 pound testicles, or even GOATSE.
The newer members haven't seen these things, and they are buried deep in the archives. We could fill a couple of months of pages with just going through all the old links from page one and reposting the good ones while eliminating the expired links. The tradgedy of that would be the loss of comments. Some of the funniest shit I've ever read has been in the comment sections. Brutal.
I try to submit links and the queue is almost always full. I am at work / on the computer between 1am and 4am, and I'm lucky to get in one or two before its full. At the same time, There are links that I wish I could clear with a Null vote, because I don't have a strong enough interest to condemn or approve them. Not sure what the answer to that is, but there's been a few dozen pretty good links that you'll never see...
I like the idea of earning by participation; a vested interest in the health of a project you have put time in. There are enough involved members to create a "Council of the Damned" or what ever you want to call it. I had no vote to begin with; it became a bonus, and then an annoyance. Now its something I only vote on if I want to promote something or really don't like it. I get the impression that a lot of votes are cast simply to clear the queue and not to show true feelings for or against a link. That's kinda weak.
Either way, I'm easy. Give me a vote, I'll use it properly, with thought. Take the vote away, and i'll be just as happy, as long as I still have access to the rejected links.
But quit yer whining.
____________________
|
| |
vasudeva
Bad Taste in your Mouth SSHOLEPosts: 4538 Registered: 3/8/2002 Offline
|
9/30/2005 at 11:29 |
BeachGoat: I try to submit links and the queue is almost always full. I am at work / on the computer between 1am and 4am, and I'm lucky to get in one or two before its full.
At the moment everyone gets 7 links in there before it stops letting you submit more. I'm going to crank that down to 3 if your rejection bitterness rating is kinda shitty and down to 1 if it's really really shitty. This should put less actual crap in there for everyone to wade through and give them more time to get through the real stuff.
Maybe if you've submitted 10 links and never had a single approval, you're someone like hellboy spamming us with his own site, and should never be able to submit, at all.
At the same time, There are links that I wish I could clear with a Null vote, because I don't have a strong enough interest to condemn or approve them.
If you don't vote, someone else will. No one is ever required to vote on a link. I could put in a NULL vote action, at the risk of making the interface a little more confusing, if you guys just want to be able to get certain links out of your face. Know in the meantime though that if you ignore it, other people will eventually vote it out of the AQ and thus it will be gone from your view of the AQ.
____________________
slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you. |
| |
