There really needs to be more concrete criteria as to what constitutes a duplicate posting.
I recently queued this video which has been deemed a dupe of this video, even though mine contains extra content.
While this and this are allowed to stay even though they are virtually identical.
Edit: two more examples here and here.
Who gets to decide these things?
I recently queued this video which has been deemed a dupe of this video, even though mine contains extra content.
While this and this are allowed to stay even though they are virtually identical.
Edit: two more examples here and here.
Who gets to decide these things?
If a newer video adds substantial content, it's not a dupe.
It creates a whole new context to what you are sifting, and the added information is then relevant.
If the extra bit on the ends of the video adds substantially to the clip, provides extra meaning or insight - then it should be considered distinct.
As for who gets to decide- we generally leave this up to the community. Unless you want to appeal the decision.
which isn't identical code to this: http://www.videosift.com/video/Giant-Missle-Command-using-Multitouch
but it is the same event, with worse filming and no added value. It was different enough that I didn't feel right hitting discard, but honestly, it is the spirit of a dupe. I thought about a * discuss, but it seems so trivial in terms of discussion. I just hope it goes.
I think we should be liberal in our definition of dupes, because I think dupes dilute the sift more than the recently mentioned chunks of flour.
I really think we need to add a dupe invocation so *someone* can make a call on these. Obviously we will always have disagreements. Maybe we need some kinds of means to appeal, etc.
In my discard, I said that, and I said perhaps it should be sifttalked. I've given my opinion.
It makes it look like people just upvote videos without even watching them.. imagine that.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Disproving-Intelligent-Design-with-a-Mouse-Trap this is a dupe.. how exciting!
I think these types of dupes might be more down to people putting stupid tags/ not taking time to think what someone else might have used.
It seems like the new post is allowed to stand.. but what about using the ability to .dead and then fix embed code (or admins swapping it out).
Anyways,
I'm sure a lot of the resistance in the disputed cases is due to people not wanting to give up the votes... which is sad.
If a case were to come up and a few members were to see it and think it was ok, it only takes one member to disagree and discard. So who's opinion overrules who's?
perhaps it should be up to an agreement between the original submitter and the new submitter. But that certainly isn't a solid solution either.
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 videos page so with *dupe at least someone scrolling through unsifted page (or similar) would see that channel and then 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.
What do you want the sift to be? An indexing service for the wide array of video sources it pulls from? Or should it be the place to find the best of the best .. as voted on by the community?
I'm not saying this has to be the highbrow or bravo sift .. there's plenty of room for drooling kittens etc .. I just don't want to see the SAME damn cat shot from a different angle .. or with Beethoven instead of Bach playing while it falls asleep. Or that there was that five seconds extra of it purring. Especially if the first one queued doesn't get sifted.
I think the FAQ is clear, but there's a lot of subjectivity to interpret it. I think we should at least start by finding a definition for "same event" videos. ie it's not an exact dupe but it's the same thing .. sharing same video etc .. windmills .. rocket people .. etc.
Just my thoughts .. trying to be part of the solution. Love the Sift but I do think we need to work on the dupe situation.