New Opinion Requirement

This forum is for site announcements. Please go here to read the SITE & FORUM RULES.

New Opinion Requirement

Postby Phade » Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:23 am

Hey All,

The opinion submission form has been updated so that if a video is locally available, an opinion can only be submitted if the member has downloaded the video. This is meant to help prevent the casual "create fake account and leave fake opinion" junk.

I hope this helps.

Phade.
User avatar
Phade
Site Admin
 
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Location: Little cabin in the woods...

Postby Kai Stromler » Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:47 am

Are there measures in place to allow for ops left on videos with multiple links? I know that whenever possible, I try to use direct or indirect links to save .org bandwidth; this rule is eminently reasonable if a video is only available locally (even if someone sees the vid at a con or other public showing, if they want to op it, most of the time they're going to want their own copy), but those with multiple links may cause some issues.

--K
Shin Hatsubai is a Premiere-free studio. Insomni-Ack is habitually worthless.
IT'S TIME!
Coelem - Tenebral Presence single now freely available
User avatar
Kai Stromler
 
Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Location: back in the USSA

Postby Phade » Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:21 am

Hey,

The new requirement is only in place for locally available videos. If a vid is only available externally, an opinion can be left at any time.

Phade.
User avatar
Phade
Site Admin
 
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Location: Little cabin in the woods...

Postby Coderjoe » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:15 am

Is this for videos that only have a local link and no external links, or for all vids that have a local link, regardless of external links?

I think it should be the former, personally, as the latter would force people wanting to leave an opinion to download from the local hosting even when external sources are available, at a time when we're having issues with the amount of bandwidth the local hosting is consuming.
User avatar
Coderjoe
 
Joined: 03 Mar 2001

Postby pen-pen2002 » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:23 am

I think you missed Kai's point.

He's saying that when given a choice, he downloads from Directs sources instead of the Local source to save bandwith. Obviously he should still be allowed to leave an oppinion.
Image
User avatar
pen-pen2002
 
Joined: 02 Sep 2001
Location: Grinnell, IA Procrastination Meter: Code Lemon-Lime

Postby Scintilla » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:41 am

Exactly. I provide both direct and local links for almost all of my videos, and I know that lots of people get the direct versions.
ImageImage
:pizza: :pizza: Image :pizza: :pizza:
User avatar
Scintilla
(for EXTREME)
 
Joined: 31 Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Status: Quo

Postby Phade » Thu Oct 06, 2005 12:36 pm

Hey,

Yes, but the issue of fake opinions seems to be a larger issue than bandwidth consumption nowadays (judging by the number of complaints I receive). This new requirement should help to knock out a good chunk of those fake ops for everyone. If the general public were nice and honest and left only opinions for videos they viewed, this wouldn't be a problem and we wouldn't need the check.

How about as a compromise we add an option for the video creator to allow opinions on their videos even if the member has not downloaded the video locally or not? The default would be to require the member to do a local download before an opinion can be left.

As for the people who download externally, there's not much I can do about that since we can't detect a successful download or not. On the cost/benefit scale, I think that requiring a member to locally download the video before an opinion can be give is a good thing.

I hope this helps.

Phade.
User avatar
Phade
Site Admin
 
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Location: Little cabin in the woods...

Postby Zarxrax » Thu Oct 06, 2005 12:45 pm

Instead of doing it like this, how about just get together an elite group of opinion task force officers to investigate into abusive opinions, and remove such opinions and punish the offenders.
Add possible opinion restrictions onto new accounts. Maybe you can't leave an opinion unless you have been a member for 2 weeks. This would stop people from creating 100 new accounts at one time to quickly boost up their video. Such attempts would have to become more complicated and drawn out, and people would be less likely to even bother.

With the solution you are proposing, I can see a lot of confusion popping up when people can't leave an opinion on the videos they have just downloaded.
User avatar
Zarxrax
 
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Location: Concord, NC

Postby AquaSky » Thu Oct 06, 2005 12:50 pm

Not to mention that it's a problem for videos that can't be hosted on the .org (a recent example would be AMV Hell 0).
User avatar
AquaSky
Master of Science
 
Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL.

Postby Phade » Thu Oct 06, 2005 12:54 pm

Hey Zarxrax,

I think that is a great idea and really should be implemented that way, but there is one problem: development time. Putting in this fix took me about 15 mins. Adding all the tools necessary for opinion ninjas to keep out the bad guys would take much much more time. Eventually a system like you describe will be up and running, but it will be a while. :-(

Phade.
User avatar
Phade
Site Admin
 
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Location: Little cabin in the woods...

Postby Rurounikeitaro » Thu Oct 06, 2005 2:22 pm

Thank you so much man! I'm soooo sick of those cheating bastards who screwed me and even Koop up!
Image
Image
User avatar
Rurounikeitaro
 
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Location: Piscataway, NJ Watching: Death Note, KIBA, Sola

Postby Rurounikeitaro » Thu Oct 06, 2005 2:24 pm

Phade wrote:Hey Zarxrax,

I think that is a great idea and really should be implemented that way, but there is one problem: development time. Putting in this fix took me about 15 mins. Adding all the tools necessary for opinion ninjas to keep out the bad guys would take much much more time. Eventually a system like you describe will be up and running, but it will be a while. :-(

Phade.


If you ever plan to do that, I will gladly be one of those ninjas. I know of about 5 videos on the top 10% that have been cheated on and many others, which even include the top 2 videos "Someone else did the bad stuff though".
Image
Image
User avatar
Rurounikeitaro
 
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Location: Piscataway, NJ Watching: Death Note, KIBA, Sola

Postby Arigatomina » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:51 am

I love this 'quick fix' and wouldn't mind seeing it permanent.

Perhaps for those people who are honest reviewers (having posted in this thread) and who would rather use direct links, you can hand them that thing derobert had a while back that counts a video as downloaded, even if you cancel the download after a few seconds. I don't remember whether it was a page on the site that might still be active, but I know he gave the link in a thread somewhere on the forum. It might have been back when we were talking about the 'suggestions according to star scores given' update - so people could knock vids off their suggestion page without having to fully download them all. As long as it doesn't fall into the hands of the bad guys, it should solve the problem for those who want to review without downloading two copies of the video.

/if no one remembers the link-thing I'm talking about, nevermind ;p
User avatar
Arigatomina
 
Joined: 03 Apr 2003

Postby downwithpants » Fri Oct 07, 2005 4:56 am

Arigatomina wrote:I love this 'quick fix' and wouldn't mind seeing it permanent.

Perhaps for those people who are honest reviewers (having posted in this thread) and who would rather use direct links, you can hand them that thing derobert had a while back that counts a video as downloaded, even if you cancel the download after a few seconds. I don't remember whether it was a page on the site that might still be active, but I know he gave the link in a thread somewhere on the forum. It might have been back when we were talking about the 'suggestions according to star scores given' update - so people could knock vids off their suggestion page without having to fully download them all. As long as it doesn't fall into the hands of the bad guys, it should solve the problem for those who want to review without downloading two copies of the video.

/if no one remembers the link-thing I'm talking about, nevermind ;p

i think they disabled it :(
maskandlayer()|My Guide to WMM 2.x
a-m-v.org Last.fm|<a href="http://www.frappr.com/animemusicvideosdotorg">Animemusicvideos.org Frappr</a>|<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2lryta"> Editors and fans against the misattribution of AMVs</a>
User avatar
downwithpants
BIG PICTURE person
 
Joined: 03 Dec 2002
Location: storrs, ct
Status: out of service

Postby derobert » Fri Oct 07, 2005 7:28 am

Arigatomina wrote:that thing derobert had a while back that counts a video as downloaded, even if you cancel the download after a few seconds.
That was a proof-of-concept implementation of what became the new download system first used on Kero. It was never available for Kero, and when I upgraded Nago to the new code, it stopped being available there, too.
Key 55EA59FE; fingerprint = E501 CEE3 E030 2D48 D449 274C FB3F 88C2 55EA 59FE
A mighty order of ages is born anew.              http://twitter.com/derobert
User avatar
derobert
Phantom of the .Org
 
Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Location: AOD Command Fortress

Next

Return to Site Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=58238&start=0
www.animemusicvideos.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2014-41
53204
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:OKT3WIMMXZRIFBSJMIV3DEE3QR7OV4ND
<urn:uuid:6d564f53-4f7f-49c4-8541-e3545f8ccb09>
2014-09-17T07:33:56Z
70.33.188.196
sha1:LMSTWBNJ3MCXD7TNXT2MSKKGUYKXJLM5
<urn:uuid:9f5f61ec-e9e9-457d-a9fe-d429b0f341bb>
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=58238&start=0
length
response
<urn:uuid:4ee43e1c-70b0-4d5f-a312-74d482f79615>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-196-40-205.us-west-1.compute.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2014-41
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for September 2014
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf