A Postcard for Max
Created on: June 13th, 2007
A postcard for max. Also see http://postcardcensored.ytmnd.com/
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (3.92) | 274 | 1 | 111 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 7,505 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 53 | https://www.bing.com |
| 10 | http://216.18.188.175:80 |
| 5 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 1 | http://yandex.ru/yandsearch?text=BACK+TO+YTMND |
| 1 | http://ytmnsfw.com/users/pistache268/ |
Agreed. It is patting users on the back who delete sites that don't do well. It's like a baseball player being able to rewind at-bats when they struck out and redo them over and over until they get a hit. Then the baseball overlord says, HEY, WHAT A GREAT PLAYER! LET'S PUT HIM ON THE PINK TEAM, LOL!
Any and all alt accounts that are being used for the purpose of voting in any way shape or form end up on the deletion queue; Bob-The-Builder is no exception. With the accounts go the votes, and then come the penalties. The cycle restarts. It has always happened, it will always happened and there is no use in complaining. Additionally I agree with detalub0's response; getting people to delete their bad sites is really Their choice in the first place; whether it makes them pink or not.
Well the more features max adds, the more we know that the mod system will never come out. I dont go much on that theory but max is working hard on the mod system and he doesn't want us to know that nothing will happen so every often he adds these features to keep us busy. Now all we need is for max to link all the gay sites on ytmnd to a "you got rick rolld" fun times mix that keaton will make.
You have absolutely no idea how the algorithm works so making statements such as the one you've made just makes you look foolish. While plenty of people are upset they "didn't make the cut", making the algorithm better is going to be an ongoing process for the next month. Will a user's score benefit from deleting their low rated sites? Most likely. Do I feel that's a bad thing? Not really. The scores are updated manually so there is no use in trying to figure out what the exact mechanics are.
Expect a lot of users who are currently "featured" to not be so in the near future, as well as many who are not to be "featured" in the near future. This isn't an exact science, but rather a reward system for people who continually make content which is liked by other users. The algorithm is based on how much the users on average like another given user. I'm not really putting these people on a pedestal, the users are.
In addition to using the algorithm to continually improve the list, manual edits are being made for user who are abusing the feature or who don't really deserve it. People I feel were left off the list but should have been on it are being studied and used as test cases to improve the algorithm. If you feel you can use any of the numerous statistics on this site to come up with a better algorithm, I'm all ears. Criticizing me for how it works the day after I posted it is a waste of time. Be constructive.
Hi Max! Glad to see you got my postcard. I'm not quite sure how, since I didn't even put a stamp on it. . . at any rate, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. My criticisms are, for the most part, in jest. You created this site that we all have a lot of fun on and for that I thank you. As for constructive criticism, I have two suggestions:
1. Try to prevent alt accounts, possibly by crosschecking ratings - if User G has rated all of user Bs sites 5 and has created no sites him/herself, User B is most likely a fake account. 2. Deleted YTMNDs' ratings should be factored in when generating the preferred users list. I know that this is probably impossible for already deleted sites, but it could go into effect to prevent people from deleting their lower rated sites in an attempt to become "pink." I know, easier said than done. Also, c*cks.
One question, if someone deletes their bad sites, how is this in any way, shape, or form, a negative thing? Bad sites chew up storage space and if they're huge they chew up bandwidth. If people went out and deleted their crapfest sites YTMND would have a much easier time. It'd still be unbelievably messy, but nowhere near as bad as it is now. Hell, if anything, PLEASE delete your sites below 2.5 YTMND community!
I think it's sad that Max considers people who disagree with this new caste system to be "upset they didn't make the cut." Not everyone in here cares about being in some little club on the internet. People care about having equality. The featured user system creates an unequal playing field. Why would any want to create a site when you have to compete with a list of "featured users?" It's like pitching to Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire or Sammy Sosa on steroids. You can't win until the system changes.
re: "1. Try to prevent alt accounts, possibly by crosschecking ratings - if User G has rated all of user Bs sites 5 and has created no sites him/herself, User B is most likely a fake account." - Thanks for outlining one of the most important jobs of the Super Moderators at this point in time. re: "2. Deleted YTMNDs' ratings should be factored in when generating the preferred users list." - Why? People make bad sites, get criticized, delete them and learn from their mistakes; they shouldn't be discriminated.
Depends on what you mean by cleaned up. All the mediocre - crappy YTMND's end up on the bottom of search lists, and people normally ignore them. Since such YTMND's go w/o views, they are ignored (and not viewed), so they do not use bandwidth. And a number of crappy YTMND's are by people who aren't, and will likely never be a featured user.
max makes a good point in noting that WE the users are deciding who's pink and who's not. So if there's a stupid fad being exploited, or a site that annoys you, JUST DOWNVOTE IT. The 1 star and 2 star votes are there for a reason. Some of the people that are complaining about bad content filling up the U&C and top viewed are the same people who upvote more than they downvote.
As PACARD would say, "COME MY MINIONS RISE FOR YOUR MASTER (BTAPE). LET YOUR EVIL (VOTE 5'S) SHINE) aka btape you nooblet stop hacking my account to find my alts and then discovering them and then making me upvote you or else you'll expose me to max and everyone at ytmnd as a fraud you a meanie hypocrit aren't I hip?
I'd like to point out that this new feature just keeps a user like me from actually getting my stuff out there on this site. I've been making YTMNDs for a while, even though it's not frequently. But I simply do not get enough votes (not that I'm asking for them here for trying to beg for attention), and now we have a whole new section putting users and their three, two and one-star pages into a spotlight that they probably don't deserve.
I agree entirely, I 'm not upset I didn't "make the cut", in fact I never joined this site with the hopes of becoming a top user. I just wanted to be able to comment and favorite sites, maybe occationally create my own. This new system makes it impossible for "casual" members to get their sites out there when they actually make them (some of the classic YTMNDs were made by such users). This system allows these "featured users" to virually bypass the downvote minefield that is "recently created."
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link