Recruiting from The Tube

[BasharOfTheAges]

I agree with everything JadaziaDax has been saying. People that have "problems with people being mean" are - especially here - (by in large) a huge portion of youtube posters. They are children. They can't handle criticism in any form unless it's so watered down and apologetic as to sound like a compliment.

[Vivaldi]

Booshack people don't have the patience to register for this site.

I'm sorry, but even generalizing places like the sack grind on my nerves

@Jaddzia: Sorry. I had glazed over the last posts on the last page, my point still stands though

I agree with everything JadaziaDax has been saying. People that have "problems with people being mean" are - especially here - (by in large) a huge portion of boochsack posters. They are children. They can't handle criticism in any form unless it's so watered down and apologetic as to sound like a compliment.

Okay, picture this. Some newb YT user comes and posts one of his vids in the forum. It's a typical YT quality vid and we give our crit. He then starts to whine about how unreasonable we are, and we essentially tell him to shut up and get out or deal with it. At this point he either

a. throws a hissy fit and goes back to the tube.
b. throws a hissy fit and stops posting in the forum.
c. may or may not throw hissy fit, learns from his mistakes, comes back and becomes a valuable member of the community.

So I don't see what the problem here is, other then you can't be asked to set your royal eyes on the title of their filthy tainted forum topic. If they don't like how we do thing here, they'll go back. Those who learn, stay. It's win-win.

[Kionon]

I largely feel things are being taken out out of context here.

I never once said drive away new members. I never once said be actively mean to new members. Nor have I even recommended FTP or other site aspects be used as entry tests. Sure, make them easier. As we all know, I refuse to even use local, I sure as hell am not going to use an even EASIER system. Not because, I don't think the Golden Donut wasn't a good idea, but rather because there is no ability to switch off stars or QCs, both of which I absolutely despise. So to avoid them, I will never upload to local. This has nothing to do with who is using local. Make it the equivalent of a playskool process and I still won't use it.

I do object to streaming video. Absolutely I do. That is not what we are. We are a database at the website level. And in any case, you would need, I presume, to upload to local to have your video even be streamable. So, many of us who refuse to use local, would then have to deal with people asking why we refuse to stream. See, the issue with the come on in flyer, which is what I think streaming would ultimately become, is that despite Castor's joking tone, the truth is as Dax also pointed out, and Bashar as well, these are children. Children who have no patience for anything and no ability to handle criticism. And more likely to ignore guides, rules, and traditions. Sorry, Zarx, I will disagree with you until we have statements from the courts, the copyright holders, or both telling us AMVs are a protected class of fair use initiatives.

And the purpose of this site can no longer be to catalog every amv. It is impossible, and ultimately silly. It made since when Phade, Quu, others, and I were discussing it on the FFIRC when we barely knew what was out there. Now though, why on earth would we even want to catalog every amv in existence? The landscape is totally different. We must alter our philosophy and goals to reflect this.

[Zarxrax]

Kionon: Utuber's are children? Generalization much?
And I don't even understand where you are going with the rest of your argument. You say the org is a database, you object to streaming and even hosting videos. Yet, you go on to say that the idea of actually using the org as a database, a catalog, is silly. What exactly *is* your idea for the future of this site?

[Kionon]

Kionon: Utuber's are children? Generalization much?

Yes, a very, very broad overgeneralization, but one that has been demonstrated over and over. And I am being metaphorical to a large degree. Take a 23 year old who acts like a 12 year old, and he or she might as well be a 12 year old. I cannot, and do not, speak for the majority of people who use YouTube. I post stuff there only to prevent people from posting my work first. I only go there when people post youtube links on #amv. I do not search the site. Sometimes political ads or speeches or the like I will look for, but that is very different from the standard of amvs hosted on the site.

The last time I actively tried to bring someone over here, she used an MP4 converter with a logo overlaid because Oh No the Org Only Likes MP4s, even after I told her that other formats were acceptable. The video was good, but she seemed entirely incapable of walking through the process of encoding, and then went as far as to follow Dax's previously mentioned story, where suddenly, despite being the one who told her I liked her video well enough to think it should be hosted on the org, I was the bad guy because I was telling her she shouldn't use a shareware program to encode her video. I think she was likely over the age of 18. She was still acting like a child.

And I don't even understand where you are going with the rest of your argument. You say the org is a database, you object to streaming and even hosting videos. Yet, you go on to say that the idea of actually using the org as a database, a catalog, is silly. What exactly *is* your idea for the future of this site?

I do not, not, not object to hosting videos. I just clarified that. I said I object to QCs and star ratings, and thus will never use local as long as they are there. I am a donator, I have helped to pay, in some small way, for hosting. I would use it and promote it if there was an option to turn off QCs and star ratings.

And again, you mischaracterize what I said. We are database, and I like that, databasing videos is not the issue here. I said I think databasing EVERY amv as some sort of God-given quest and sole purpose of the site is not only silly, it is now impossible. Our goal should be to database and catalog a subset of videos. And frankly, I am not sure what defines that subset. So far, I would say the current definition is if you can get on the org and upload them, then they get cataloged. I guess I am fine with that.

What do I see as the future of this site? That's difficult. Do you mean in practice or in theory? In practice, I think the goal of this site should merely be survival. We are clearly in disagreement as to the threat of the site being shut down. Fine, you don't need to agree with me, and I don't need to agree with you, but it will mean that our view of the purpose of this site will be very different. I think we should establish harder guidelines, formatting restrictions, etc. I am all, all, all for helping new individuals conform to these standards. You bet I aim, or I would not have written the So You Wanna sticky. I would do my best, as I do, often to the direct detriment of my sanity, to walk new members through the entire process of proper processing and encoding. There is no need to be threatened by new members as long as they conform to our standards, both ethical and technical. When you become part of a society, you obey that society's rule or are punished, either through punitive measures or by being removed. Why should the org community be any different? We are stronger with more members, but only if those members recognize a common identity. If we have any hope of winning any future battles, large numbers of people with the same ethical code will be more likely to prevail. Therefore, we should be focused on equipping new members with our viewpoints, our history, and our sense of ethics and why we feel what we do is right.

In theory? Assuming we do prevail, then we should continue to do what we have always done. Explore AMVs as art. Compare techniques and genres, express ourselves, criticise and promote. Essentially, be a place of discussion, learning, and beauty. And, of course, of debate and disagreement. Just more. A lot more.

[BasharOfTheAges]

There is no need to be threatened by new members as long as they conform to our standards, both ethical and technical. When you become part of a society, you obey that society's rule or are punished, either through punitive measures or by being removed. Why should the org community be any different? We are stronger with more members, but only if those members recognize a common identity. If we have any hope of winning any future battles, large numbers of people with the same ethical code will be more likely to prevail. Therefore, we should be focused on equipping new members with our viewpoints, our history, and our sense of ethics and why we feel what we do is right.

This is the crux of it right here. Any other hobbiest forum i've been to or seen friends of mine go to hold people to a certain level of decorum - standards of behavior (often referred to as etiquette) that dictate what you do and don't do when you're new to the area - at least in the more technical question and feedback areas. While we have a few people around that genuinely are asses for no good reason, even the nicest ones snap after constantly being bombarded with the same damn questions, the same "bannible offense" requests for downloads, the same problems repeated over and over again and again. "Lurk more" isn't just some meme from 4chan, it's what people are supposed to be doing when they join an online community. (and i'm not trying to down the "I do it for me" crowd - keep it to yourself, keep it pure, keep it offline if that's the case)

The fact that we have problems with "they're mean" bawwwing, the fact that we have misunderstandings about encodings, the fact that we have people asking for places to download clips, the fact that nobody can take criticism without whining - they all stem from the tide of "me too" hangers-on that tons of successful contests have bread. They don't care about a community they don't feel they're part of; they just want to ride the train into the ground and get off and say it was a fun ride. We can't force people to care, but having standards and barriers tends to only get the more serious crowd willing to follow those standards to stick around - and that's beneficial to the community as a whole.

I really don't know how to feel about it all. It's kinda sad really. I imagine a lot of the older members feel a little like how a painter feels when some guy shits on a canvas and calls it art - when his hard work stars becoming seen by the collective consciousness of society as the same as feces on canvas.

[Zarxrax]

There is a difference between having strict rules and standards, and having artificial barriers to entry which make people jump through hoops so that we can decide that they are "dedicated." I personally think the forum rules are a bit too lax at times. More could be done to help educate users before they make their first post, or before they post their first videos. I wont get into the various ideas for such things, as they have all been discussed ad museum in the past.
I just think much of the sentiment that I am seeing in this thread, from lots of different people, is highly elitist and makes the org look bad by association.

[Zarxrax]

ad museum

LOL, yay for not reading spellcheck suggestions

[Kionon]

There is a difference between having strict rules and standards, and having artificial barriers to entry which make people jump through hoops so that we can decide that they are "dedicated."

I do not advocate jumping through hoops as barriers to entry. I clearly said that. I am not against making registration or hosting easier.

In this I think we agree.

[Zarxrax]

In this I think we agree.

Cool

I want clarify, I'm not necessarily speaking to you in particular, but more the thread in general, though I singled your posts out in my first reply, because I was too lazy to do a lot of different quotes.