Is YouTube a self-link? August 19, 2006 7:35 AM Subscribe
Is youtube a self-link? [mi]
Yes it's a self link.
posted by thirteenkiller at 7:36 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by thirteenkiller at 7:36 AM on August 19, 2006
What's the best way to deliver such content? It's not really a 'project', and having a friend post it for you just seems duplicitous (and not really much different from posting it yourself, either ideologically or practically). Or, like I said, is it just not MeFi material?
posted by Eideteker at 7:40 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by Eideteker at 7:40 AM on August 19, 2006
I'm thinking maybe a public domain speech by a famous politician
I'd rather see a video of your kitten falling asleep. Although, if you want an adorable video of ME falling asleep, you could come over & film me watching political speeches on YouTube.
posted by jonson at 7:46 AM on August 19, 2006 [3 favorites]
I'd rather see a video of your kitten falling asleep. Although, if you want an adorable video of ME falling asleep, you could come over & film me watching political speeches on YouTube.
posted by jonson at 7:46 AM on August 19, 2006 [3 favorites]
From the FAQ: It's against the rules to link to your own site or a site that you host or contribute to substantially.
The 'contribute to substantially' bit seems to cover all your examples.
posted by jack_mo at 7:55 AM on August 19, 2006
The 'contribute to substantially' bit seems to cover all your examples.
posted by jack_mo at 7:55 AM on August 19, 2006
The idea, and I think languagehat has articulated this better on more than a few occasions, is that if you are close to the material then you are not in a position to judge whether or not it is worthy of posting to the front page of MeFi. It's not so much a consideration of where the material is hosted.
So, either post it Projects (if it complies with the guidelines) or email another member and, if they think it does indeed have merit, they can make a front page post.
Or just don't.
posted by peacay at 7:57 AM on August 19, 2006
So, either post it Projects (if it complies with the guidelines) or email another member and, if they think it does indeed have merit, they can make a front page post.
Or just don't.
posted by peacay at 7:57 AM on August 19, 2006
yes, it's a self-link for the reasons everyone outlined above. Do something interesting with it and put it on Projects.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:05 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:05 AM on August 19, 2006
Turn it into some sort of crazy mash-up, then get Cory Doctorow to notice it. Once it's on Boing boing, it'll be on the front page of Metafilter in no time flat.
posted by crunchland at 8:10 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by crunchland at 8:10 AM on August 19, 2006
Vote yes it's a self link. Look at it this way: if you had unlimited hosting of your own and you posted the vid to your own site it would be a self link. Just because youtube isn't charging you for hosting doesn't change the fact that you are the one responsible for the content.
Also not really best of the web if the only reason it is on the web is so you can make a post to MetaFilter.
posted by Mitheral at 8:14 AM on August 19, 2006
Also not really best of the web if the only reason it is on the web is so you can make a post to MetaFilter.
posted by Mitheral at 8:14 AM on August 19, 2006
your video has too much hi-hat. mix it up or mix it down.
posted by quonsar at 8:19 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by quonsar at 8:19 AM on August 19, 2006
Also not really best of the web if the only reason it is on the web is so you can make a post to MetaFilter.
This seems to me the most succint statement of the core issue. I think that if someone had a well rounded post built from independent web sources, they might add a link to a video they put up as part of their comments inside the thread to add further depth and I doubt anyone would make a fuss.
posted by nanojath at 8:23 AM on August 19, 2006
This seems to me the most succint statement of the core issue. I think that if someone had a well rounded post built from independent web sources, they might add a link to a video they put up as part of their comments inside the thread to add further depth and I doubt anyone would make a fuss.
posted by nanojath at 8:23 AM on August 19, 2006
Ok, I thought the self-link thing was about spammers, but I can understand the impartiality thing (which is how having someone else post it would be ok; if you were a spammer, it would not be).
posted by Eideteker at 8:24 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by Eideteker at 8:24 AM on August 19, 2006
Just put it on YouTube. It will get posted to the front page eventually.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:10 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:10 AM on August 19, 2006
I thought the self-link thing was about spammers
I once thought that, too. You could make it a project, even if it's doesn't quite fit the mold, since projects are by definition self-links.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:24 AM on August 19, 2006
I once thought that, too. You could make it a project, even if it's doesn't quite fit the mold, since projects are by definition self-links.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:24 AM on August 19, 2006
Wait! So if I link to my *own* stuff it's a self link now?!!?!?
posted by nthdegx at 10:02 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by nthdegx at 10:02 AM on August 19, 2006
Vote no on the self-link.
posted by Captaintripps at 10:10 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by Captaintripps at 10:10 AM on August 19, 2006
Apparently, one of the prerequisites of a thread being deemed "post-worthy" is that you have no personal connection to it. Because, obviously, if you were actually interested in something so strongly that you participated in it's creation, you're clearly too blind as to reason whether it's interesting for others. On the other hand, if you're just a very-lazy person by nature, and take no active role in anything that interests you, well, feel free to post those links.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:38 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:38 AM on August 19, 2006
I have no idea how much of what C_D just said was meant to be sarcastic.
posted by languagehat at 10:51 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by languagehat at 10:51 AM on August 19, 2006
I think that as long as you're not shooting video of a monkey ingesting its own semen, you should be okay.
posted by 2or3whiskeysodas at 11:22 AM on August 19, 2006
posted by 2or3whiskeysodas at 11:22 AM on August 19, 2006
Also not really best of the web if the only reason it is on the web is so you can make a post to MetaFilter.
The only reason I'm on the web is so I can post to MeFi. So what you're saying is that I'm NOT the best of the web? Thanks guys, that hurst, that really hurts...
Oh, look! A shiny penny!
posted by blue_beetle at 11:43 AM on August 19, 2006
The only reason I'm on the web is so I can post to MeFi. So what you're saying is that I'm NOT the best of the web? Thanks guys, that hurst, that really hurts...
Oh, look! A shiny penny!
posted by blue_beetle at 11:43 AM on August 19, 2006
You should have just posted it without asking, I'm betting no one would have said anything.
posted by bob sarabia at 12:21 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by bob sarabia at 12:21 PM on August 19, 2006
As long as no one was familiar with his YouTube account name, bob sarabia.
The situation described is not self-linking. Eideteker did not have any involvement in making the video nor knows anyone connected to it, gains no monetary, traffic or other tangible reward from it, and was conscientious enough to ask.
Of course had Eideteker simply created a throw-away YouTube account, posted it and then linked to it, no one would be the wiser.
Since he done a'ready shot hisself in the foot on that account, I'd be happy to be utterly funky and link to it for him.
As long as it's not the semen-consuming simian, of course.
posted by Captaintripps at 1:23 PM on August 19, 2006
The situation described is not self-linking. Eideteker did not have any involvement in making the video nor knows anyone connected to it, gains no monetary, traffic or other tangible reward from it, and was conscientious enough to ask.
Of course had Eideteker simply created a throw-away YouTube account, posted it and then linked to it, no one would be the wiser.
Since he done a'ready shot hisself in the foot on that account, I'd be happy to be utterly funky and link to it for him.
As long as it's not the semen-consuming simian, of course.
posted by Captaintripps at 1:23 PM on August 19, 2006
"Ok, I thought the self-link thing was about spammers, but I can understand the impartiality thing (which is how having someone else post it would be ok; if you were a spammer, it would not be)."
The definition/determination of "spammer" is very ambiguous. The definition/determination of "self-linker" is unambiguous.
Given that self-linkers can be assumed, as a class, to have other motivations besides altruism in posting links, and given that motives other than altruism tend to degrade the poster's ability to determine "best of the web", then prohibiting self-linkers is something that can actually be accomplished that will prevent a lowering of quality of posts. Spammers are caught reliably by this trap, but they're not the only ones it's aimed at.
It also catches as false-positives those rare self-posts which are truly altruistic and qualify as "best of the web". But, as is always pointed out in these MeTa threads, if it really does, in fact, quality as BotW, then another mefite would likely be only too happy to post the link so this isn't really a barrier for those small number of posts.
Finally, there's the more generalized way in which what's going on with self-linking interacts with the "character" of the front page. I think the quality of the posts are higher, and in general the trustworhiness and even the readability of posts are higher the less they involve the author of the post as a subject of the post, explicitly or implicitly.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:50 PM on August 19, 2006
The definition/determination of "spammer" is very ambiguous. The definition/determination of "self-linker" is unambiguous.
Given that self-linkers can be assumed, as a class, to have other motivations besides altruism in posting links, and given that motives other than altruism tend to degrade the poster's ability to determine "best of the web", then prohibiting self-linkers is something that can actually be accomplished that will prevent a lowering of quality of posts. Spammers are caught reliably by this trap, but they're not the only ones it's aimed at.
It also catches as false-positives those rare self-posts which are truly altruistic and qualify as "best of the web". But, as is always pointed out in these MeTa threads, if it really does, in fact, quality as BotW, then another mefite would likely be only too happy to post the link so this isn't really a barrier for those small number of posts.
Finally, there's the more generalized way in which what's going on with self-linking interacts with the "character" of the front page. I think the quality of the posts are higher, and in general the trustworhiness and even the readability of posts are higher the less they involve the author of the post as a subject of the post, explicitly or implicitly.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:50 PM on August 19, 2006
Huh. And here I was thinking that the cum-monkey video was just an average political speech.
posted by loquacious at 1:54 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by loquacious at 1:54 PM on August 19, 2006
Captaintripps writes "As long as it's not the semen-consuming simian, of course."
2or3whiskeysodas writes "you're not shooting video of a monkey ingesting its own semen"
loquacious writes "And here I was thinking that the cum-monkey video was just an average political speech."
Is this monkey a hypothetical or did it actually appear on the front page?
posted by Mitheral at 2:37 PM on August 19, 2006
2or3whiskeysodas writes "you're not shooting video of a monkey ingesting its own semen"
loquacious writes "And here I was thinking that the cum-monkey video was just an average political speech."
Is this monkey a hypothetical or did it actually appear on the front page?
posted by Mitheral at 2:37 PM on August 19, 2006
But, as is always pointed out in these MeTa threads, if it really does, in fact, quality as BotW, then another mefite would likely be only too happy to post the link...
The flaw in this logic being that, when you impose upon another member by asking him to post your link, there's a good chance that person's decision will have less to do with the quality of your link than simply agreeing to do a favor for someone who has asked.
It's basically self-link by proxy — which means this advice ("As another member to post it") is like telling people to couch their ChatFilter questions with the disclaimer, "I need to know this because I'm writing a book." In both cases, we're advising people to follow the letter and the law and ignore its spirit, when the legitimate answer should really be, "Sorry, but you just can't do that."
posted by cribcage at 2:53 PM on August 19, 2006
The flaw in this logic being that, when you impose upon another member by asking him to post your link, there's a good chance that person's decision will have less to do with the quality of your link than simply agreeing to do a favor for someone who has asked.
It's basically self-link by proxy — which means this advice ("As another member to post it") is like telling people to couch their ChatFilter questions with the disclaimer, "I need to know this because I'm writing a book." In both cases, we're advising people to follow the letter and the law and ignore its spirit, when the legitimate answer should really be, "Sorry, but you just can't do that."
posted by cribcage at 2:53 PM on August 19, 2006
Nope, I didn't realise it had been posted in the last 4 hours. I'd thought (foolishly as it turns out) it was a more historical youtube link.
posted by Mitheral at 2:54 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by Mitheral at 2:54 PM on August 19, 2006
Why would it be a self-link? I can see why it'd be a self-link if you make the video, but if you just happen across it and stick it on YouTube, I fail to see why it would be.
posted by reklaw at 3:23 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by reklaw at 3:23 PM on August 19, 2006
Post a Link
Does it say:
"Put something cool on the web and want to share it with everyone else?"
or
"Found something cool on the web and want to share it with everyone else?"
posted by shoesfullofdust at 3:54 PM on August 19, 2006
Does it say:
"Put something cool on the web and want to share it with everyone else?"
or
"Found something cool on the web and want to share it with everyone else?"
posted by shoesfullofdust at 3:54 PM on August 19, 2006
You can ask permision first, I know a couple of people have asked permission to post hosted things.
posted by delmoi at 3:58 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by delmoi at 3:58 PM on August 19, 2006
I asked about this and it was strongly discouraged. I had an idea for a FPP but I couldn't find a copy online of the one painting that would have made the post complete and worthwhile - the artist's "masterpiece" basically. I had it saved on a CD-R from about 1998 (this guy is more or less forgotten) but uploading this jpg to imageshack is deemed a self link (I didn't paint the painting, scan the image, or financially bankroll the artists during his lifetime.) Annoying, but rules are rules.
posted by fire&wings at 4:10 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by fire&wings at 4:10 PM on August 19, 2006
You could also post it to YouTube, then ask a fellow member to post a link on the front page, if they think it's worthy. I know I'd probably enjoy watching a cool public domain speech from a cool historical figure, especially if it's something that's not already available in full on the Web. If it's good, you should be able to find a member who'll agree with you.
posted by mediareport at 5:12 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by mediareport at 5:12 PM on August 19, 2006
[probably best if the member you ask isn't a close pal, though, to avoid the "you're too close to the work" problem.]
posted by mediareport at 5:13 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by mediareport at 5:13 PM on August 19, 2006
What Captaintripps said. He didn't make the video. He isn't 'close' to the material in any way other than all other FPPs: he finds it worthy to post.
posted by spaltavian at 9:34 PM on August 19, 2006
posted by spaltavian at 9:34 PM on August 19, 2006
Yes, but that's a slippery-slope. The same thing could apply to someone making a web page about a particular subject using only found materials and nothing original. That person would also just be uploading material to an appropiate location and then linking to it. And, as it happens, I recall at least one MeTa where someone proposed almost this exact thing and were told of course it's not appropriate, it's a self-link.
If it's worth posting, then it's likely hosted as content by someone else somewhere else and then linkable, or, alternatively, you can host it yourself and then just hope it gets posted to MeFi like anyone else who hosts something that they think might be MeFi worthy.
And doesn't Projects generally provide an alternative to emailing another mefite and asking them to post something? Surely other users frequently end up posting stuff they've discovered via Projects.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:25 PM on August 20, 2006
If it's worth posting, then it's likely hosted as content by someone else somewhere else and then linkable, or, alternatively, you can host it yourself and then just hope it gets posted to MeFi like anyone else who hosts something that they think might be MeFi worthy.
And doesn't Projects generally provide an alternative to emailing another mefite and asking them to post something? Surely other users frequently end up posting stuff they've discovered via Projects.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:25 PM on August 20, 2006
Yes, but that's a slippery-slope. The same thing could apply to someone making a web page about a particular subject using only found materials and nothing original.
But in this case, he didn't make the site he would post the video too, either. It's not like he's just getting cool content to get traffic to his site.
If it's worth posting, then it's likely hosted as content by someone else somewhere else and then linkable
Sure, but... somebody has got to be first, right? It just seems odd to restrict the poster because they recognized/found something first/early when they didn't create it or the means to see it.
posted by spaltavian at 6:52 PM on August 21, 2006
But in this case, he didn't make the site he would post the video too, either. It's not like he's just getting cool content to get traffic to his site.
If it's worth posting, then it's likely hosted as content by someone else somewhere else and then linkable
Sure, but... somebody has got to be first, right? It just seems odd to restrict the poster because they recognized/found something first/early when they didn't create it or the means to see it.
posted by spaltavian at 6:52 PM on August 21, 2006
Err, ignore that extra "o".
posted by spaltavian at 6:53 PM on August 21, 2006
posted by spaltavian at 6:53 PM on August 21, 2006
Odd maybe but better than the alternative of allowing people to post links to the front page of content that they have put on the web. People can't judge the merits of stuff they are involved with.
posted by Mitheral at 8:04 AM on August 22, 2006
posted by Mitheral at 8:04 AM on August 22, 2006
He isn't 'involved' with it. He didn't make it or the site its posted to.
posted by spaltavian at 12:05 PM on August 22, 2006
posted by spaltavian at 12:05 PM on August 22, 2006
It wouldn't be on that site if he hadn't posted it there. He is involved with it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:46 PM on August 22, 2006
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:46 PM on August 22, 2006
« Older How do I search for video links? | Is it proper etiquette to request topics for FFPs?... Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
The underlying question is: Is it a self-link if you aren't receiving any promotional consideration? What about the text of the same speech in a .txt file on your own site? On a free google page you set up (so as not to be driving any traffic to one's own domain; you know people sometimes like to pop up to the index and poke around)? Or is putting something on the web yourself violate the concept of "best of the web"?
posted by Eideteker at 7:36 AM on August 19, 2006