Time for video.metafilter.com? January 25, 2007 5:14 PM   Subscribe

Time for video.metafilter.com?
posted by lupus_yonderboy to Feature Requests at 5:14 PM (60 comments total)

The top two posts at this instant are very lame You-Tube videos.

I don't completely mind one-you-tube posts -- but there are only certain times and places I can watch them.

Alternately, a little hint in the posting page that one-link you-tube posts aren't good unless they are completely amazing -- and a new flag "lone video" or some such?
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 5:16 PM on January 25, 2007


"All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time...for video.metafilter.com ."

What do you propose, exactly?
posted by cortex at 5:16 PM on January 25, 2007


"What do you propose, exactly?"

Damn, that was fast.

See above -- either a new subdomain, http://video.metafilter.com like music, OR at least warning people with the flashy light like the Iraq warning (which seemed to work tolerably well...)
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 5:18 PM on January 25, 2007


(oh, and I really do like that Blade Runner quote.)
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 5:19 PM on January 25, 2007


Whatever happened to YouTubesDay?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 5:21 PM on January 25, 2007


If it is not good enough for the front page, I don't want the garbage in another sub-domain.
posted by geoff. at 5:23 PM on January 25, 2007 [3 favorites]


The two suggestions are kind of contradictory, though—either start a new subdomain to emphasize the video-linkery we do, or a prohibition against all the video-linkery we do. But then, folks have made the same sort of twin-edged argument about polifilter before.

(I like it too. Best swansong ever. Go Rutger!)
posted by cortex at 5:24 PM on January 25, 2007


Let's do it here. I'll start.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 5:29 PM on January 25, 2007


complaining about youtube is soooooo 2006.
posted by empath at 5:30 PM on January 25, 2007


I repeatedly voiced my distaste for YouTube posts, but after gaining no support for my position I have now given in to the Dark Side.

Embrace it. Merge with it. Be the YouTube.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:33 PM on January 25, 2007


geoff. said: "If it is not good enough for the front page, I don't want the garbage in another sub-domain."

Actually, I think that argument is irrefutable. (The music subdomain isn't a counterexample, because it's there to encourage a new area, not to throw stuff we don't like away.)

OK, then drop that. How about:


1. a warning when you post -- "avoid single link video posts if possible"?

2. a line in the guidelines -- "avoid single link video posts: if it's really that compelling, at least try to do a little background research."

3. a new flag for posts "single link video"?
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 5:35 PM on January 25, 2007


I just watched w-g-p's linked video. I think I know how those boys would score on the Are you Smart or Stoopid? test currently on MeFi front-page.
posted by ericb at 5:36 PM on January 25, 2007


1. a warning when you post -- "avoid single link video posts if possible"

If someone finds it impossible to avoid posting something, they have a problem that a warning won't solve.
posted by JekPorkins at 5:37 PM on January 25, 2007


I kinda like the idea. But on the other hand, Music and Projects are for music and projects that YOU created, and Jobs is for posting jobs that YOU are hiring for. Having a special video section for user-approved but not user-produced videos would end up, well, a bit like this.

Which, I guess, would still be kinda fun. Especially if we get to post that "Good evening" video.
posted by Milkman Dan at 6:35 PM on January 25, 2007


"What do you propose, exactly?"

Twenty bucks, the same as in town.
posted by Eideteker at 6:42 PM on January 25, 2007


That Bollywood midget breakdancing is just good YouTube.
posted by Astro Zombie at 6:47 PM on January 25, 2007


It was time for

stuffidontlikeghetto.metafilter.com

7 years ago. Matt is still working on the algorithm.
posted by scarabic at 6:51 PM on January 25, 2007


geoff. said: "If it is not good enough for the front page, I don't want the garbage in another sub-domain."

I think that argument is specious. Some folks like the vids, others don't. It isn't about whether a particular one is "good enough" for the front page, it's about segregating the content to a designated place. There is precedent for that, and you're soaking in it.
posted by owhydididoit at 6:58 PM on January 25, 2007


August 5th, 2005. A day that will live in infamy.
posted by tkolar at 7:15 PM on January 25, 2007


I don't think there really is precedent for segregating content. There are different areas of the site for different things, but there is only one area of the site where links found elsewhere on the internet are posted. If you're going to make segregated front page, why stop with videos?

I don't think it's a good idea.
posted by OmieWise at 7:39 PM on January 25, 2007


I'm down for the cause. However, the implementation raises some questions: would video be embedded in the page (which would require posters to embed flash objects) or just contain links to the video? If the subdomain didn't allow you to embed a video there isn't much of a point in having it. MeFi proper is doing a fine job with the whole links thing right now.
posted by mullingitover at 7:44 PM on January 25, 2007


What I proposed previously. A sidebar for amusing single link posts. Especially youtube.

I like youtube posts sometimes, but there are way too many.
posted by theora55 at 7:51 PM on January 25, 2007


MetaFilter: doing a fine job with the whole links thing.
posted by Duncan at 7:55 PM on January 25, 2007


The thing about some youtube posts that I find annoying (but really, it annoys me with any post: not a lot, but still..) is when there's no blurb telling me wtf it's about. I'm not saying that people should be banned or castigated or whatever but if they are trying to share something they think is cool then they should know that they are limiting the audience because there are those of us who just won't bother.

We don't need a video subsite imho.
posted by peacay at 9:00 PM on January 25, 2007


i sincerely doubt that anything short of an unbreakable ban on youtube posts will stop people from attempting to post them but this horse is still on the back of the truck headed for the glue factory if you want to beat it some more.

the reality is that a large number of internet users believe that youtube is the best of the web and until we can find a way to cut off their internet access or stop them from becoming members, this will continue to frustrate those who don't agree.

i mean, it's not like "best of the web" is anything but a subjective mantra with which to contribute.
posted by dflemingdotorg at 9:22 PM on January 25, 2007


Who wants to see a video of me, what do you want to watch me do, and how much will you pay me?
posted by davy at 9:32 PM on January 25, 2007


i'm still waiting for cassette-tape.metafilter.com. good luck.
posted by localhuman at 9:44 PM on January 25, 2007


So let me get this straight, the idea on the table is to have a designated site where people could put interesting videos and comment on them and favorite them and such? Genius!
posted by padraigin at 9:52 PM on January 25, 2007


Perhaps you are right, OmieWise.
posted by owhydididoit at 9:57 PM on January 25, 2007


Yeah, it's the same reason why PoliFilter is a bad idea; FPPs that wouldn't have a snowball's chance of being posted to the Blue Proper would make the cut on a splinter site because the narrow focus would require more content to justify its existence.


I know, I know - there are links on the front page right now (*GASP*) that don't belong there. Flag and deal.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:06 PM on January 25, 2007


There have been a few wonderful YouTube links of late - the Boeing 777 wing test led to a fascinating discussion and one of the best comments I've ever seen. But something about these video links bothers me.

YouTube itself certainly falls under the rubric of best of the web, but I'm not sure the same can be said of individual videos.

Discussion and commentary of YouTube videos ought to take place on YouTube itself. Because this type of community isn't well supported there, MeFi becomes a weak alternative. It's not bad, exactly, just not the best place for it. Video links are simple and often devoid of content - the primary ingredients for a poor MeFi post.

The solution is either an outright ban of video links (which seems too draconian), a special video flag that allows for the filtering of posts, or the separation of video content onto a different *.metafilter domain. I suppose one could argue for the status quo, but YouTube links have diluted the overall quality of the site somewhat. It's that quality that's kept me kicking around this place for nearly 7 years.

In any case, I've been mulling a MeTa post about the issue for a few days, and just clicked over to write one up. I was pleased to see that lupus_yonderboy was of the same mindset.
posted by aladfar at 10:10 PM on January 25, 2007


Seconded.
posted by davy at 10:30 PM on January 25, 2007


waitaminute... when am I gonna get my 8track.metafilter.com?
posted by pjern at 11:20 PM on January 25, 2007


no
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 11:28 PM on January 25, 2007


As a recent Youtube-video-single-link-er, I can say that my justification is twofold. I found that the video was extremely enjoyable, and wanted to discuss it with people. I would love to do this at Youtube.com itself, only their comment and discussion system is full of people with whom such discourse is impossible. I think part of the reason you see so much Youtube here is people wanting to share and discuss videos with this specific community, and not one full of flamewars, bigotry, trolling, and complete lack of civil discourse. I'd much rather deal with the actually thoughtful people here.
posted by potch at 12:13 AM on January 26, 2007


only their comment and discussion system is full of people with whom such discourse is impossible

It's so bad that after reading the comments over there for a while you have to head over to Ask Yahoo!, Fark and eBay to remind yourself that there is intelligent life out there.
posted by soundofsuburbia at 2:10 AM on January 26, 2007


No.
posted by juiceCake at 2:59 AM on January 26, 2007


Well, music.metafilter.com is for music made by MeFites, so video.metafilter.com would be for video made by MeFites.

So probably it would be "videobyothers.metafilter.com". Which would be great. We could also have "textbyothers.metafilter.com" for people linking to articles, treatises, reports, etc., "imagesbyothers.metafilter.com" for people linking to photo galleries, art galleries, and the like, "interactivewebapplicationsbyothers.metafilter.com" for people linking to flash games, widgets, and other flash/java type stuff.

Oh, and for things like photo galleries with descriptions and long text, we could have "imageswithtextbyothers.metafilter.com", and likewise for video with text, or flash stuff with text.

And then for things like people who've made a movie, made a site discussing it, and included screenshots, we could have the subdomain "videoandimagesandtextbyothers.metafilter.com", and so on and so forth.

Then the blue would be marvelously easy to read and keep up with, as there would be nothing on it.
posted by Bugbread at 5:02 AM on January 26, 2007


Alvy Ampersand: "Whatever happened to YouTubesDay?"

YouTubesDay™ is the Right Solution™. It allows people to post the crappy one-link-video posts in a context that should prevent snarking. (Much as single-link Flash games would probably get crapped on if they were posted every day of every week.) The problem is that it hasn't been mentioned prominently in FPPs, so the word isn't out. Based on some quick searching, it looks like it's only been mentioned in an FPP twice before and only inadvertently celebrated once besides.

Everyone reading this thread who thinks that YouTubesDay is a good idea should make an effort to make the first International YouTubesDay on Tuesday. (I don't expect Mattamyn to bend their "is this shit" deletion rubric for YTD.)
posted by Plutor at 5:03 AM on January 26, 2007


I recently posted a single link to a youTube video, 'cause I thought it was damn cool. I made it pretty clear that it was video, and what it related to. I hope you flagged it as lame you meanie. If a post is shitty/boring then flag it. Or meta it, or best of all say so, using unequivocal terms, in the post's thread. Honestly, video posts don't need a specific warning or flag, if it's shit then that's what it is. And matt's acerbic deletion reason should be enough to teach the miscreant a lesson they will never forgot.
[The guy is wasted here, he should be running a last chance camp for delinquent juveniles... !?]
posted by econous at 5:23 AM on January 26, 2007


That video just made me laugh econous. I must have missed it before.
posted by OmieWise at 6:01 AM on January 26, 2007


I think a subdomain that only allowed linking to videos hosted elsewhere would be totally great. Totally totally great. But I have this strange flash-allergy that others apparently do not share.
posted by shownomercy at 6:27 AM on January 26, 2007


Videosift.com works well enough.
posted by Burhanistan at 6:49 AM on January 26, 2007


a warning when you post -- "avoid single link video posts if possible"?

This is bullshit. There's nothing wrong with single-link video posts any more than there is with other single-link posts; if they're good links, they're good posts. If you think it's impossible for a YouTube link to be good, you're wrong, so wrong that I'm not even going to bother to take the time to go dig up one to prove it to you. (Hint: check y2karl's posting history.) And if you think single-link posts are bad, you're wrong too. Go stand in the corner.
posted by languagehat at 6:52 AM on January 26, 2007


Remove single-link videos from the front page? And leave what, exactlty? 3 paragraph screeds that spawn hundreds of comments?

I do not think the word Metafilter means what you think it means. Long live the hyperlinks, solo or multiple!
posted by blue_beetle at 7:18 AM on January 26, 2007


Remove bad posts. If that means stupid videos fine. However, some of the video posts are great, even the single link ones. The problem is people posting crap. For some reason video crap slips past poster's crap filters more easily than other types of posts. Whether a post is video or other, the truly horrid ones should be culled. As for giving a separate space for videos, that will only encourage more fark like postings of crap.
posted by caddis at 7:32 AM on January 26, 2007


August 5th, 2005. A day that will live in infamy.

Wow, it's only been 18 months, seems like forever.
posted by octothorpe at 7:35 AM on January 26, 2007




Nope, just intensified my love of The Werzog.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:02 AM on January 26, 2007


Seriously, why exactly is that supposed to make us stop looking at youtube? I don't like what you're implying towards that beautiful movie about insane dwarfs, and I hope that someday you fall off of a cliff.*
*not a very high cliff
posted by item at 11:17 AM on January 26, 2007


I ♥ that Bladerunner quote and the whole villain-becomes-hero turnaround there at the end. That is all.
posted by onlyconnect at 11:23 AM on January 26, 2007


I think that just made my youtube addiction stronger, Burhanistan.
posted by Bugbread at 11:51 AM on January 26, 2007


Who's to say what's a stupid video? I may like something you despise and vice versa.
posted by MadAboutPolitics at 1:49 PM on January 26, 2007


I also thought that clip was brilliant, by the way.
posted by Burhanistan at 3:26 PM on January 26, 2007


Well, I'm coming in late here but:

""a warning when you post -- "avoid single link video posts if possible"?

This is bullshit. There's nothing wrong with single-link video posts any more than there is with other single-link posts; if they're good links, they're good posts. If you think it's impossible for a YouTube link to be good, you're wrong, so wrong that I'm not even going to bother to take the time to go dig up one to prove it to you. (Hint: check y2karl's posting history.) And if you think single-link posts are bad, you're wrong too. Go stand in the corner."

First, I'll thank you to keep a civil tongue in your head. I didn't swear at you, don't swear at me, don't be rude to me, don't talk down to me. It makes me grumpy and it doesn't make you look smart.

Second, you are attacking a straw man. I never said, "all one link YouTube posts are bad", quite the opposite. I *did* want to encourage people NOT to just post a single lame link with no explanation. This happens every day here.

Again, don't swear at me, and don't put words in my mouth. It doesn't help civilized discourse one bit.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:21 AM on January 28, 2007


Oh dear me! If you find the word "bullshit" so frightfully hideously unbearable, I fear you are frequenting the wrong retreat. Try the gentlemen's clubs over at Pall Mall.

Second, you are attacking a straw man. I never said, "all one link YouTube posts are bad", quite the opposite.

So "avoid single link video posts if possible" is the opposite of "all one link YouTube posts are bad"? Hmm. Since I obviously am not a disinterested party, I'll leave it to the judgment of other MeFites whether you're making any sense or are simply offended and flailing out.
posted by languagehat at 8:43 AM on January 28, 2007


If you read it one way, it becomes an admirably stringent litmus, actually:

Read "avoid single link video posts if possible" to mean, literally, "post single link video posts when they are so goddam good you can't help it.

And there seems to be a lot more sniping about sniping than actually policy discussion at this point, you silly mooks. Everybody breath into a paper bag for a bit.
posted by cortex at 9:28 AM on January 28, 2007


cortex : "If you read it one way, it becomes an admirably stringent litmus, actually:

Read 'avoid single link video posts if possible' to mean, literally, 'post single link video posts when they are
so goddam good you can't help it."

Yeah. When people complain about the quality of posts on MeFi, other folks always say "if it bothers you, post something better". But the complaint isn't usually that there's not enough good stuff, but that there's too much bad stuff. If I could post something better, I would, and if I'm not, it's because I can't, but one's inability to post something good does not mean that someone else's bad post is therefore somehow not bad.

Which is just a circuitous way to say that, I guess, the guiding principle of MeFi should be "avoid posting links if possible". My first ever post was a misguided, trying-to-prove-a-point post. But all the other posts I've made were not made because "well, this seems kinda neat, maybe some folks on MeFi might enjoy it, I dunno", but because I found them so goddamn good I couldn't help it.
posted by Bugbread at 10:04 AM on January 28, 2007


"Read 'avoid single link video posts if possible' to mean, literally, 'post single link video posts when they are so goddam good you can't help it.""

This is precisely what I meant.

LanguageHat: "...whether you're making any sense or are simply offended and flailing out."

It would really cost you little to be polite and discuss the matter at hand. It might be a little less fun for you if you were respectful of others, but it'd be a heck of a lot more fun for me and I suspect other people too.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 11:16 AM on January 28, 2007


Read 'avoid single link video posts if possible' to mean, literally, 'post single link video posts when they are so goddam good you can't help it.

I don't see how that makes it better. The idea still is that video links are somehow less worthy than other links and should be held to a higher standard. (If the poster did not mean this but thought the standard should apply to all posts, he should have worded it differently, notably by omitting the word "video.") I deplore this idea and wish people would stop proposing it, and the more people propose it, the less patience I have with it. This has nothing to do with lupus_yonderboy himself, who is a fine fellow; it is simply a disagreement about what's best for MetaFilter, a subject on which strong opinions are frequently strongly expressed in MetaTalk.
posted by languagehat at 3:21 PM on January 28, 2007


« Older Ajax for Projects   |   Love you Portland! Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments