vote as well as write.
It sounds simple, but I always check latest submissions and vote on them. It's what keeps the site moving. If you don't take time to read other captioneers input, it's much like a comic playing to an empty house, or one talking over them for the whole set.
Also, when voting, don't forget, there's a 'thumbs up', a 'thumbs down', but also the option to remain neutral if you don't really have anything truly for or against a caption.
8 comments
written by Davie Marshall
15/01/09 2:28pm
15/01/09 2:28pm
email us
I think it best to be positive or be neutral and refrain from negative voting altogether. Too many use the down votes to boost their standing on the list or get the edge to be the caption with the photo or be vindictive. And so much of what is considered good or bad is a matter of taste which can really be across the map.
2:39pm
I'm not the most tolerant person on the planet, but I came to the same conclusion as Eileen. I only use 'thumbs up' now. But I agree with your point about keeping the site moving, so I might have to reconsider.
What should I do if I log in and find one really good caption, three OK ones, ten mediocre ones and five terrible ones?
Maybe this is a thought for a way to upgrade the site: we could award captions a score from 0 to 5.
3:21pm
In my opinion, negative voting is useful.
Firstly it discourages people from adding ill-thought-out, offensive or spam captions as they will be voted down and become less visible. I would prefer that bad captioneers are actively discouraged from the site, even if it means losing visitors in the short term. Overall quality is my number one priority. Quality breeds quality.
Secondly, negative voting means that new captions enter at the middle position on the "pile" as opposed to the bottom where they might not be so readily seen.
4:05pm
...and I really appreciate the opportunity to contribute.
Chris makes some more good points that I hadn't really considered.
I'm too much of an internet moron to know how much hassle it would be to change the voting system. If we can find a better way to encourage better use of the current system, that may well be a better solution.
[edit: did I just say better that many times?]
Quality is important, so I'll happily do my bit. How about if there's some clear guidance on what criteria you could use to vote 'up', 'down' or abstain? This tips page will help people too, probably.
6:06pm
Another thought: if the policing was down to me I'd be less democratic and just delete the crap captions, so credit to Chris for finding a more equitable way. I'm happy to support this and (hesitantly) gave a thumbs down to a couple of captions today.
5:47pm
for negative voting now.. but I still think it should be used for those captions that are glaringly bad/offensive/lame and NOT toward someone's sincere effort that you just happen to deem not up to snuff. Like Ryan said somewhere here - too liberal negative voting has a discouraging and inhibiting effect on creativity and the quality of future captions by that captioneer.
4:12am
I see the need of the negative vote to get rid of offensive, rude or spamming captions, however, rather than having a + and - captions, why not have just a + option and then an option saying if something is offensive or rude, for admin. like Chris to check. Either this or just make everyone aware that the negative tool is for insulting or spamming captions, rather than for tactical voting and for sheer fun, then spamming or insulting ones can be deleted whilst those which have no reason to be negatively voted don't then get a negativ score.
Thanks, Ryan M.
8:44pm
..the tip with the fewest votes and located at the bottom of the list has the MOST comments and happens to be about being too liberal with negative votes and too stingy with thumbs ups! Everyone seems to be afraid to credit a good caption with a vote for fear someone will get the jump on them and some vote a decent caption down because they don't get the joke. The association or subtlety is lost on them.
8:49am