best earliest latest latest and best captions

I agree that is a good idea, and I have done it myself when the occasion arises, but I also think that once someone else has pointed out a similarity and there have not been any votes cast yet that the later quote should not automatically be blacklisted if people prefer it. Being told how to vote or implying that other users have deliberately stolen ideas under the guise of anonymous also isn't good etiquette, yes? I'd prefer to give the benefit of the doubt just now and I'm sure other users will exercise their own judgement how they see fit. :)

Chris Moorhead

Nobody is telling you how to vote or implying that you deliberately stole an idea, Chris. It's normally the person that writes the original caption that comments on the duplicate/similar caption and that's why he/she stays anonymous. I can guarantee that if we don't draw attention to these captions then the 'smart' guys will sit back and have a field day copying and tweaking the best ones.

Pete

To Pete: Just to clarify, neither of these are my captions, I just cast the first vote for either and made a comment that I preferred the later one as justification. I fully agree that it should be custom to give nods to previous captions and that others should be encouraged to point out similarities if authors do not do so. The reasoning for this is sensible and if we didn't have it then we would have the situation you describe. My only objection is that the next comment was that it didn't matter which I preferred because it was someone else's idea which is saying that I shouldn't vote for duplicates full stop and/or that the author (whoever that might be) stole the idea. I know that it is usually the author of the original caption that responds with #anon, which is why I wanted to discuss it with someone who can be proved to be impartial. I was just wondering if anyone else would give an opinion on what circumstances it is considered OK to vote for duplicates. :)

Chris Moorhead

Being I was the captioneer who submitted the caption I feel like I should make a few points.
1 The words 'face off' were used in a completely different context,i.e face of (sorry if i have to explain this to some people).Face off was used in another caption with no votes,no mention of this,hmmm.
2 When I submitted the caption it was not flagged up in the similar caption box,which I think makes it fair game.
3 Using the next photo as example,the words 'flame' and 'hot' are used in many captions.Just because someone else uses these words first does this mean know one else can ?
4 Finally the sixty second reference is a Nicolas Cage film ( sorry if I have to explain this to some people)
The words 'SOUR' and 'GRAPES' spring to mind.

Steve Davies

I am the author of the other caption and 'Gone in Sixty Seconds' was used in the same context, you can't deny that. If people started adding captions using someone else's idea used in the same context, we would end up with pages of similar captions to scroll through, plus loads of arguments.
Site etiquette of avoiding duplicates has been working well on the site for years.

Thanks Steve for pointing out that I had used the 'Face Off' reference in my caption (the one with no votes) I have removed it now in deference to the original captioneer ;)

You'll just have to grin and bier it.

John Glover

other treatments are available.

Steve Davies

Can you play fair and not put the extra blank line in please.

?

Steve Davies