The Org Redesign - What's wrong with the org?

[CodeZTM]

Plus, is it really that bad to want to bring in new talent and new editors? I mean, we all pretty much know what each of us is going to end up editing. Let me rephrase. We've all fallen in a similar genre of editing and are set in our ways. It'd be nice to have a little surprise here and there.

What's the next video I have on my plate to edit?

If it's on your plate, then it obviously has to do with waffles.

Meanwhile, I suppose that was worded in a generalized fashion.

[Pwolf]

actually, i'm some what serious and want to know what you might think my next video will be

[Enigma]

I suggest, that we add another big old sticky to GAMV (or the introduction forum) called What Is Criticism, which will draw from fields like literature and film in order to explain to new members what constitutes valid criticism, and what are personal attacks, and how the two are not the same. This will prevent new users who have never really received criticism from responding inappropriately to constructive criticism. It will also serve as a reminder to veterans where the line is, and not to devolve into personal attacks. Attacking ideas and methodologies, good. Attacking people, bad.

This will do great, considering new comers might find it a bit scary if they get critiqued to hell and might just go and fleed to wherever they came from, as if this hasn't been talked about to death. But it sure would be a great addition.

[Corran]

I'm not against bringing new membership in. I just want to know why we feel we have to do it.

Two reasons stand out in my mind:
1) The code base is crap. It was Kris's attempt to learn php. If the programmers are going to re-write the org anyways, let's look for things we can improve upon.

2) What we are doing now is not working.


Click image for full size graph. Missing from that image: YT was in public beta starting in May 05.

And no, quick comments are not our demise as tempting as it is to say that based on that image. The full impact of quick comments on opinions occurred over a couple months as people stopped giving three word Opinions and began using QCs for that. Then, QCs and OPs both follow the exact same general declining trend that started after YouTube started to pick up steam.

Pssh, who cares about YT right? We'll just do our own thing.

Did people start making fewer and fewer amvs starting in 2005? Nope, or at least I really, really doubt it. Then the reason for these trends is that people are choosing to release their videos off the org. Why is that? Are YT and other video sites really better "amv communities"? Definitely not. Then the non-community specific features and/or audience they offer trump the (community + non-community) features/audience the org offers in the eyes of a significant number of amv editors. I'm not suggesting that the org clone YouTube, but we would be fools not to learn from general streaming sites like YT and not pick and choose popular features these sites have for use here whether that be easier video sharing or public feedback mechanisms.

So again...

I just want to know why we feel we have to do it.

Do you think this is a good enough reason? If not, would you change your mind once you are the only one still here talking to yourself or, more realistically, a much smaller group of the current users?

[Kaream]

Also, put in a god damn public social forum. Lack of feedback or public viewership, whatthefuckever, what's keeping this community hog-tied is the fact that you have to go well out of your way to actually make friends in this community.

I think we need a new forum section for newcomers to introduce themselves. A "beginners" forum, one might say. I've offered my assistance in getting this set up, and I hope we can get something like this up and working. This way, they can introduce themselves, ask basic questions about the site, and get the endless threads of "WHAR CAN I UPLOAD" and then 4/5 people trolling and Karuido/mirko/mod pointing them in the right direction. The site is intimidating enough without it, and I think it might get some new traffic.

"The Grand Newbie Guide". Kind of like a different version of Kionon and godix's threads, but based around the site's basic functionality and forum attitude. This could be in the aformentioned beginner's forum, and I have no issue with writing it.

Next, the comment system. Replace the quick comment system with a youtube-like system. Comments should be public. Give the creator the option to disable comments, or make them private only. Should not be anonymous.

Donations. The "pledge" system is extremely confusing, and I believe it actually turns off many potential donators. Get rid of "pledging" altogether, and just let people donate straight up. Make it clear that recurring donations are extremely important. There are so many people who default on their pledge and are then PUNISHED, because they simply did not understand what they were doing. It's not helped by the big wall of text and the fact that many people may not speak english as their native language. Plus, potential payment methods are not even mentioned until after one makes a pledge. Vastly simplify this, and instead of having 3 buttons to choose from, make a temporary waiting period of about 30 seconds, like you see on many file download sites.

As I see it our goals should be:

1) Make it easier to find videos.
2) Make it easier to download videos.
3) Make it easier to participate in the forums.
4) Make it easier to go from viewer -> editor.
5) Make it easier to navigate on the site.
No need of reading anything else I said, you'll just waste your time.

YES WE CAN.
First off, let me say I didn't expect this day to come in a million years, so I'm really happy with the new ideas and taking this community to the next step.

Also, I suggest all the mods and admins to take a look at Discount Menu's post on page 2, post 6.

[Kionon]

I've read this through three times, and looked over the graph... but I'm not really clear on what you've said...

Two reasons stand out in my mind:
1) The code base is crap. It was Kris's attempt to learn php. If the programmers are going to re-write the org anyways, let's look for things we can improve upon.

How is increasing membership going to fix the code? I don't see the correlation.

2) What we are doing now is not working.

Are you making the claim that we already have a strategy for increasing membership, but it's failing? I wasn't aware we had one, and if we already do, then that leads me back to the original question... why?

And no, quick comments are not our demise as tempting as it is to say that based on that image. The full impact of quick comments on opinions occurred over a couple months as people stopped giving three word Opinions and began using QCs for that. Then, QCs and OPs both follow the exact same general declining trend that started after YouTube started to pick up steam.

...I'm not following. The point?

Did people start making fewer and fewer amvs starting in 2005? Nope, or at least I really, really doubt it. Then the reason for these trends is that people are choosing to release their videos off the org. Why is that? Are YT and other video sites really better "amv communities"? Definitely not. Then the non-community specific features and/or audience they offer trump the (community + non-community) features/audience the org offers in the eyes of a significant number of amv editors. I'm not suggesting that the org clone YouTube, but we would be fools not to learn from general streaming sites like YT and not pick and choose popular features these sites have for use here whether that be easier video sharing or public feedback mechanisms.

Okay, I think what you're trying to say is that we need to increase membership because we've not been able to maintain a particular rate of released videos. Is this what you're saying?

Or are you saying we need to increase membership because we are losing members faster than we gain them?

So again...

I just want to know why we feel we have to do it.

Do you think this is a good enough reason? If not, would you change your mind once you are the only one still here talking to yourself or, more realistically, a much smaller group of the current users?

Again, I am going to assume that your point is one of the two above, which is why you're asking me these questions.

The answer is, I really don't know. In my opinion, I never seem to interact with more than 100 people at any given time. A good twenty or thirty of those people have been around for several years. While your graph shows a significant decrease in active membership over the last five years, I personally haven't felt it, nor have I seen any impact on the relationships I have with other org members. I do admit that I have detected a slow-down in the post rate of the forums, and I have commented on that. I always felt the 800,000 supposed members was a huge joke. I've never even met 500 editors, let alone thousands. So I'm not really sure what kind of reaction you expect these changes to have.

I'm not telling you, or anyone else, that we can't try these changes. I am saying, let's be realistic. We're not going to make all these changes and have the membership take off like it did in previous years. That ship has sailed, and we have far too much competition from casual "editors" to ever have what we've lost.

[Nya-chan Production]

Oh yeah, can we PLEASE purge the database at least from the 3-5+ years inactive accounts with no videos, comments etc. (same as in the renaming rule, I suppose) and spambots? I guess that would clear tens if not hundreds of thousands of people from the list.

[Otohiko]

I think that streams number is quite telling actually. If there's one thing that YT is showing and one ship that definitely has sailed, it's that of how videos is approached online. Honestly, I think beyond purely design-oriented features, the fact is that most people these days do not download video content, period. I don't think the .org needs to get rid of downloads, but I think ever since the Golden Donut was introduced, a large proportion of the site's strategy for membership, donations and design - whether intentionally or not - has necessarily had to revolve around hosted video content. And that is the ship that's really sailed.

I don't think there's an only answer to it, and certainly "OrgBook" or "OrgTube" aren't the only possibility. But the fact is that because of social media and streaming (among other things, the ways (a) video content; (b) community involvement; and (c) collaboration and remix culture - these have forever changed. Ignoring any of these changes is very damaging to the .org. Sadly I think we very much still living in 2005 here.

So I think above all, we need to begin to reconsider exactly how we want to better offer up video content that is more portable than high-quality downloads and how we can develop the rest of the strategy around it, and how we can reconcile that with what the .org also stands for and supports (and I agree that some aspects of it, like hosting for high-quality downloadable video files, should be defended).

The tl;dr version of the point here: we need to formulate an approach around VIDEO CONTENT in the manner that is acceptable today in light of what's been happening with online streaming. This is the 'meat' of the site. Any strategies for everything else, including community matters, can't even be discussed until we decide on exactly WHAT WE WILL OFFER AND HOW WE WILL REACH A MAXIMUM AUDIENCE WITH IT.

I will also note that the .org is not a useful resource at all unless it indeed aims for a maximum audience. If we plan to shut ourselves off into obscurity and limit our ambition to survive, then I propose we end the .org here and now. If we cater to the 500 people Kionon apparently met, then there's no use for us - a small community centered around a studio-style site is enough. We don't need a costly and complicated .org for this.

Seriously, if the only hope for the .org is to settle into a retirement hub for refugees from mainstream online AMV culture, then I think it's time to pull the plug, at least on the database as such.The .org can't not be big and maintain its database and servers, otherwise it's a huge waste of everyone's time and money, which could easily be put to better use than this.

[Kionon]

Oh yeah, can we PLEASE purge the database at least from the 3-5+ years inactive accounts with no videos, comments etc. (same as in the renaming rule, I suppose) and spambots? I guess that would clear tens if not hundreds of thousands of people from the list.

I concur with this. We still have test accounts around that could be purged.

I think that streams number is quite telling actually. If there's one thing that YT is showing and one ship that definitely has sailed, it's that of how videos is approached online. Honestly, I think beyond purely design-oriented features, the fact is that most people these days do not download video content, period. I don't think the .org needs to get rid of downloads, but I think ever since the Golden Donut was introduced, a large proportion of the site's strategy for membership, donations and design - whether intentionally or not - has necessarily had to revolve around hosted video content. And that is the ship that's really sailed.

Agree with these conclusions.

I don't think there's an only answer to it, and certainly "OrgBook" or "OrgTube" aren't the only possibility. But the fact is that because of social media and streaming (among other things, the ways (a) video content; (b) community involvement; and (c) collaboration and remix culture - these have forever changed. Ignoring any of these changes is very damaging to the .org. Sadly I think we very much still living in 2005 here.

Agree with these conclusions.

So I think above all, we need to begin to reconsider exactly how we want to better offer up video content that is more portable than high-quality downloads and how we can develop the rest of the strategy around it, and how we can reconcile that with what the .org also stands for and supports (and I agree that some aspects of it, like hosting for high-quality downloadable video files, should be defended).

Tentative agreement. Require specifics about plan of action.

The tl;dr version of the point here: we need to formulate an approach around VIDEO CONTENT in the manner that is acceptable today in light of what's been happening with online streaming. This is the 'meat' of the site. Any strategies for everything else, including community matters, can't even be discussed until we decide on exactly WHAT WE WILL OFFER AND HOW WE WILL REACH A MAXIMUM AUDIENCE WITH IT.

Concur with first point, possibly question second point.

I will also note that the .org is not a useful resource at all unless it indeed aims for a maximum audience. If we plan to shut ourselves off into obscurity and limit our ambition to survive, then I propose we end the .org here and now. If we cater to the 500 people Kionon apparently met, then there's no use for us - a small community centered around a studio-style site is enough. We don't need a costly and complicated .org for this.

Do not concur. I do not think that we need to aim for a maximum audience in order to be a useful resource. Nor do I suggest we shut ourselves off into obscurity and limit our ambition to survive. These two are not a binary system. There IS a middle ground. We do not cater to the 500 people I may possibly have met. Nor have we ever. What I am saying is that's all the people that are currently here. We are those 500 people. All of us. Every single one of us in these threads. Are you honestly saying we are of no use to ourselves? If you honestly believe that then...

Seriously, if the only hope for the .org is to settle into a retirement hub for refugees from mainstream online AMV culture, then I think it's time to pull the plug, at least on the database as such.The .org can't not be big and maintain its database and servers, otherwise it's a huge waste of everyone's time and money, which could easily be put to better use than this.

This is the result, and I say, if you don't think we are useful to ourselves, then you are right. Time for us to just shutdown. I, however, do not believe that the org is useless to its users, be them 500 or 500,000. If we can't even serve the 500 people we have effectively, do you honestly think we will be able to serve a thousand times that?

[Panky]

The answer is, I really don't know. In my opinion, I never seem to interact with more than 100 people at any given time. A good twenty or thirty of those people have been around for several years. While your graph shows a significant decrease in active membership over the last five years, I personally haven't felt it, nor have I seen any impact on the relationships I have with other org members. I do admit that I have detected a slow-down in the post rate of the forums, and I have commented on that. I always felt the 800,000 supposed members was a huge joke. I've never even met 500 editors, let alone thousands. So I'm not really sure what kind of reaction you expect these changes to have.

I'm not telling you, or anyone else, that we can't try these changes. I am saying, let's be realistic. We're not going to make all these changes and have the membership take off like it did in previous years. That ship has sailed, and we have far too much competition from casual "editors" to ever have what we've lost.

It might be hard to believe due to the amount of people active on the forums, but there are around 1million registered users in the org (1026783 according to the main site) which, coming for a fan-made anime videos is quite amazing. But many have lost the path probably because there were many problems in knowing where to go, or what to do. And now like Corran said there are so many streaming sites that chances are they won't find this or won't think it's appealing (due to uploading process, commenting, or others).
And you probably will be right it won't be the same, there weren't many places to upload videos back then. Youtube would remove amvs in less than a week, it wasn't as known as it is today and as fast, giving this site a little "advantage". But the org still keeps the advantage of having a community where you can learn how to edit, encode, and discuss about amvs.
To me, it looks like this site worked perfectly in the past, but without changes like the other sites, it can't move much further. To you, a little growth in people/popularity seems just fine (to go unnoticed; it's an opinion that I respect), but it's true the org is hardly getting anymore active users on here, and there are at least a few changes that need to get addressed.
(Otohiko beat me up to it, I agree with his post)

Oh yeah, can we PLEASE purge the database at least from the 3-5+ inactive accounts with no videos, comments etc. (same as in the renaming rule, I suppose) and spambots? I guess that would clear tens if not hundreds of thousands of people from the list.

If you think about it for a while, that would kinda be the same than keeping the video catalog, even when you can't know if it's true you made the video or not, and even when you didn't upload a local version. There should have some 'importance' (even when you take in mind the way the renaming rule works in). Note that I'm all for it though, in fact it would help to know how many people are somehow 'active' and reduce stress on the dB.