should noobs wait longer??

Flint the Dwarf · Post by **Flint the Dwarf** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 2:22 pm

The purpose of this site is not to entertain you or catalogue only well-done videos. Its purpose is to catalogue every video whether you like it or not or whether it entertains you or not.

Arigatomyna brings up some good points too.

About the accounts, a lot of people, I'm sure, make accounts just to download videos. Forum activity is not a good indication of account activity.

I don't even want to get rid of the bad videos. Let's say, hypothetically, that these new creators end up progressing and get a lot better. I'd love to be able to see that progression, instead of instantly thinking everyone is a video master.

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 2:24 pm

But it's not the unused accounts you're complaining about here - those are already being deleted according to some sort of time period (checking if there's been any activity in a certain amount of time since creating the account). This is a complaint about bad videos taking up space. That's all it is.

I know people who make *great* videos who don't donate a penny. No one complains about them - it's the poorly made videos that get brought up time and time again. And that's fine. But if you make the bad editors pay, you make everyone pay - and then it isn't a voluntary donation, it's a bill in return for the hosting service. Which is fine. That means this is a place to host videos for a price - only those who can afford it will have their videos hosted. As far as I can tell, that goes against the idea of a 'utopia where all videos can be hosted and catelogued.'

I think people should donate, don't get me wrong. But to single out the bad editors and use mandatory donations as a way to weed them out won't work. The only people you'll see weeded out are the poor people. And if you are selling bandwidth here, that changes everything about the org - if I buy bandwidth for 4 videos it shouldn't matter if they're all the same video - I payed for the bandwidth for four videos and so long as they don't break the content rule (most hosting services have a rule against hentai and such) it won't matter so long as I pay for what I get. I don't think I need to go any further with that.

My main point is that making donations mandatory makes this a site that sells space, bandwidth. It would be just another place for those with money to host their videos. Rich editors will have as much space as they can buy, bad vids or not, and the poor ones will have to wait around until the next amv .org comes into existence (and hope that it doesn't turn into another hosting service). Making people pay won't get rid of bad videos - it'll get rid of poor people.

Which is fine. ^_^ I don't mind paying more if it becomes mandatory - I can afford to do that. I don't mind if my videos are removed because I missed a monthly payment - that's the way it works at any site that sells bandwidth. But it would pretty much kill the place, at least as far as the ideals of the Golden Donut are concerned.

[PS: I wrote this before Flint's post - sorry if I repeated things. ^_~ ]

madmag9999 · Post by **madmag9999** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 2:43 pm

Arigatomina si right. post count and vids has nothing to do with the other at all. i have like 1000+ posts and dont host any vids becouse well i dont think they are good enough plus when my comp died i lost them. but still i would like to see the members of the org post in the forum it would make me know them better and know about there vids. i totaly forgot about reviews, i mean if someone does reviews they are still an active member.

SQ · Post by SQ » Tue Oct 14, 2003 3:10 pm

Hm. This can be answered very breifly.

If you're so worried/have bad feelings toward "bad videos" then you should make it your sole obligation to help make those editors better. I.E. LEAVE OPINIONS.

Lyrs · Post by **Lyrs** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 3:18 pm

SQ wrote:If you're so worried/have bad feelings toward "bad videos" then you should make it your sole obligation to help make those editors better. I.E. LEAVE OPINIONS.

I agree. The best path to seeing quality amvs is to help the enthusiastic new creators improve.

Bebop0083 · Post by **Bebop0083** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 4:40 pm

im not worried about the ones that make accounts just to download. its just ones we who make an account put their vid up and we never see them again. i have been leaving a lot of free ops on bad videos that ive been seeing lately and its really getting disappointing but Flint does make some good points about seeing crappy amv creators becoming good ones. besides its not some thing to worry about this thread will never happen. its just a suggestion.

Farlo · Post by **Farlo** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 5:10 pm

i think it would be fair to limit non-donators to only 2 uploads max

AbsoluteDestiny · Post by **AbsoluteDestiny** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 5:14 pm

el_farlo wrote:i think it would be fair to limit non-donators to only 2 uploads max

fair to everyone except the donators who donate to get lots of good videos. This is why people can upload from the word go - the org wants videos.

Lyrs · Post by **Lyrs** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 5:20 pm

AbsoluteDestiny wrote:the org wants videos.

yes.

and *ahem* derobert and Phade (along the same lines) said this: the Org still has over 500gigs left. Not that storage is a question when considering amv quality.

moonslayer · Post by **moonslayer** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 6:08 pm

Lyrs wrote:
AbsoluteDestiny wrote:the org wants videos.
yes.

and *ahem* derobert and Phade (along the same lines) said this: the Org still has over 500gigs left. Not that storage is a question when considering amv quality.

Don't tell people that, they'll start abusing it.