Channel creation
  (13 votes)
  (20 votes)
A total of 33 votes have been cast on this poll.
Do you think it is a good idea to willfully make a videosift channel if you have absolutely no interest in moderating said channel ? Likewise, if you are not sticking around to take care of it.

is it okay to create a videosift channel knowing full well you ( theoretical owner ) are not going to fulfill the terms and conditions set forth in the Frequently asked questions area, regarding channel ownership and all it encompasses ?


it is a yes no question, no grey area here.
Submitted by BoneRemake
Comments (showing 10 of 22)
What are the duties of a channel owner?

A channel owner is essentially responsible for everything that goes on in their realm. Here are the basics:

Make sure the videos in your channel belong there
Keep an eye on Talk posts in your channel and make sure they are topic related
Try to be supportive of videos assigned to your channel
Encourage interaction among those Sifters who frequent your channel


If you are going to open end your channel like a length of cut garden hose, you are a joke to the community, and so is the channel.
0  
written by BoneRemake

Is this the first rhetorical poll?
3  
written by Deano

I don't moderate my channel. The irony is that it's the "law" channel.


[edit] is that irony? I don't know, go fuck yourself...
6  
written by rottenseed

It would be cool to have the ability to designate a co-owner of a channel. Someone who could share in the success and responsibilities that goes with the job.
9  
written by critical_d

In my Ruby-tinted fantasies, I create *Americuh or somesuch for all of the videos that highlight what's absurd, broken, or downright terrible about my great nation, but I'd have little interest in moderating it, since I can scarcely watch most of those types of videos. So, of course I deem it cool to "fire and forget".
I can see the argument that's essentially just creating a tag rather than a channel to be curated for the benefit of the Sift.
I do think that the "no gray area, yes or no" poll is pushing it, especially the way the question is worded. "Do you think it is a good idea to willfully..." is a very different question from, say, "Are there circumstances under which it would be acceptable to..."

I do like the idea of being able to appoint moderators for your channel, but anyone who is Silver Star or above can modify channel assignments anyway.
2  
written by ReverendTed

I was just curious of your opinions, I have mine and wanted to know yours.

"

If you are going to open end your channel like a length of cut garden hose, you are a joke to the community, and so is the channel. "

that definitely was directed at seltar, but I feel kinda dirty now for saying it. So, sorry @seltar your reply sure did indicate you didnt have an interest in taking care of the channel up to VS specs like that weiner @rottenseed admits .

We have too many system channels I dont see the need to create more of them.
-1  
written by BoneRemake

>> ^critical_d:

It would be cool to have the ability to designate a co-owner of a channel. Someone who could share in the success and responsibilities that goes with the job.


THAT SIR is a great idea.
3  
written by BoneRemake

I wonder from time to time whether a member ought to have been here for a certain amount of time before they get a channel, so that we have some assurance they mean to stay around for a while.

Time and again we see "grinders" who show up, ride a wave of nutshots and kittens to ruby in a month, and then burn out and never come back. We should avoid giving channels to these members.

I also think the moderator job should be "use it or lose it" and that channels that cannot function cleanly without an active moderator (viral, sexuality, terrible, cult, vintage, basically any channel that requires you to read the description) should be locked so they cannot be invoked or selected until a new moderator is selected. They could still be viewed and browsed, just no new content.

Or I guess we could keep doing what we've been doing, and treat channels as meaningless decorations that we display to the left of our video submissions.
1  
written by xxovercastxx

Channels in general are a clusterfuck. I say tear it down and if so inclined start over with a new way of doing them! But thats just my opinion.
1  
written by eric3579

I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about, though that may be because I don't really "use" the channels at all aside from ticking some boxes when I post a new Sift.

So what are the problems with a poorly-moderated channel?
- Incorrect channel assignments; Anyone Silver or above can correct those if it's egregious, and if no one Silver or above cares about a particular video's channel assignment, then is it really a problem? Is there any real benefit to "abusing" the channel assignments?
- Lack of content in the channel? Again, if there aren't enough users posting or tagging videos for a particular channel, perhaps it's not a big problem if the channel is quiet.

Are we irritated with how many checkboxes there are to sort through when posting?
Are we frustrated with the channel limit?
0  
written by ReverendTed


login or sign up to comment