YTMND Search

Weight votes based on the usual votes. Presume that users would most frequently vote on a bell curve, so users who have skewed vote spreads vote for less than a whole vote, while users who fit a more fair balance have a "heavier" vote. Perhaps add bonuses for average site rating, to inspire people to make sites worth 5'ing.

also; deleting all the sites below a threshold would remove act as a good spring clean of the old sites, but if it became a permanent policy would inevitably lead to greater upvoting as people try to push sites above the deletion threshold. this would unfairly skew the voting system and make it harder to discern between good and bad ytmnds based upon score. this is clearly bad for the site and should be avoided if it was more than a one time only event.

partial deletion of sites (2.0 or less), weighted voting, more ads for non registered users, and maybe a "user spotlight" section of the front page that changes on the hour (users chosen for this can be based on average site value/ number of views or faves) are all good options. unfortunately you are right about the state of the content on ytmnd right now. too much crap gets upvoted and too many uncreative sites. how people can be laughing at the same joke they have for the past 3 years boggles me

What if we delete everything, but prior to that, we get users to vote on what they want carried over, sort of like New Game +. It might even be possible to distribute the votes each user recieves based on merit (avg. site rating, membership length, general awesomeness, etc.)

2 Questions 1. Is YTMND script based and run on Apache or the such? Or is it it's own standalone server? 2. What language is it written in?

Oh the misconception that disabling adblock will do f*ck all for a website. I've seen it a thousand times. Most advertisers pay based on clicks, so if you were never going to click them anyway, why not block em? Why, I think I will, Trebek! Also the ones that would pay for views have a habit of dropping sites that get way more views than clicks (and I mean an exceedingly unbalanced ratio; naturally views would be higher normally). Therefore keep adblock on if you won't click anyway, or disable and click ads

I want to see a weighted voting system based on quality sites (people who have sites that have >3.5 or 4 for a score shoudl have their votes counted more as they are obviously contributiong to ytmnd.)

No because alot of times people who vote honestly and harshly get revenge downvoted and have poorly rated sites. I contribute alot to YTMND and my sites either are pure crap, poorly rated, or both. Vote weighing based on vote spread, number of votes made, time registered, and comments left would be the best way to reward active members and stop vote inflation by bad users.

Max, the most needed thing is a place for sites to go after leaving the U&C. Either a list based on rating or a "most voted on today".

Actually, nix the second part, since the sites need to stay there a decent amount of time. Just make a ratings-based list of sites created in the last week with 300+ votes.

Voting algorithms can be designed in MANY ways. You could make it so that people who have a closer to even split of 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s, and 5s getting a bonus, if you wanted to. I don't think thats the right way to do it, though, considering if you vote on only front page material your average should be "hopefully" higher than the normal YTMND average. There are alot of factors that could go into vote weighing, and I feel giving certain users more weight based on past performance and experience could help

YTMND Store would generate more income, give people what they've wanted for awhile, allow for more advertising to perhaps more capable users, and make the donations(/downations?) more organized, I guess. For a money base that idea seems to win for first choice.

^ base on what? a study you did behind your computer sitting inside all day

max, I guess my base worry is twofold: 1. while I certainly agree that those users are the ones responsible for making the most interesting, creative stuff on the site, we still wouldn't want it to be like "who are you worshipping today?" 2. the list would become sort of like a "good stuff you've seen before" list, somewhat like the Hall-of-Fame. I think your comment sort of responded to both of those.

Actually, it *IS* the sites that speak for themselves, not the users. The scoring is based on site properties, not properties of the user such as his votes or comments.

Max, lemme just say: Good idea; significant flaw: As opposed to having two tiers of users, the elite, and the people like me, who are ruining this site, why don't we introduce some subtle shading to the dichotomy. If you have people on a continuim from 1 (total rock) to 0 (total suck) wouldn't it be possible to shade the featured user page so that the closer you are to 1 the more likely you are to be featured? This ensures an incentive to improve as well as some exposure for all, still based on ability.

Max, does your algorithm for rating users take into account the fact that everybody except for you votes 1 or 5 almost every time? I was working on a statistical model for users' voting habits (just for fun, and based only on the voting histogram, which has since been replaced by a Flash pie chart [boo!]---you *do* have access to more information than we do), but it's been on the back burner for a few weeks. I was wondering if that's the kind of voter you want to favor. Oh, and have fun in Baton Rouge.

"195th syncan Actually, it *IS* the sites that speak for themselves, not the users. The scoring is based on site properties, not properties of the user such as his votes or comments." . . . . . FOR O SO LONG HAS THIS NEEDED TO BE SAID

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly, but my original impression was that since it will be based on a flash player and not the computer's individual mp3/wav player, the volume is not dependent on any computer-based settings that the particular application had. I highly doubt it means leveling all volume out.

This is ridiculous. Threatening to sue a site, just based on what is said? ITS NOT LIKE MAX HAS A COPY OF THE BOOK IN HIS HAND! You could just be stating fiction for all they know! WHAT THE F*CK! If I knew the ending to transformers before it came out, and told people it, am I going to get my balls sued off? NO!!!!!!!!!

I love Harry Potter and I have avoided this site like the plague for a good two months because I know some asshats out there will spoil the ending. Lawsuits must suck, but the corporation actually cares about its fan base. I know its not Max's fault, but since YTMND is so public I feel that its really the individual user who should be sued. Way to ruin it for the whole community you communists!!

Could you please delete any Anti-Daxflame sites and make it clear YTMND is not a base of operations for these f*ggots?

Lets make the next theme night based on really awful Silvester Stallone movies, like his porno.

Maybe your ideas would work out better if you stopped acting like you are some sort of cultured snob who is better than all of his visitors to his website. Even if what I just said was true, no one would like to admit it, which is why exposing the user base to "culture" will never work if you go about shoving it down their throats as some sort of proprietary bullsh*t about what "good culture" actually is. This notion actually goes against the whole idea of YTMND if you ask me.

I'm certain this is the same person as above. http://www.ytmnd.com/users/kisaragi-chan/votes Seriously, you people need to stop basing your self-esteem on a website that will have no relevance in your life other than doing something when you were bored.

I sudder to think that Fourest could become a mod based on his popularity alone. I know he wants to be one. I know I can come off as being a prick (a lot of people don't catch on to my sarcasm), but I'm not a petty, vengeful person. I wouldn't pull an adverb and flag a site as NSFW because I didn't like it. Hell, I'm twice the age of most of the users here.

Wow, that was. Actually quite interesting. I wish you'd share more insight upon your views of emergent internet-based groups and the connections from them more frequently, max. Or at least share links to whatever people you think discuss it in greater detail.

You should call one of your new sites (or programs they're based upon) "Yiddish Cup." Good luck with these endeavors -- also, c*cks.

based on my vote history, I think collaborative filtering is going to tell me "MOAR NEDM!!!11!!"

and WoW crazed guys from WoW forums across the web. I often try to refer my friends to ytmnd, but they always ask a ton of (in my view) obvious questions. Sure, I dont want this turning into an internet fad like youtube, myspace or even ebaums. But the kind of humor promiment on ytmnd will scare most total morons away. Despite seeming simple and dumb, most of this humor is relativly complex. Secondly, and less importantly, the search feature. Fad categories pl0x? Being able to browse based [cont again]