SponsorBlock
SponsorBlock copied to clipboard
ajayyy
Overhaul rating system
I noticed the tendency of users to rate cut marks negatively, but very very rarely positively. So two users unhappy with a cutmark let it disappear forevery while 100 happy users which don't notice anything negatively and thus do not rate it down doesn't change anything about that.
Improvement suggestion
New user protection:
I feel like we might "degrade" the users feedback by a multiplier below 100 own contributions. So we just do if contributions < 100: rating = 1*(contributions/100).
So new users cannot be destructive by just voting stuff negatively without having some own contributions to the database.
Views vs votes:
Additionally, we might want to assume a positive "ghost feedback" when 20 users watched a section, just for the "disappearing" rule. So if there are two negative votes but 40 views, the result for the disappearing rule would be 0.
@ajayyy ah!
My issue with the current system is: There need to be just two rouge user votes to remove a good segment. I feel that's quite a lot of trust into any user.
That's why I think we may want to reduce the possibility that this happens by reducing the trust in new users. Plus acknowledge that a lot of people had no issue with this skipping in the past (but haven't voted on it).
But I understand from your response that there's a general lack of user response, so we need more engagements.
How about enforcing that a user needs to vote by default every say 10 skips if he likes it or not? Like making some kind of "coins" by doing this and allow 10 skips with the coins (across the devices)?
This would (mildly) exploit the gamification aspect and also increase the amount of votes to decide if the users approve them or not.
To not annoy users too much who contribute this could become kinda optional as you submit skip marks by just gaining say 10 coins for each skip mark which users found useful.
Kinda rough idea sketch, but I think you get where I'm coming from. :)
Hmmmm... yeah just throwing ideas around 😂
Or maybe just have the popup allowing to vote not go away for a minute if the user is not voting enough? 🤔
I like the idea. It reminds me of stackexchange's reputation levels to perform certain tasks.
If the user doesn't vote for at least half of the segments, we could force the user before exiting the video to vote on Were all segments precise in this video?.
I like the idea. It reminds me of stackexchange's reputation levels to perform certain tasks.
Yeah, it's similar. The main issue is just that a user needs to install the add-on on two devices to randomly "delete" segments if he doesn't like the work (e.g. a sponsor removing the skips for their products or a YouTuber who doesn't like the add-on).
So a minimum amount of submissions to have your votes (at least the negative ones) have that large of an impact is most certainly necessary in the future to avoid abuse.
And 100 submissions isn't really a hard task, it will just naturally happen over time if you use the plugin as it's intended.
An example where IMHO the voting was just wrong:
I labeled a section as "Unpaid/Self promotion" in this video (and another used did the same), both times it got voted out of the database:
https://sb.ltn.fi/video/hE3KjKg69ZA/
Despite he mentioned in this section with whom he collaborated and give him a shoutout – which is not necessary to understand the main video.
The wiki list this as valid content for beeing marked as "Unpaid/Self promotion":
- Information about whom they collaborated with
On the other hand, 183 people had no issue with these sections, but just haven't upvoted them.
Out of curiosity, @ajayyy is there something wrong with my submission?