Quoting:
so imagine what it would be like if there were no saturday or sunday updates which used to be the rule
End Quote

*gasps in horror*

Quoting:
so imagine what it would be like if there were no saturday or sunday updates which used to be the rule
End Quote

actully, a long long time ago (like back in 2000) there were both Saturday and Sunday updates if I remember..but then again, the average amount of parodies per day coming in way like 5

Quoting:
Perhaps the webmaster could nominate a committee of reviewers to gauge which parodies are suitable for posting in terms of overall quality, that way it would cut down on the massive amounts of postings every day, and also help people who submitted "subpar" parodies to improve upon their work?

Just a suggestion.  No offense to anyone.
End Quote

I like taht idea...

Quoting:
I don't like that idea. Sure, if we had a case of a bunch of new people post 1-worthy songs, maybe, but these songs are at above 3 average. Most people are putting in a lot of work on writing these, and seeing it not get put up just because Malcom decides to submit 50 songs that day......it doesn't seem right
End Quote

actually, I don't think Malcolm submitted even half that many today.. of course you may be trying to exagerate, but the fact that I didn't think you were, just shows how much Malcolm is capable of sometimes..

there is one new parody author on the site today, who is clearly posting his entire archive at once or something, and even that was maybe a dozen or so..

while I've toyed with the thought of letting someone else approve parodies, I'd never prevent them based on quality except for stuff that is "incomplete", really short tunes, or badly formatted (or the other dozen rules I seem to have)..

I've toyed with the thought of appointing several people (parody authors and maybe non-parody authors) to highlight parodies in a special section, like a stamp of approval.. so for a panel of twelve people, each person gets to nominate a handful each week, and if half of the remaining people approve a parody, it gets approved.. like a hall of fame.. but more regular..

of course even that has flaws like: how do I pick who should be on the panel, should the judges be anonymous to prevent people trying to beg their way into the nominations, would that be too many possible nominations, should each judge be responsible for reading X amount of new parodies each day and picking at least one nomination, what about old parodies on the site, would people end up singling out favorite authors, should re-nominations occur, and if renominations do occur, can it be by the same judge?

clearly, there's a lot of things that would need to be thought through, (you can tell I do a lot of programming, I can think of everything that can go wrong, and then start planing on how to work around it)

I'd also have to either write software, or use the messageboard in some fashion (protected newsgroup perhaps?).. and find space on the website for it (a small section on the home page, but where and how big, and do I remove something to fit it?)

clearly I'm happy that so many people are willing to submit to the site, and the votes can't be the sole metric for picking which parodies make it to the front page (since they can be toyed with, and encourage people to toy with them).  Anything I can do (or the the visitors/contributors of the site) to encourage the quality material to stand out, is only going to make the site more interesting, and encourage more people to contribute..

The more new people, the better in my opinion.  Humor is subjective, and the more people trying to be funny, the more likely there's something someone will love on the site, and pass it on or contribute, etc.

Quoting:
I have a quasi-suggestion.

On Wendy Northcutt's DarwinAwards site, she has a "slush pile" for stories that are pending review and approval before they are enshrined into the archives.  I think a similar idea can be implemented for this site.

That way, submissions can still be made, and voted on, but final approval would allow the high-quality parodies to become a permanent part of the website.  I have no idea how much extra work this requires so this is just a suggestion, not a mandate.
End Quote

I've thought about similar things for the misheard lyrics and other sections (kind of the reverse of what we do now, let everything through and just delete the garbage after the fact), and it can certainly be done.. the question though is would anyone want to do it?

I guess if I set it up with some sort of user system, and let people score points for the deletions that others agree with, or some kind of ranking system, people may want to take it on.. but there's always the possibility for abuse of the system (people creating multiple accounts is impossible to entirely prevent)..

if enough people voted, the ones idiots, and the ballot box stuffers, would become rather insignificant.. I think this solution is alot along the same lines.. if enough people could be trusted to respond properly, yes it would work.  The problem is that you can't expect everyone who participates to be onboard with how you want things to work..

Quoting:
i like rice's idea but it should be 20 volunteers in the 25+ parody club no the 20 top submitters since som of the people with the most parodies aren' here too often nowadays (stg, syncronos)

i'd be able to take a few minutes to review parodies at about 1030 in the morning

A lot of days reading all the parodies at once seems like it could be pretty overwhelming (as i'm sure chucky knows very well) so i think if there is a reviewing commitee of 20 amiright regulars then they should be split up into groups of 5 and each group would be in charge of 1 quarter of the new submissions  
End Quote

that kind of system would require a much more complicated review mechanism than I have in place now.. (you have to worry about what happens when more than one person is reviewing parodies at the same time, race conditions, etc). I can certainly code something like that, but would prefer not to for the time being..

plus that only solves the problem of reviewing parodies in the morning.. and right now, it's not that big a problem (plus I don't think I need more than five people for the task even if I did)..

the problem we want to solve, is how to identify parodies that are better than the average parody submitted..