ShareCG Main Forums
   >> Site Recommendations and Suggestions
Thread views: 685587 View all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode

Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | (show all)
MatrixWorkz
(Enthusiast)
01/05/08 05:10 PM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: dadchamp]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

See that's part of my rub with the rating systems Dad. I DO Give 1 star ratings and I don't do it as a punishment. I do it because I think the item has merit above and beyond not rating it at all which is what I do for the most part. I don't rate often and I rate towards the low side unless something really stands out as a 4 or 5 star item to me.

You don't call Best Western a bad hotel just because it's not a Five Star hotel. Neither do I call items I give 1 star to bad items. It's this difference in view points about what the stars mean that causes all the grief. I don't think 1 star is bad, others do. Never will we agree on what they mean coming from extremely different view points on them. 



It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Albert Einstein


Beatrice
(Newbie)
01/05/08 06:47 PM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: Stepdad]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Lets be honest there would be very few people here who would not want some revenue if it was available. Two tier systems would not work. I would assume that most people who post here think there work is of a standard that others would like to use it. Some people might be more desperate for money than others. We don't know the circumstances of everyone. I do know there are some people here who really really  do need the money they were getting from here.

Let us also be honest. The site earns money because we and other people access it. And because we and other people upload items here. If that didn't happen there would not be any money.

 





spacenewt
(Newbie)
01/05/08 07:27 PM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: Beatrice]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

What's wrong with paying by stuff that is actually downloaded rather than just looked at......

It would seem to me to be the fairest way of all to filter content.... if somethings naff then no one will download it.Wink the biggest problem with paying by page views as far as I could tell, was that you had to look at the actual page to decide wether or not you wanted something.... most of the time I'd look and then not download said object once I'd seen a full sized preview and read the info......





Goldenthrush
(Stranger)
01/06/08 12:36 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: spacenewt]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

I'm good with that idea myself, Spacenewt.  That's how The Sims Resource would reckon their artists 'pay'.  And they also had a sort of committee deal to approve new submissions.  The committee was, admittedly, pretty lenient, but I think in all, quite fair. 

I'd also suggest that works in progress not be eligible, simply by the nature of the beast.  It's not a finished artwork or whatever.  

I'll also put out that it is not that difficult to find people who are violating copyright and the like, even if it is material one person is unaware of:  Someone will be, and having a reporting system for suspected copyright violation is easy enough to put in.  This means the staff doesn't have to be familiar with 2904023420398098523423 forms of various material.  

That's easily abused by people, too, so once a report comes in, the staff can google and check for themselves.  Then it can be acted on.  

Ratings and comments are great, but most people don't bother with them.  It's not that they're mean or bad people, they just literally forget or don't notice.  (For instance, when was the last time you remembered to fill out the "how was the service here?" cards at the local coffee shop?) 

I don't have much of a burning want or need for the portfolio things, I really do not think that I'd be getting a job from making mat poses.  There's people who have the schooling and all for graphic arts, I certainly don't!   





dadchamp
(Journeyman)
01/06/08 01:05 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: MatrixWorkz]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Matrix, what you are saying is EXACTLY what I mean. Motel ratings are justified BY comments and reviews that are associated WITH the ratings systems. A rating system WITHOUT comments and reviews is useless! I would stay at a one star motel if it was reviewed as such because it didn't have porters, a restaurant, et all, but had clean, cheap rooms. I would NOT stay at a one star motel that was rated as such because the rooms were filty and the restaurant served lousy food and the porters stole luggage. A ratings system has to be supported by a comment/review system. No other system works and even one like this has it's drawbacks.

--
I don't fear God anymore. Anything he/she can do to me now is only adding insult to injury!


WalkerofShadows
(Stranger)
01/06/08 08:15 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: spacenewt]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

I would agree that a per download basis would be far wiser, and would help eliminate some of the problems. There are of course factors that would need to be taken into account ahead of time to prevent abuse starting up again.

First one I could see, would be that you would need IP tracking being used, as well as a system in place to prevent automatic downloads.

Second,would be that only one download per IP address should be counted. Yes, people might not get the file the first time due to errors, but you've still been paid, you shouldn't get paid for their reattempts.

Third, would be to continue hand inspecting the logs before payout. This should prevent people from using an internet cafe etc to generate huge download counts since a large amount of IP's from the same area would throw up a large warning flag.

I would also definately agree that the rating system needs to be tied to the comments. I know for myself, that I've got a bunch of five star ratings that to be honest, I would love to know why they rated them that high. My partner and I work hard on each of them, but I Know they're not perfect. Having the comments linked to ratings would be a good way to know if it's people just rating things high because they feel they should, similar in principle to giving only positive feedback in galleries, or if they really like things that much.

 





adp__
(Journeyman)
01/06/08 09:19 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: WalkerofShadows]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Second,would be that only one download per IP address should be counted. Yes, people might not get the file the first time due to errors, but you've still been paid, you shouldn't get paid for their reattempts.

 

Bad idea (there are a lot of people using proxies - means a lot of people having the same IP at the same time). Better is using sessions and bulding a user history. It isn't required to offer downloads to non-registered users if a fast registration system is in use.

 

Third, would be to continue hand inspecting the logs before payout. This should prevent people from using an internet cafe etc to generate huge download counts since a large amount of IP's from the same area would throw up a large warning flag.

Ha ha ha! :) There are so many ways to implement "click-bots". Using an internet cafe is what the clueless are doing :)

 

To have a picture: Create a webpage (simple HTML) with something a lot of people are interested in ([censored]? Games? Music?). Advertise this webpage. The webpage contains an invisible frame requesting a page from ShareCG. Everybody visiting your webpage generates a "view" on ShareCG with his own, unique IP-Address. If a download is addressed, this download is started (and mostly interrupted by the surprised, innocent user).

Another: A lot of hobby-forums allows using images and/or iframes in comments. Anybody who accesses a page with a prepared comment generates a view on ShareCG.

Ergo: No way around offering downloads only to registered users.





adp__
(Journeyman)
01/06/08 09:26 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: adp__]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

(download isn't started automatically if a webpage is requested. But it is possible to force a download with some tricks or a bit of javascript - no further description here for obvious reasons)



dadchamp
(Journeyman)
01/06/08 09:54 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: adp__]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Here's another thought:

To get paid here for download/views of items posted you would have to provide a SSN, EIN, or ITIN and W-8BEN (for people outside the USA) to qualify so that income taxes can be recorded and reported. This IS income and should be reported especially if you live outside the USA! I can guarantee you that the moochers and cheaters will vanish in a heartbeat because they'll never want to provide that kind of indentification information and/or probably can not! Jake, Dave, I have my SSN memorized and will supply it to you if requested!



--
I don't fear God anymore. Anything he/she can do to me now is only adding insult to injury!


WalkerofShadows
(Stranger)
01/06/08 09:56 AM
Re: Here's a thought ... new [re: adp__]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Ahh, thanks for pointing out the problems with my ideas. I'm very much not a  programmer :)




Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | (show all)
View all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode
Jump to

 




© 2021 Internet Business Systems, Inc.
670 Aberdeen Way, Milpitas, CA 95035
+1 (408) 882-6554 — Contact Us
ShareCG™ is a trademark of Internet Business Systems, Inc.

Report a Bug Report Abuse Make a Suggestion About Privacy Policy Contact Us User Agreement Advertise