|
VideoGameCoupons (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
great job
cardinpeggy (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I like the video. Good job!
joedange2007 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
cool, now where's the KFC mate?
NjhuyPloik (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Nice hair Russian women **lostlk.info**
ehsanul (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@FRandallFarmer I'd like to thank you for the very illuminating talk. I guess I have to get your book now. It'll be very helpful when designing the social reputation and anti-gaming system for my web application (jellly.com) under development hope I can make good use of your advice, but I'm sure I"ll make some glaring errors.
ehsanul (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@FRandallFarmer You mentioned an average of 4.8 among 5-star ratings on youtube. It seems like 4.8 is the average of every rating made (most ratings are made on good/viral 4.99-rated videos), rather than the average of each video's own average rating (which was probably more like 4.1 or so). I used to use this fact, along with a knowledge of the distribution of votes to decide what videos to watch. A 3-star video would be "poor", while 4.5 star is probably good. This used to be very helpful.
FRandallFarmer (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@fomaden There was no such thing as a 3.5-star video on YouTube. That's my point in this presentation - the 5-star scale didn't mean what you thought it meant.Not your fault, YouTube's mistake, which they've (mostly) corrected.
fomaden (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Removing the stars from the YouTube is a bad thing for the viewers. How do I know when I come across the video whether it is worth watching, for example these in the Google Tech Talks? If it is 3.5 stars than I am not going to watch it.
michalhantl (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I give this video Five Stars :)
brandonthebuck (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Thumbs up to reflect that I stuck around for the whole video and shared it with friends. |
