Best Ever Albums

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 07:28:44 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/11/2011 11:28

yes, it's on the list, but sitting in a queue with some other bits. It'll be done fairly shortly, but not straight away. There's a few issues with performance I want to address in the meantime.

EDIT: I must be a bit bored today, just added this... 😎

Re: Moderation Suggestion

Xavygravy — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 07:18:42 GMT

Author: Xavygravy

Posted: 08/11/2011 11:18

Very awesome!

Any chance we can have that text box next to 'Tracks' where we can enter a value of how many tracks there will be, and that many tracks will automatically be added? (Instead of clicking add new track over and over)?

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 04:33:43 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/11/2011 08:33

thanks for the feedback.

What I think might be a good idea then, is to allow users with over x mod points to moderate 'locked' items, and also to approve/reject changes from other users.

So, if you spot an incorrect edit from another user, then super-admins can have the ability to mark these edits down.

I'll add this functionality over the next week or so, as I'd like to get the moderation part of the site working better for people.

EDIT: Now done. It was a very simple change as I'd anticipated needing to do this at some stage and had already written most of the code.

Users with over 1,000 'mod points' will now be able to edit locked items and approve/reject other user's edits. Three users have the ability to do this already: harkan, Xavygravy and btener11.

N.B. This functionality (and the qualification criteria) are subject to change depending on how well it beds in. If you are reading this thread, I am not going to announce it properly until its been running a few days, so let's see how it goes first.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

Xavygravy — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 04:10:23 GMT

Author: Xavygravy

Posted: 08/11/2011 08:10

A lot of the already-moderated albums are slightly incorrect, yet we aren't able to edit them once they've been moderated once.
The only option we have right now is to submit correct values one-by-one, which is tedious and hardly worth the effort.

I propose that higher-level members should be able to edit these albums (say 5000 or even 2500+ points). This should prevent spam/vandalism but allow the dedicated members to fix these errors.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Thu, 4 Aug 2011 18:18:54 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/04/2011 22:18

Sure, I'll look into making the track editor easier to use. What is there at the moment is a first attempt at getting something out there, and it does need tidying up a bit.

Yes, most of the albums are already populated from Amazon using their API (artwork and tracks), but not all albums are on Amazon (particularly foreign albums or out of print etc) and not all albums on Amazon have track-listings.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

Xavygravy — Thu, 4 Aug 2011 17:57:45 GMT

Author: Xavygravy

Posted: 08/04/2011 21:57

Also, are you sure there isn't just a way to extract the data from sites like amazon.com?

Re: Moderation Suggestion

Xavygravy — Thu, 4 Aug 2011 17:53:34 GMT

Author: Xavygravy

Posted: 08/04/2011 21:53

To make moderation that little bit easier, could you have a box next to 'tracks' where we enter how many tracks there are in total, and that amount automatically appears below (rather than having to click 'add a track' over and over).

Thanks.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Thu, 4 Aug 2011 15:28:47 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/04/2011 19:28

no problem, a few changes over the past couple of days have helped spread the load a bit.

yes, I think variety is important, but I also think it is important that the site highlights the canon (for want of a better word).

I think first time visitors should quickly be able to pick out the top selections, whilst there should also be plenty of nuggets to find for the more knowledgeable listeners as well.

I think we are serving multiple audiences and hopefully can provide something for each.

In terms of capping the number of 'new' selections, I think we can cover that off with tiered membership. Newer members could have restrictions over how many times they can re-submit their chart and will start off with a smaller-sized chart than senior members.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

videoheadcleaner — Thu, 4 Aug 2011 09:26:47 GMT

Author: videoheadcleaner

Posted: 08/04/2011 13:26

albummaster wrote:

Limit the amount of new albums some people can add
Perhaps new users could be limited to a smaller chart (say, 50 entries) and gain access to a bigger chart once they have reached a certain points threshold.

I think we should only allow users x 'new' albums within their chart. Then, once the chart is submitted, they should not be able to edit their chart to include *another batch* of new albums within a certain time period (say 7 days). (I think some people do this already to build up the database here, but it's completely unnecessary.) I'm not suggesting people can't edit their chart within that time period, just that they can't add any more new albums if they have reached a certain threshold.

I think some kind of throttling is also necessary to prevent 'flooding' of the system (e.g. a user today who added about 50 new albums within their chart which took about four hours to sort out and still isn't finished) (why any of the current 20,000 albums isn't enough to choose from, I don't know 😉 )

If I wasn't teaching English to bone-idle students, I would have helped to sort them out.

I agree that new albums can flood the system but how to enforce a restriction is an interesting prospect. Almost something like a handful per year for the last 5 years and only premium members able to have more?

However, the previous comment by RFNAPLES I disagree with. If we didn't have variety, the site would be boring. I have discovered new bands and albums from visiting this site and that's because not everyone has the same opinion.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

RFNAPLES — Wed, 3 Aug 2011 20:53:37 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 08/04/2011 00:53

Albummaster, I share your concern for the numerous "new" albums and chart additions. It is obvious many members don't follow your desire to list the best ever albums or the greatest albums ever. It seems that some members want to list only new, rare, or obscure albums. Perhaps they see this site as a place to discover potentially great but unrecognized albums; or a place to try to express their sense of uniqueness.

My personal chart often gets attacked for being not unique, not different and without hidden treasurers. But personally I like that stated mission of attempting to determine the greatest albums of all times and their relative rank.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:41:23 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/03/2011 12:41

Xavygravy wrote:

I'm thinking that new users should be limited to only overall charts of sizes 25 or 50. Then once they reach a new rank they can have the next size up, going up in 25s, until they reach 100.
After they have access to a 100 chart, the next rank will unlock decade charts and the rank after that will unlock yearly charts. �'� Something like that.

Yes, agree. Just need to think about what the thresholds would be in practice and what functionality becomes available etc. I used to play a lot of RPG games where once you get enough XP, you 'level up' and gain new powers etc. I think this is much the same thing here.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:38:09 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/03/2011 12:38

Perhaps, in the future, we could have something where you could 'buy' a rank, but if you want to 'earn' your rank, you still can. This would mean the site would stay free, but some people could pay (if they want). Maybe there could be a special rank for paying members, but other members can still access the same functionality through their contribution etc.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

GARY — Wed, 3 Aug 2011 04:52:58 GMT

Author: GARY

Posted: 08/03/2011 08:52

Just a thought, in case it may be needed due to the fact that there is an ever increasing amount of BEA members and charts.

Which creates an ever increasing amount of work for Albummaster.

I would suggest maybe having a voluntary paying membership and higher rank that would give these members more options including chart options etc.

Just my opinion but I always favor rewarding as a motivation more than penalizing those who are not as big or interested in something. Such as limiting the chart size of new members. This may turn off new members.

I try to whenever I notice a new member on BEA to rate their chart if they have one or at least say welcome. As with any site you have many people who check out a site and become a member but never return. I would think that we should make an effort to raise the % of members who sign up that keep coming back and interact in the forums etc.

But I have no clue what Albummaster wants for the future of BEA as far as growth.

With growth comes more cost and less "free" time for Albummaster.

In closing I want to add that I personally would have no problem at all paying for my membership. Bea is well worth it as far as I'm concerned 😁

.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

Xavygravy — Wed, 3 Aug 2011 04:35:56 GMT

Author: Xavygravy

Posted: 08/03/2011 08:35

albummaster wrote:

I think this one is very important. With the planned updates of decade and yearly charts, these limitations will become essential.

I'm thinking that new users should be limited to only overall charts of sizes 25 or 50. Then once they reach a new rank they can have the next size up, going up in 25s, until they reach 100.
After they have access to a 100 chart, the next rank will unlock decade charts and the rank after that will unlock yearly charts. �'� Something like that.

In combination with everything else you pointed out, moderation will be something nearly every active member will be doing.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

19loveless91 — Tue, 2 Aug 2011 11:58:43 GMT

Author: 19loveless91

Posted: 08/02/2011 15:58

The way I see it, if somebody adds an album that is new to the site (and thus without any info), they should be the one most "eager" to update the data (well I know I was when doing my chart for the first time).. But I'm sure that most people don't even realize that they can update it. I guess forcing people to do it when first submitting isn't the best idea, but highlighting (in a way) the possibility of that, should mean that at least some of the users will do the editing.

I said before that I'm not a fan of limiting the number of added new albums, I prefer however the idea of limiting the size of the chart for the new members (or those with lower rank). This should decrease the number of added new albums, and it actually just might mean that those users would become more active on the site (provided they want a bigger chart of course)...

Oh and I've done my share for today (editing a couple of albums), I'll try to make it my daily routine from now on 😜 (well, I'll start next week, I won't have access to internet in the next couple of days)

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Tue, 2 Aug 2011 11:10:36 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/02/2011 15:10

Bork wrote:

I see your time problem better now Albummaster. I added the tracks to a couple of albums and it made me realize just how time consuming it is with the vast number of new entries being added.

Albummaster needs help updating all this info if we don't want him to burn out completely, so I would urge everyone who hangs around these forums to spend a few moments a week checking the newly added albums and newly added bands, look it up at a reliable source (wikipedia normally works well for this purpose), and make sure the info is correct and complete. 15 minutes a week by 50 members saves Albummaster almost two hours a day that could be used for things that we can't help with.

yes, very time consuming! I have got a few of my own tools to help make things a bit quicker/easier, but it's still a time-hog. I'd be very grateful for anybody's assistance!

Re: Moderation Suggestion

albummaster — Tue, 2 Aug 2011 11:04:11 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 08/02/2011 15:04

Thanks for all the feedback and to summarise and add my own comments to what people are saying:

Make the moderation area more obvious and put a link into the main navigation
The reason it is hidden at the moment is to make the site a bit more streamlined for new users (a first time user doesn't need to be aware of moderaton and I don't want those pages crawled by the search engines as they are quite expensive in terms of performance). Perhaps we could just show this tab for logged-in members.

At the moment, I accept some people probably aren't aware they can edit data etc. I could update the 'how it works' page to include a section on moderation, and maybe make the admin links more prominent across the site (e.g. suggested on another thread to add mod icons to the 'my chart' page).

I could also add filters to the 'newly added albums/bands' pages so that you can filter to see albums with no artwork, missing year of release etc and allow you to click straight through to the admin page without going to the album page first.

During the add chart process, highlight more obviously the moderation process for new albums/artists
I don't want to make it overly burdensome, while a user is adding a chart to fill in loads of missing data. The prompts need to be subtle and should not be in the way. I think adding something more obvious within the chart confirmation page to link through to the moderation area is needed (there is something already, but maybe this needs to be reworded).

Limit the amount of new albums some people can add
Perhaps new users could be limited to a smaller chart (say, 50 entries) and gain access to a bigger chart once they have reached a certain points threshold.

I think we should only allow users x 'new' albums within their chart. Then, once the chart is submitted, they should not be able to edit their chart to include *another batch* of new albums within a certain time period (say 7 days). (I think some people do this already to build up the database here, but it's completely unnecessary.) I'm not suggesting people can't edit their chart within that time period, just that they can't add any more new albums if they have reached a certain threshold.

I think some kind of throttling is also necessary to prevent 'flooding' of the system (e.g. a user today who added about 50 new albums within their chart which took about four hours to sort out and still isn't finished) (why any of the current 20,000 albums isn't enough to choose from, I don't know 😉 )

Encourage/incentivise more people to edit
I thought originally awarding 'mod points' for successful edits might be a way of incentivising people. So, if member ranks were based on total points (as per the scores on the top-members pages) instead of being based solely on forum posts, perhaps it creates an incentive for people to build up their score (I know it's a very artificial mechanism, and I don't take it totally seriously, but it does provide a good degree of insight into how active somebody is).

There are quite a few members here who don't post on the forums, but are otherwise active on the rest of the site, so I quite like the idea of altering the ranking system to be based on points awarded rather than purely on forum posts

I don't think doing that would adversely affect too many people, as the people that are active on the forum are generally active on the rest of the site as well, but it would boost a few people that are not on the forums and those people should also be entitled to any extra features that might be gained through having a higher rank.

(I'd also like to change the names of the ranks and the icons to bring them up-to-date - but that's a side issue!)

Summary
I don't think we should prevent users adding the albums that they want, as this might artificially affect the albums people select for their charts. I think we just need to put some controls around the process (per above), so that it is not abused and the site becomes easier to look after. For selfish reasons, if I spend all my time on data admin, it means there is less time to do proper development of the features on the the roadmap and that affects the general progress of the site.

I'd like to get the moderation right and spend time on this before continuing with the development of the roadmap. If we have a sound base to build from, then the site will scale really well.

albummaster

Re: Moderation Suggestion

Bork — Tue, 2 Aug 2011 10:48:11 GMT

Author: Bork

Posted: 08/02/2011 14:48

I see your time problem better now Albummaster. I added the tracks to a couple of albums and it made me realize just how time consuming it is with the vast number of new entries being added.

Albummaster needs help updating all this info if we don't want him to burn out completely, so I would urge everyone who hangs around these forums to spend a few moments a week checking the newly added albums and newly added bands, look it up at a reliable source (wikipedia normally works well for this purpose), and make sure the info is correct and complete. 15 minutes a week by 50 members saves Albummaster almost two hours a day that could be used for things that we can't help with.

And thanks again for all your immense efforts oh mighty creator.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

GARY — Tue, 2 Aug 2011 08:07:57 GMT

Author: GARY

Posted: 08/02/2011 12:07

My rank 😁

Thumbnail. Click to enlarge.

Re: Moderation Suggestion

GARY — Tue, 2 Aug 2011 08:02:28 GMT

Author: GARY

Posted: 08/02/2011 12:02

Xavygravy wrote:

The ranking system could probably be made consistent with the current forum ranks (Superstar, Legend, etc.), but rely on the Top Members leaderboard points, rather than just points. That very same forum rank icon could be used next to your name around the site.

You lost me on that one cuz I don't understand.

What is the difference between Top members leaderboard points and points 🤔

What is the difference between the two ❓