You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: MinnowBooster : Abuse Cases Defined
It is not hard to write a few words. If you post a video without any text to it, that is bad. If you write why you did it, what you learned while doing it etc. Then that could be enough. It all depends on the context.
That (art, well taken photography, video) is double the work (editing, thinking of shot, preparation etc., forget about art made of hours of work), in some cases triple/xxx work. A picture/art (quality picture off course) is better than thousand words, a video is better than thousand pictures (i.e. interestingly, videos are made of spoken words and pictures/frames). This is quite absurd to force someone to write 150 words if the content is appropriate and medium is different (e.g. consider Youtube). I would request @minnowbooster to consider these forms of works to be relieved from their TOS.
For blogs that is quite appropriate.
I think this depends on context and if the art is made by you and provably so. We are currently discussing this and will get back to it in a bit.
There will always have to be some discretion involved in the definition of abuse. Votes are subjective proof of work, and the abuse of votes is also subjective. An objective definition will always have some corner cases that allow things that are abusive in spirit and disallow things that are not abusive in spirit.
I very much appreciate that you guys are taking responsibility for your large voting power though. For me it is all about responsibility, even when a vote is sold (I delegate my SP out for a price, but I try to do that responsibly as well).
Definitely. It will always have corner cases and discussion.
We can only say: If your content is really good then you will most likely not have a problem. And if your content is on the edge of being good, then maybe you can improve?
We listen to all feedback and want to include the community in this :)
150 words is more than a 'few'. Better to consider lowering the number required.