Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works

[Damage3245]

https://vsbattles.com/threads/sligh...-regarding-original-works.165557/post-6487396

I think that's a reasonable minimum threshold.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for your input.

 

[Agnaa]

I think this is a deceptively tough thing to do....

• Not all internet media has viewer numbers. Most webfiction doesn't, which means we'd either need to find alternate methods to determine notability (and if we have these, why not apply them to verses with viewcounts too?), or delete demonstrably notable verses such as Parahumans (Verse) and Unsong.
• A tricky revision project would be required to implement this. People would need to comb through all Internet Characters and determine whether or not they pass these new standards.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I also think a one-size-fits-all approach is bad. For YouTube (the mainstream of Internet content), it's a pretty easy mark to hit whether people like your content or not and regardless of quality. The sheer amount of bots on the site make it bad enough (or have in the past), but also slight changes to the algorithm can change the influx of views substantially.

For another site, 1 million would be a huge amount, worthy of consideration. I think something like a Newgrounds series being held to that number is at least close to a good standard, but for something like Worm (as mentioned by Agnaa), it would make for a poor standard.

I think we're intuitive people and can figure such things out without a hard-set number, because the alternative is developing many, many different standards for many, many different sites. Agnaa's earlier point about earnings may be tough (he linked an article showing authors making only 25k in a year, but that particular example was a notable award-winning author who was considered an "egregious" case), so I don't know a great single metric to work with.

 

[Antvasima]

So what kind of rule texts would the two of you (and other of our administrators) suggest here, and what is our currently applied rule text regarding this issue?

 

[Agnaa]

So what kind of rule texts would the two of you (and other of our administrators) suggest here, and what is our currently applied rule text regarding this issue?

Current rules for that are here. The relevant core is "It's impractical to set precise limits, but works should be very popular and/or influential. Such as the Interface Series, which has a Vice article, as well as significant fanbase and discussion across multiple platforms."

If you want to set hard limits, I'd want to have more staff discussion on what things should be looked at before typing up new rules.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. No problem.

What do the rest of you think regarding setting up hard limits for different types of "unofficial" media?

 

[DontTalkDT]

Another case that would need separate considerations is works originating from other languages. Reaching 1 million Japanese speakers is a much higher percentage of the viable readership than reaching 1 million English speakers.

Maybe we could set a hard limit just for the sources from which we most commonly have problems regarding notability and leave the rest to case-by-case consideration? I think 1 million is probably fine for something like Youtube.

 

[Tllmbrg]

I really don't see what we are getting from this
Not to mention you'd argue if it needs to be 1 million collective views of the thing as a whole, or 1 million on 1 video and so on

 

[Antvasima]

Another case that would need separate considerations is works originating from other languages. Reaching 1 million Japanese speakers is a much higher percentage of the viable readership than reaching 1 million English speakers.

Maybe we could set a hard limit just for the sources from which we most commonly have problems regarding notability and leave the rest to case-by-case consideration? I think 1 million is probably fine for something like Youtube.

1 million YouTube views for at least one video for a verse seems reasonable to me.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

1 million YouTube views for at least one video for a verse seems reasonable to me.

@DontTalkDT

Are you willing to write a draft for a slightly modified rule text please?

 

[DontTalkDT]

Maybe we could simply add it as a sub-bullet point to the existing rule?
So like:

• [Existing rule]
  • For Youtube series that are not created by bigger companies we generally require that at least one video of the series has at least 1 million views on its own.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that seems perfectly fine to apply.

What do the rest of you think about this? Is it acceptable?

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah sure.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

I have applied the new rule text now:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/index....bmit&type=revision&diff=8617731&oldid=8588620

Is there anything else that we should do here?

 

[DontTalkDT]

I think not? As far as I am concerned this can be closed with the current result.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. So you and others here do not have any suggestions for further minimum requirement specifications regarding other types of personally released works?

 

[Tllmbrg]

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/World_Doctors
Just to check, is this verse fine to stay under the new rules?
It has way lower views than needed but it was co-made by MondoMedia which have made Happy Tree Friends and Dick Figures

 

[Antvasima]

That verse should probably be deleted from our wiki then. Thank you for helping out.

 

[Tllmbrg]

So MondoMedia and stuff in its vein not considered a large enough company for our new rule's purpose?

 

[Agnaa]

Tllm's most interesting point, when bringing this up to me on Discord, was that Happy Tree Friends, another show of theirs, aired on TV.

But so far I haven't been told any further details.

 

[Tllmbrg]

Happy Tree Friends - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The television series was first shown at Comic-Con 2006, while some of the episodes were shown on the website a few weeks prior to the show's television premiere.[citation needed] The television series would premiere on September 25, 2006, at midnight on G4's late-night block, Barbed Wire Biscuit (later renamed Midnight Spank). The web series also aired on the network's animation anthology series; Happy Tree Friends and Friends and G4's Late Night Peepshow.[citation needed].
The Canadian channel Razer (now MTV2) aired the show in syndication with then-sibling television network Citytv,[17] and then OLN. Internationally, the series was broadcast on MTV in Europe and Latin America, and Animax in South Africa.[18]

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I don't think the company's name would really change how we treat each verse, I think. Happy Tree Friends is perfectly acceptable, but if their other works aren't notable, then they aren't notable, simple as.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Bambu here.

 

[Agnaa]

I don't think the company's name would really change how we treat each verse, I think. Happy Tree Friends is perfectly acceptable, but if their other works aren't notable, then they aren't notable, simple as.

idk what you mean by "company's name", Tllm was trying to appeal through the "bigger companies" exception.

fwiw, I think something like this could be a way people read that, but probably isn't what was intended.

 

[Tllmbrg]

Yah I am just trying to understand what is a bigger company under this new rule

MomdoMedia is not some giant of the industry but theyhave had commercially successful shows, so do their other less popular stuff get to stay

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I definitely don't think they would be a bigger company. Although, to your credit, I initially didn't realize the sheer volume of shit they've put out, so perhaps they're larger than initially thought?

idk what you mean by "company's name", Tllm was trying to appeal through the "bigger companies" exception.

fwiw, I think something like this could be a way people read that, but probably isn't what was intended.

(to be clear, I referred to "company name" because I did not reckon this company to fit said rule, and that simply producing one notable production probably didn't suffice to call it a "big company"- having looked at their catalogue, I now see that it's more expansive than previously thought, so while I would still say this isn't a big company, I understand it is more borderline than previously thought)

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

What currently needs to be done here, and what are our conclusions here so far?

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

What currently needs to be done here, and what are our conclusions here so far?

@Mr. Bambu

 

[Agnaa]

The rule was written and applied.

After that, Tllm asked whether an example met the guidelines or not.

Bambu and Ant agreed that it didn't.

If no-one wishes to discuss that further, this could be closed.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

The rule was written and applied.

After that, Tllm asked whether an example met the guidelines or not.

Bambu and Ant agreed that it didn't.

If no-one wishes to discuss that further, this could be closed.

@Antvasima

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will do so. Thank you to everybody who helped out here.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. So you and others here do not have any suggestions for further minimum requirement specifications regarding other types of personally released works?

Never mind. We still seem to need to handle this issue regarding works not released via YouTube. My apologies.

 

[Agnaa]

The current rule extends to sites that have viewcounts which seem comparable to YouTube's.

As discussed earlier, other methods of engagement (like likes/favourites/comments) vary too much to be particularly useful.

Only other option I can really think of is using money earned. I'd be pretty lenient and say earning $10,000 in sales in at least one year of operation should be enough.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the information.

What about the number of views for original text stories released online?

 

[Agnaa]

We'd default to 1 million until we see evidence that their viewcounts are over/under-represented compared to YouTube.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Is that made clear in our currently written rules?

We probably need to make it clear that the views for each chapter of a story should not be added to each other, and that we should only count the total number of visitors.

 

[Agnaa]

I think both of those are already clear in the rules:

For content published on YouTube, or online content for which one can expect similar viewer numbers to be equally reasonable to reach, we require that at least one entry in the canon has at least 1 million views on its own. This doesn't apply for entries created by bigger companies and for entries for which no viewer numbers can be determined. The former are generally allowed, while for the latter, case-by-case consideration is required.