The Return of the VC2 Leaderboard!

Hey Plisko,

The minimum of $1,000 for the #1 pod is planned to be the standard going forward.

Steph

Thank you.

Hi Zen,

Yes, the producer whose video is at #1 on the Leaderboard when the countdown ends will be offered the $1000 prize, regardless of whether or not their video is approved for air.

Staff votes will count, the same way they do on Current:News. Current staffers are also part of the Current community, and many are active participants on Current.com.

Steph

I wish I understood better how and why the staff are considered the same as members when it comes to voting. Staff are IN the community but they are an entirely different group with a whole different set of powers, privileges and agendas. I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of someone with the power to choose a pod directly voting for it instead. Does that mean they like it or they don't?

@Plisko-One thing I think is important to remember is that "Current staff" covers a whole lot of territory.

Everyone who works at Current has a staff badge, from producers to broadcast engineers to human resources to developers to online editors to video editors to facilities management.

In reality, only a very small number of staff members are actively involved in picking pods, so for a lot of us voting on a pod is how we share our opinion, just like any community member.

Thank you.

You explain the reasoning well. I guess I'm just not sure why this is any different from when other corporations like MTV, or American Idol, or Disney have contests that involve prizes and voting but they exclude all employees and their families from participation.

Hey Plisko,

We do exclude Current employees from submitting a video to air via the VC2 Leaderboard. While we do have internally produced pods, those go through a separate approval process.

Steph

Thank you again.

I didn't mean to turn this into a debate but I guess I was defining voting as participation.

It's a given that the word "staff" has a broad meaning from the janitor to Al Gore. I think it's also a given that many staff will vote their own opinions independently.

The problem is that, if voting directly effects results, there is no way of knowing which kind of staff person it is for any given vote. Is it staff who are senior members that others want to impress? Is it staff with power to choose videos themselves? Staff with power to use admin tools on the leaderboard results? Is it someone who is office friends with those staff? A family member? Is the vote representing the assistant to someone with a high office rank? Is it representing some other kind of office politics? Is the vote representing an independent idea of what Current should broadcast or is it conformed only to the in house definitions of that format?

It could be any or all of of the above at any given moment. Is it unreasonable to wonder about a conflict of interest?

Well, it is the internet so a certain amount of drama is inevitable. But we're hoping to keep it as drama-free as possible.

Just like Current:News, we have measure in place to minimize gaming. And while some amount self-promotion is going to happen, remember that you can always opt out of sharing emails or block them, if you think it's getting out of hand!

Hey Neghie, That's is funny way to tell the truth. By the way, Thanks for refreshing our memories up!

I sound like a whiner myself don't I?

Not to me! Your comments are right on the point we all have been discussing for the past few months. So, good point! In my case, I'll respect better the voting system when people that vote negative are also invited to the comment box and explain why they are voting negative. If I personally push something down at least I have the courtesy to explain why. Zipping through the board pushing people down does not make this system very reliable in anyways.

A strange sideline to this is the folks who e-mail me other's posts that the sender has commented on, I think, in the hope that I'll recommend what they've said so they'll get picked to be quoted on Current TV.
This has nothing to do with how I chose. I recommend stuff that interests me. Same as how I vote things up.
I only vote down what I find to be truly offensive or just plain stupid.
As for those who chase us around in here to vote down whatever we vote up,...I don't suppose that there's really anything that I can do, other than to report them as suspicious characters.

the complaining was rather legit as there was and still is abuse of the negative vote system that allows people to vote something down with no comment. I have one to two negative votes on a number of my vids that came from an obsessive stalker who's handel has been removed but so far not the damage ie negative votes.

Completely agree with you. I think their is already a website for drama.. Oh wait, yeah, it's called "Myspace"