Ranking

[owyn]

First. Congrats on clearing the backlog, surviving the disk crash, and implementing a more secure voting method.

Now, a question and possible suggestion.

The question. It appears that ranking is strictly based on current month votes. Is this correct?

The suggestion. Change ranking to use a computed metric.

For example, Votes for ranking could be Current Month Votes + 10% of Votes To Date.

Any algorythm should use Current Month Votes at unity to simplify the count vote update procedure. The adjustment could be calculated at the same time as the current month votes as cleared.

The advantage of adding/using a computed metric are:
-You could fine tune the metric monthly
-Ranks at beginning of a month would reflect historical trends
-Simple selects

Comments?

[Ian]

Keep it how it is... monthly voting allows new podcasts to shine. Giving extra credit for being around longer just keeps the older, more popular shows at the top.

Ferf, you'll never make everyone happy with any voting system, but I think its current form is about as good as it can get.

[Version3]

I agree with Ian... new podcasts would never have a chace if history is introduced into the equation. I think weighted with the previous month only might help settle some of the surges that occur. You'd have to have more devoted listeners/noters to really get up there.

Either way, it won't stop some podcasters from inflating their votes with a few dialup accounts, and a single domain completely at their disposal.

That's okay though, I intend to get more votes by having listeners. Others do it this way, and it's done very well for them.

[thumper369]

Ferf, you'll never make everyone happy with any voting system, but I think its current form is about as good as it can get.

Yes I like the way it is. BTW if you have not heard it recently

THANK YOU!!! for all you are doing. We really apreciate your hard work.

[gavin]

I second Thumper's thank you!!

The current system would certainly give newer, lesser-known podcasts (like mine!) the chance to get noticed, but what about a sliding 30-day ranking system? That way the top podcasts from the past 30 days would be ranked, and the ranking data would expire at the end of the 30-day cycle? That way everything cycles through, the popular podcasts are represented, but new and small shows also can be represented...

Did that make sense?

[Craig]

Did some posts get wiped out again, or is this a duplicate topic? I could swear I posted already saying that I agreed with the sliding 30 day idea.

Craig

[Ian]

I don't care for the sliding scale, there's not as much immediate gratification, or as much of a sense of competition.

[alissa]

i'm just starting out. so i don't know anything. but i'm starting to get the impression that it's almost better to be a middle of the road unnoticed podcast. because there's a lot of drama at the top. what if someone started a podcast called 'f*^& alissa' i might start crying. maybe i should move to some island in the middle of nowhere with a socialist economy...

[garybibb]

Alissa don't cry, dry your eye. . .

[alissa]

no tears from me.

as long as i stay below 50. :)

[speechless]

What's the point of the voting thing? We just want to see which casts have the most listeners? That's all it seems to really counts. I mean, I wasn't even aware that I had *any* votes. I was never notified, so unless I'm watching it, I'd never know.

Is the top fifty list designed to show websurfers which podcasts have a lot of listeners? It's doing a good job of that. So I guess it's useful...sort of. (No offense Ferf.)

One other tool I'd like to see is a good method for accepting and tabulating quality scores *with reviews*. Kind of "grade the content" on a scale of one to ten and write a review of why you think that. That would be useful to me for finding new podcasts to listen to.

[yaz]

oh wow! bibb came out from under the bed...homo...the voting works and is always gonna be tampered with somehow...so don't even go nuts with it ferf...

[Ian]

One other tool I'd like to see is a good method for accepting and tabulating quality scores *with reviews*. Kind of "grade the content" on a scale of one to ten and write a review of why you think that. That would be useful to me for finding new podcasts to listen to.

The whole grading content idea was here a few months ago and had a bit of a controversey attached to it. It gives haters too much of an opportunity to be mean.

[notyourusualbollocks]

Why don't we just mimick terrestrial radio and set up some kind of payola ranking system? Much like an auction, you bid cash for the highest ranking. Chris would love it. ;)

MK

[Craig]

Why don't we just mimick terrestrial radio and set up some kind of payola ranking system? Much like an auction, you bid cash for the highest ranking. Chris would love it. ;)
I actually suggest something like this to Chris back when he was trying to figure out a solution the the voting problems...a pay for each vote system. I was only half joking. He deserves the money.

Craig

[owyn]

Well I guess that suggestion did not fly.

Thinking about it, the most important vote/ranking for me is a recommendation from a podcast that I already like.

I have stayed subscribed to most of the recommended sites and maybe 50% of top 10 sites. Just my personal tastes kicking in, but, that is the beauty of podcasting. Very personal listening.

After that the most significant source of new podcasts is being able to search directories by keyword.

[jeffoest]

Along the lines of recommendations....

How about an alternative ranking (that gets equal exposure as the current list). This additional ranking would be based on podcasters choices - sort of akin to the Golden Globes (I think that's the one) where podcasters themselves vote for the best. Monthly, subscribed podcasters could pick their favorite 10 podcasts and the results would be compiled into another top 50 list.

Strictly as a listener, I would LOVE a list like this.

What do you guys think?

[debategod]

I've got another suggestion.

Split the rankings into 2 seperate polls and promote them equally. One poll would only have amatuer podcasts and the other would have professional ones.

I know the line between the 2 can be blurry and subjectional but something should be done to combat the big name personalities that come onto the scene and dominate the rankings.

For example on the amatuer side, I would have:
Dawn and Drew, Catholic Insider, EarthCore, Coverville, Bitterest Pill, ...
basically anything home based or at least who had no fame before podcasting.

In the professional pole, I would have:
this WEEK in TECH, Rachel Maddow, Free Talk Live, ...
basically any traditional radio shows. I also think celebrities and churches would fall in this catagory.

This would keep visible the little guys who put out really good shows.

Is this possible? What does anyone think about this?

[Insomnia Radio]

I would prefer something like the "Podcaster Recommendations" List

When we start differentiating between amatuer and professional, that will cause more debate and more angry people...

For example, you listed Coverville as amatuer, when in fact it's as good as anything on the radio and I would call it professional...

the whole ranking thing is tricky. It's a popularity contest, and only for those who decide to push it.

There has to be some good middle ground though. I think if Chris is listening, and we expand on these ideas, something great might come from it.

[Craig]

Patience, as they say, is a virtue!

Craig

[Insomnia Radio]

Patience, as they say, is a virtue!

Why yes it is Craig ;-)
I bet some cool things are in store for Podcast Alley

[ferg]

Along the lines of recommendations....

How about an alternative ranking (that gets equal exposure as the current list). This additional ranking would be based on podcasters choices - sort of akin to the Golden Globes (I think that's the one) where podcasters themselves vote for the best. Monthly, subscribed podcasters could pick their favorite 10 podcasts and the results would be compiled into another top 50 list.

Strictly as a listener, I would LOVE a list like this.

What do you guys think?

I like the idea, but it won't help me, so....

[docsnavely]

I'm ust happy I can vote for more than one podcast! If I only got one vote, I would be up in arms about who to give it to. It's all working ok for now. Why change it?