Quality Vs Quantity

QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 12:19
Last edited 12/10/2015 - 12:45 by 1 other user

Interesting debate last night in the link below (before it degenerated into the inevitable insults and anonymous slander that the internet affords) stemming from the amount of previously posted bargains being rehashed or reinvented in different iterations (in this case it was a new way to get a month free Netflix trial, which has obviously being available since its launch…other examples that spring to mind come from fast food restaurants etc)

It also follows that posts linked to referral credits and even cutting and pasting of spam type emails (think COTD, Kogan, Surfstich and Dick Smith) may be posted as deals with the sole intention of either generating monetary rewards via store credits or getting the post / vote count up in the hope to snare on of Ozbargains elusive monthlhy prizes.

If you can be bothered uncollapsing the comments, its worth a read - if not to aid in thought on the quantity vs quality debate then only for a laugh - https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/214818

The mods rightly shut it down for getting off topic as per user guidelines and suggested it move to the forums - so here it is….do you feel the quantity of posts that may exist for reasons other than altruism affect the overall quality of the deals on this site?

In simpler terms, do you prefer more to be deals posted, or fewer deals of higher standard?

Mod: While discussion in general terms is fine let's keep accusations and personal attacks out of this thread.

Site Discussion

closed Comments

  • spackbace on 12/10/2015 - 12:32
    +9

    Everyone's standards are different, everyone values deals differently. I know some, maybe even close to half, of the deals I post won't benefit the masses and won't get >100 votes, but that's not to say it's not a good deal.

    I'll be upfront and say I'm not a fan of re-hashing deals from >6 months ago, to front page it again. That's just lazy and this site needs a wiki page of older, longterm deals that are always searchable. Some way of having a list of deals, maybe just divided into categories, that are where the good deals go. If they expire, delete the listing. Arrange the lists by votes they received. That will mean that no-one misses out on a good deal, new users to the site can go through the list and get the 'best of the best' that's available to them right now.

    I know TA gets slammed for his post count, (and OP I know you defended him last night), but it's crazy the amount of time that goes into some of those posts. Work out the yearly amount from prizes, and it's barely $3/day. Not exactly a big return.

    • neil on 12/10/2015 - 12:38
      +5

      I'll be upfront and say I'm not a fan of re-hashing deals from >6 months ago, to front page it again. That's just lazy and this site needs a wiki page of older, longterm deals that are always searchable.

      Long Running Deals

      • spackbace on 12/10/2015 - 12:41

        I know, but under current duplicate rules, nowhere does it say if it's marked as longrunning does it count as a dupe:

        Duplicates

        Don't post duplicates (deals that are already on the site). Please search OzBargain before posting.

        Exceptions:

        The original deal is older than one month, and was expired or sold out between then and now.
        The original deal is active but older than 6 months.
        The duplicate gains an excessive amount of positive votes (50+) and reaches the front page.
        The original deal is a list of multiple items and the item is not contained in the title of the original deal. Related forum discussion.
        Note if the expiry date is not specified on a deal post, our system will automatically expire the deal after 45 days (90 days for freebies). It is the posters responsibility to set an expiry date or report the deal to have it not auto expire.

        Could do without people just re-posting popular deals every 6 months :/

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 12:44

          nowhere does it say if it's marked as longrunning does it count as a dupe

          It's not mentioned because it doesn't. Marking it as Long Expiry serves to remove the default auto-expiry of deals (45 days).

        • spackbace on 12/10/2015 - 12:46
          +1

          @neil:

          I know, but that's my issue, and was going along with the discussion of popular deals getting rehashed to be popular again. No need if there's a 'hall of fame' so to speak, that's easy to find.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 12:59

          @Spackbace:

          I would agree with that view, however the majority of users continue to vote up the "rehashed" deals. Taking that as community feedback, it seems people do want to see these deals again. It's also part of why our duplicate guidelines are so intricate.

          At the end of the day, people would rather see a good deal than miss it because they didn't see the one 6 months ago or it was only mentioned in a description of a deal.

        • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 15:46
          +1

          @neil: The underlying issue, is that 20 votes is pretty small when you think about. How can you be assured that a deal isn't only getting up voted by a small minority that are fans or driven by monetary agenda?

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:50
          +1

          @gamechanger: yes this, exactly this - for instance, in the debate that occured last night, one user was admittedly sitting around with a bunch of friends while on ozbargain - if they all have accounts, and are all online with their individual mobiles, then the can effectively upvote any given deal without any trace of IP addresss etc so the only way to police this kind of fraudulant behaviour would be too increase the amount of votes to hit the front page

        • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 15:53
          +2

          @pointless comment: Very concerning and I'm sure there have being deals in the past where the user profited via paid advertisement. I'm sure many marketers have approached some of the quantity posters to get their offer fast tracked to the front page.

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:54

          @gamechanger: very concerning indeed - i did not even think of this.

        • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 15:57
          +2

          @pointless comment: Yep very common practice on social media- Instagram, Facebook and Youtube. And given the nature of OZb it makes these deals very easy to happen.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 15:59

          @gamechanger:

          How can you be assured that a deal isn't only getting up voted by a small minority that are fans…

          Fans of what?

          Looking at the Long Expiry deals, random picks:

          driven by monetary agenda?

          Votes are audited and we are consistently banning stores & accounts for fraudulent voting. Now of course without going through bank accounts, we are limited to our investigations. :)

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:59

          @gamechanger: very concerning ideed

        • ShamelessBargains on 12/10/2015 - 16:03
          +1

          @neil: I'm interested to know how you can ban accounts for fraudulent voting. Is it simply someone making a second account on the same IP and upvoting their own deals or something more complex?

        • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 16:06
          +1

          @neil: One of the big deal posters, claimed to have a large fan base. I would assume its made up of friends up voting and users who admire the quantity poster and up vote regardless of seeing if its a bargain.

          Its great to see that votes are audited, but I would assume if an account has being a member for a long period and contributes they wouldn't be picked up as suspicious?

          I also understand from a quality assurance stance, it won't be always possible to keep a high standard as it would involve lots of time.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 16:12

          where the user profited via paid advertisement.

          If users are being paid to post then they need to mark themselves as associated. As well, as the system flagging unusual activity, we also look at who is posting what. Obviously not foolproof but it is something we are on the lookout for.

          then the can effectively upvote any given deal without any trace of IP addresss etc so the only way to police this kind of fraudulant behaviour would be too increase the amount of votes to hit the front page

          IP addresses are just one variable we take into account. We can't reveal the secret source but let's just say that people shouldn't be worried about the government having our metadata as much of it is already public. :(

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 16:23

          I'm interested to know how you can ban accounts for fraudulent voting. Is it simply someone making a second account on the same IP and upvoting their own deals or something more complex?

          More complex.

          One of the big deal posters, claimed to have a large fan base. I would assume its made up of friends up voting and users who admire the quantity poster and up vote regardless of seeing if its a bargain.

          Sorry, the mind reading function has not been implemented. :)

          I also understand from a quality assurance stance, it won't be always possible to keep a high standard as it would involve lots of time.

          OzBargain has moderators working 24 hours a day. Most of the time when I go to a moderation issue, it is already been solved. We count reports (avg 1 every 20 minutes) and why posts are removed so we can act accordingly. I think with 6 moderators we are probably fielding the moderation issues at appropriate levels. See September stats.

        • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 16:33

          @neil: I noticed 20 accounts where for sockpuppeting, where these completely different people or mainly the same person?

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 16:37
          -2

          @neil:

          Sorry, the mind reading function has not been implemented. :)

          Best comment on page so far

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 16:42

          @gamechanger:

          I noticed 20 accounts where for sockpuppeting, where these completely different people or mainly the same person?

          20 different deals.

        • ShamelessBargains on 12/10/2015 - 16:53
          +1

          @neil: Geez didn't realise sockpuppeting was so widespread. Has it always been this bad or has it gotten worse with the increased ozbargainer community?

        • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 21:46

          @ShamelessBargains: probably got more worse. For many stores free advertising and instant sales it's hard to resist making fake accounts.

        • ShamelessBargains on 12/10/2015 - 21:51
          +2

          @gamechanger: Yeah luckily the majority of stores don't go down that path. Even though they are easy to spot with their eBay sales off a site no one has heard of with a fake discount saving.

          Geez really puts into perspective all the work behind the scenes the staff team put into keeping the site legit and fantastic. It really is impressive how Scotty built this site from scratch to amass an incredible amount of users per month. Whats the setup like for a site of this scale?

        • Moderatorneil on 13/10/2015 - 00:34

          It fluctuates. To the point someone made before, people think OzBargain is like Twitter, Facebook etc and just click away. However, we've also put red flags and warnings everywhere to warn users before the astroturf/sockpuppet. Anyway, it will always happen. We get people contacting us every day asking where their products they bought from us are or how to fix x product.


          Year Month  Removed

2014    1   17
2014    2   27
2014    3   22
2014    4   31
2014    5   33
2014    6   52
2014    7   38
2014    8   24
2014    9   30
2014    10  26
2014    11  18
2014    12  34
2015    1   13
2015    2   15
2015    3   16
2015    4   24
2015    5   22
2015    6   19
2015    7   20
2015    8   34
2015    9   20
2015    10  3
        • GameChanger on 13/10/2015 - 00:43

          @neil: Thanks for this statistics, a considerable amount of fake accounts!

    • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 12:41

      All good points….what do you reckon of a similar type of arrangement for 'current promotions' to keep them from the front page? something like this would help to negate the cut and pasting of spam email from DSE, Kogan COTD etc

      • spackbace on 12/10/2015 - 12:45
        +1

        If the community wants to put it on the front page, so be it! During Ebay sales (for example), see many people posting what they think is a deal, only to see it get <5 votes because it is average.

        Like with the group buy deals, I was one of the advocaters for the OP's referral link not showing up straight away. Let the community decide it's a deal, then they get rewarded from it.

        Side note, maybe the vote count required for front page gets indexed each year, as the number of users keeps increasing. Could say 15 votes is 'too easy' sometimes these days.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 12:50

          Could say 15 votes is 'too easy' sometimes these days.

          It's 20 votes

          Rule of thumb is basically 2 days worth of deals but here are the stats:

          Year Deals (not Front Page) Front Page Deals Vote Average
          2011 11590 3641 16
          2012 15148 3851 16.31
          2013 21043 5084 17.63
          2014 22975 5989 20.94

          graph

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:08

          @neil: hi neil, just wondering why this deal hit the front page on 15 votes at the time of wroting of course

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/214907

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 15:15

          @pointless comment:

          From the FAQ:

          I've seen deals on the front page with less than 20 votes. Why?

          Hot Deals Can Reach the Front Page without Reaching Minimum Votes

          We want to bring deals that gain enough momentum, i.e. getting many votes within a short period of time, to rise to the front page even when it has not yet reached the minimum votes (20). Because of the number of deals getting posted everyday, some of really good deals got pushed to page 2 of “New Deals” page within 2-3 hours without gaining sufficient votes. When you are on the 2nd page of “New Deals”, you are not likely to be graced by many users so they might never reach front page…

          So we are now using a simple algorithm to determine whether a deal will be on the front page.

          let v = positive votes - negative votes (total number of votes). let m = minimum votes (default=20)

          A deal will be on the front page if

          v >= m, or
v >= m /2 + (current time - deal posting time) / rate

          Currently rate is that for every 30 minutes, new deals need one more vote above m /2 to be on the front page. Due to the way rounding works, a deal needs

          Only 11 votes to be on the front page within the first 30 minutes
12 votes if it has been posted for more than 30 minutes but less than an hour
13 votes if more than an hour but less than 1 1/2 hours
14 votes if …

          m would be different if you have changed your front page minimum votes, but basically that's how it works behind the scene to bring recently posted deals to the front page even when it does not have enough votes.

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:21
          +1

          @neil: was not aware of that, thanks for clarifying - up until today i did not even know that 20 was the magic number to hit the front page!

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:40

          Incidentally, how many comments does it take for a forum post to hit the front page?

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:58

          @pointless comment: i just noticed that a forum post with 38 comments is on the front page….for instance, if this thread got to 39, would it then supersede it?

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 16:00

          @pointless comment:

          Formula for Hot Discussion Topics is:

          • Forum threads with the most comments over the last 2 days
          • Threads have to be created less than 7 days ago
        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 16:02

          @neil: thanks again Neil, you have been most helpful today….hope it alleviates some of the concrens people are having on this thread

        • silverrat23 on 12/10/2015 - 17:55
          +1

          @neil:

          H…how did you link an image into the post itself?!?

        • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 19:02

          @silverrat23:

          Only available to mods :). You used to be able to link images in deals however users kept breaking the site by linking enormous images.

      • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 12:47

        Not sure I understand what you mean. If you don't want to see deals from DSE, Kogan or CatchoftheDay you can use the Hide feature.

        • Go to a Dick Smith deal
        • Hit Hide
        • Check Hide deals from store Dick Smith Electronics (DSE)
        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:19

          Yes, i underetand of the hiding feature… I am actually questioning the validity of the existence of these types of posts in the first place… Let me put it this way, if a deal is sourced from a typical spam email, then is the posting of the deal on ozbargain - often by a simple cut and paste - not in itself inherently spam?

        • neil on 12/10/2015 - 15:39

          @pointless comment:

          I don't understand why sourcing a deal from email would mean SPAM? I found out they were giving out free ice cream via the last Yelp email so that means its SPAM?

        • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 15:44
          -3

          @neil: haha , yes i guess the definition of SPAM is in the eye of the beholder… But i am thinking more along the lines of COTD / DSE / Kogan types of mass database emails - most would define these as SPAM.

          And free is always a deal regardless - SPAM or not !

  • Moderatorneil on 12/10/2015 - 12:35

    While discussion in general terms is fine let's keep accusations and personal attacks out of this thread.

  • dasher86 on 12/10/2015 - 12:48
    +1

    I think all deals have their place.
    I prefer quality over quantity myself, however there is nothing wrong with quantity deals as they highlight deals that could have been previously missed by other people. That is as long as they fulfill the deal guidelines.
    The referral and monetary reward generation needs to be looked at separately as an issue; the deal guidelines may also be required to be looked at.

    • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 12:53

      The referral and monetary reward generation needs to be looked at separately

      I like Spackbace's idea of increasing vote threshold to solve this - It seems is too easy to get in the front page with a cut and paste of a spam email from say COTD with an embedded referral credit.

      • spackbace on 12/10/2015 - 12:56
        +1

        I like Spackbace's idea of increasing vote threshold to solve this

        It's already up and running, a post needs a vote count of 5 or higher before the OP's referral link shows at the bottom of it :) Before that it's just random (unless of course they include it in the deal post itself)

  • nocure on 12/10/2015 - 13:45
    +3

    My ten cents worth…last night's display of disrespect was disgraceful.

    • pyramid on 12/10/2015 - 13:52

      +1c.

    • rompastompa on 12/10/2015 - 13:53
      +8

      Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
      The thing about Arsenal is, they always try and walk it in!

    • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 14:09
      +4

      Yep, sure was. Someone just PMd me to notify that one of the particpants has been placed in the penalty box, FYI

      • djones145 on 12/10/2015 - 14:20
        +5

        it was a very weird, but entertaining!

    • gimli on 12/10/2015 - 16:27
      +1

      happens when you drink too much that's why I always protest about these alcohol deals on ozbargain

      • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 16:35
        +3

        Yes , possibly, if i recall correctly one of the participants in the debate did admit to drinking at the time, so maybe you do have a point.

        Dont drink and post people!

  • djones145 on 12/10/2015 - 14:22
    +1

    good balance between the two is good

    you need the monetary incentive so that people place deals up
    and hopefully the voting will make sure only good deals win the incentive!

    • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 14:26
      +5

      I think the vast majority post deals without any thought of the monetary incentive.

      there are only a handful of people with enough motivation and inclination (and of course time) to post deals en masse.

      And clearly TA has everyone else covered on those three terms.

      so the rest of us just throw up a deal whenever we have time or come across one deemed worthy for the sheer goodwill of it.

    • ShamelessBargains on 12/10/2015 - 16:00
      +6

      I don't think the monetary incentive is there anymore. It's pretty much the same people winning the monthly contest every month which takes out the incentive for others to try.

      What I don't agree with is these store rep deals hidden behind users. The store reps should just be posting them or the user should be associated so Ozbargainers know this is not just a great deal they have come across.

      I didn't agree with the behaviour in that thread last night especially since it was Mental Illness week last week. Attacking people on a deal posting site over the values and beliefs is a low act as the person being attacked could take it to heart.

      I probably went a bit overboard too with some of my statements last night but I strongly believe there is a conflict of interest between the store rep and Ozbargain user and a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

      • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 16:03

        Yes very true, well said. People need to remember this, no matter how angry or upset they get

  • [Deactivated] on 12/10/2015 - 22:10
    -7

    Didn't read the whole thread but what's with the goading though?

    pointless comment on 11/10/2015 - 16:30 new ¶
    This isnt a deal - its standard for new sign ups.
    No monthly prize for you!

    /

    pointless comment on 11/10/2015 - 16:48 new ¶
    He tries hard this guy, but never gets the prize

    /

    pointless comment on 11/10/2015 - 17:24 new
    (…)
    so really you are not as great as you seem to think, and i for one am glad that you dont get the monthly prizes - especially with your bad attitude, you simply dont deserve it!

    Perhaps it is you who needs to "get over yourself dude"

    /

    In this OP:

    If you can be bothered uncollapsing the comments, its worth a read - if not to aid in thought on the quantity vs quality debate then only for a laugh

    What was so funny? o.O

    • GameChanger on 12/10/2015 - 22:32
      +4

      Why don't you read the whole thread to gain context, instead of making claims.

      • [Deactivated] on 12/10/2015 - 23:41
        -5

        I've read the whole thread. Quite a few comments from the OP have been unpublished and without those comments, it just looks like the 2 of you were bullying him, hence my question.

        • GameChanger on 13/10/2015 - 00:24
          +2

          I don't understand how having a discussion the validity of the deal, is considered 'bullying'. It has reached a stage where posting deal for the sake of it, had to be discussed.

    • QuickToThePointless on 12/10/2015 - 22:45

      What was so funny?

      "only for a laugh" - its just an expression, not to be taken literally.

      Your post seems a bit biased to me - you admittedly did not read the whole thing, yet you are taking snippets of it out of context - maybe you are the one who is goading me?

      • [Deactivated] on 12/10/2015 - 23:47
        -2

        you are the one who is goading me?

        Not at all. Gd night.

  • Ughhh on 13/10/2015 - 00:27
    +5

    hubbly bubbly while we laugh at your silly replies.

    Tbh, if I went to a gathering/party and that was the highlight of the event…I would have to be so heavily intoxicated so that I forget how depressing the night was.

    On the other hand. Quality over quantity, otherwise we might as well post every single catalogue as a deal.

  • Moderatorneil on 13/10/2015 - 00:48

    Making malicious comments towards a person, such as knowingly spreading false information about what someone did or didn't do is a form of personal attack. It is disrespectful and not about the subject at hand.

    Please stay on topic

  • Moderatorneil on 13/10/2015 - 01:05

    While there was some productive discussion in this thread, OzBargain is not a place to air your dirty laundry about other users. Thread closed.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join