Has anybody else noticed a spike in duplicates? Does anyone have any theories as to why this is happening?
I have no idea why but it bothers me somehow.. Something seems amiss.
Or am I just imagining it?
Why is there a spike in duplicates?
Lsevenohfive on 23/02/2013 - 09:49
Comments
I"d say more people joining the site, and therefore more people posting. As a result, possible more duplicates
I"d say more people joining the site, and therefore more people posting. As a result, possible more duplicates
I"d say more people joining the site, and therefore more people posting. As a result, possible more duplicates
Has anybody else noticed a spike in duplicates? Does anyone have any theories as to why this is happening?
I have no idea why but it bothers me somehow.. Something seems amiss.
Or am I just imagining it?
people don't search? and if they do search then because of the stupid default search sort method on this site. it sorts by most popular deals rather than most recent. it happily shows results from half a year ago before results from yesterday which might be buried well down the list.
Here are some raw stats:
Deals reported for duplicates (unique, not total reports)
2012 10 126 2012 11 137 2012 12 146 2013 1 205One of the things that was proposed was automated removal. The problem is that 1. People will game the system if automatic removals happen 2. While most of the duplicates are duplicate, a good deal aren't and the reports are incorrect 3. Some of the duplicate guidelines are complex (supermarket deals have different rules)
So we can only improve things on the submission end. Users should search or check the deals by store before posting. When you fill out the fields in the submission, the system pulls up likely duplicate especially if the link is the same. When a duplicate is detected, there is a checkbox to acknolege that this isn't a duplicate. There are also reminders on the side of the submission page to prevent duplicates. Even after all that, people still submit duplicates. Sigh.
IMO, Internet users are lazy when it comes to reading. How many people here have signed up for a site and read all the T & C's before clicking accepting? I certainly don't. Even the art of blogging is dying, replaced with short messages via Facebook & Twitter. Further with Pinterest & Instagram, there is rarely even words attached. Content overload + shorter attention spans, and we are asking people to add a lot of information correctly in the submission page. Easy for those who have done it before but probably tricky for new users.
There will be some further UI changes to assist users but the majority of duplicates will still have to be sorted by moderators.
We have lots of deals which are gray areas. People who list a few things in one deal, then someone else posts an individual item by itself. The "few things" post gets barely and votes while the individual gets lots. Both items mentioned in the title.
Example: Few things mentioning
$20 printer in titlecamera 4 votes
Individual deal mentioning$20 printer13 votesWe get chastised for leaving a popular deal that's a duplicate and chastised for removing a popular deal. We can only apply guidelines when there is some logic to behavior.
OK, so that's it in a nutshell. ;)
EDIT: Camera not printer.
There is absolutely no mention of a $20 printer in this deal http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/94772 . It's the camera deal which has been duplicated in this case.
The title of these deals (maximum of once) should be left with a link going back to the original deal (ie http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/94772 )
Sorry, I meant camera deal.
Someone also posted the printer deal individually, we removed, and had users say that it should be left published..
The title of these deals (maximum of once) should be left with a link going back to the original deal (ie http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/94772 )
You are saying unpublish the front page deal with a link to original? or changing the title?
Unpublish the front page deal, leaving only the title, so people are aware of the deal, and when they click on this it will take them to the original posting.
I would imagine then with the direct link recorded in the system it would help prevent further duplicates because the next poster would be warned about the existing link.
So different from the way current unpublished deals are done? Interesting idea. That will need to be a new feature.
@unity1
Great idea and thanks for that.
I just gave up on this matter.
Have a good dayDefinitely need a way to highlight a deal regardless of whether or not it has been mentioned in a previous post. Something of real interest can be lost amongst others when in a list but highlighting, even if it has been mentioned previously needs to be taken in to consideration. In my opinion ozbargain should accommodate exceptions. It's easy to look over a post full of "deals", a +ve individual product not so.
ozbargain should accommodate exceptions
The problem is we need to act as consistent as possible. theearth wants the duplicate removed, there were those who voted who wanted the deal, and unik wants the title with a link. At the end of the day, we need to do what's best for the community (or at least the majority).
So perhaps we can apply the supermarket duplicate rules to all deals.
The original deal is a long list of
supermarketitems and the item is not contained in the title or first line of the deal.So the camera deal which is mentioned in this list of deals but not in the title or first line would stay published.
Whereas the printer deal, as it is mentioned in the title, would be unpublished.
Definitely need to be consistent otherwise all hell will break loose. Although somehow regardless of whether an individual deal has been mentioned previously, if the new post/deal published is as/more popular it should stay front page. If it's directly linked to OP is another matter.
Edit: need to disregard egos and recognition imo. It's about the bargains and need to spread the idea of you get what you pay for and realisation of why rrp is as high as it is.
Although somehow regardless of whether an individual deal has been mentioned previously, if the new post/deal published is as/more popular it should stay front page. If it's directly linked to OP is another matter.
That's a bit tricky. Depending on the time of the posting, it could be reported/removed with say only 1 vote cast. If it's already on the front page, well that would apply.
I've put up for discussion extending the supermarket deals guideline with the moderators and any other ideas to help with the duplicate issue.
OK, the new guideline has been approved.
Unpublish the front page deal, leaving only the title, so people are aware of the deal, and when they click on this it will take them to the original posting.
hasn't this good idea been suggested somewhere else before?
Not everyone checks Ozbargain 24/7 and sometimes deals are posted in advance before they start and/or get buried away (i.e. not front page) where no one will ever see them.
Example - I posted a deal for free burritos in Perth last month, only to have it removed because someone had posted it up 2 weeks before the deal was live. Another 2 people posted the same deal that day and were also removed as duplicates.
Problem? Obviously no one is going to go searching for free burritos from two weeks ago if they don't even know it's on (the original post didn't even make the front page) - the opportunity for the deal is lost, buried away forever.
I've seen this happen before to other deals and my suggestion is maybe have a section where "active deals for today" are shown. Also, fix the stupid search function already so it sorts by posting date by default (it's like a few lines of code at most to fix it guys, cmon). That would make it a lot easier for (lazy?) people to search for duplicates.
my suggestion is maybe have a section where "active deals for today" are shown.
Deals starting today
Deals ending today
Set a reminder
Also, you can let one of the mods or myself know about a deal and we can sticky, put in the frontpage news, newsletter, FB etc. etc.
Lots of ways to get messages out but posting the same thing over and over is not one of them.Also, fix the stupid search function already so it sorts by posting date by default (it's like a few lines of code at most to fix it guys, cmon >_>)
The goal at the moment is to move to a different search backend that is faster — probably next year. We probably won't update the existing search.
Deals starting today
Deals ending todayon the rhs of the front page, rather than listing the 15 newest deals, what about instead having something like the 10 newest deals, top 5 deals ending today, top 5 deals starting tomorrow/soon?
Good suggestion!
no worries :)
not sure if it's better to have 'deals ending' appear above 'new deals' for easier last minute shopping?
and 5 newest instead of 10 for better layout so can see all 3 categories at once?
ie.
top 5 deals ending today/tomorrow/next 24hrs
newest 5 deals posted
top 5 deals starting tomorrow/soon/next 24hrsI'd probably filter out unpopular deals for starting/expiring, like the 2 for 1 choir deal. Maybe anything under say 10 votes.
top 5 = 5 most popular/voted :)
I"d say more people joining the site, and therefore more people posting. As a result, possible more duplicates