Comments (8)
TopDudeMan  +   538d ago
Awesome. I'll put this article on my "Top ten articles about top ten lists" list. ;D
Menashe  +   538d ago
I agree with the main notion of what you just said. Top Ten Lists used to be interesting because they were infrequent and well-written. Now, they are:

1) Mostly common knowledge or super-obscure
2) Too frequent.
3) Exploitative.

The two sites that have caused this Top Ten proliferation are N4G and Zergnet. Most smaller sites these days are part of the Zergnet network and basically, the only articles that get accepted into their system are Top Ten lists.
MidnytRain  +   536d ago
Sorry, bro. Great idea and all, but, for the most part, the admins ignore any suggestions users make. You'll be neither the first nor the last to complain. Aside from some site redesigns, it's been the same for years. N4G never really changes. Your nobility is nice to see, though.
Godmars290  +   535d ago
I'm not asking the admins - I'm asking the people who's votes approve stories.

Check under the link to the actual article which has the submitting site's address. You can both rate the quality of the story as well as the site itself. Vote it down enough and the site will effectively be banned.

If the admins don't remove the option if such a thing becomes widely used. Could as well offer something like editing descriptions to let the site, or those submitting stories from it, why submissions from it are no longer being taken.
MidnytRain  +   535d ago
Well, then there's the second problem. This site is user-run. While that is good in some ways, it's bad in others. Submitting stories is almost like a contest to a lot of people here. If it gets approved and hot, then that's all that matters apparently.
ShiftyLookingCow  +   534d ago
Only 10 people(or less) are required to approve a story.

I think if the number is increased to say 50(given this site's growth and popularity, that wouldn't be unreasonable) then we would have better quality content.
#3.1.2 (Edited 534d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
darkpower  +   535d ago
Have to be careful, though, of who you end up banning from N4G based solely on that (and we have enough topic that come up on this site that people don't think before posting or acting on as it is). That site that could post a top 10 like that could also be a creditable site that would otherwise get good stories, or it could be a site that needs the exposure and clicks to get into that threshold, and when it's hard to GET that exposure or anyone to actually read what you're posting (because of fanboyism or spite or whatever else), you're going to need to do something to get people to click.

Yeah, they might be fodder and might exaggerate the clicks, but it might be a necessary evil for some sites that need to get exposure and/or revenue from somewhere in order to survive.

It's a good idea, but we need to think it through and make sure we're not just getting every single person who dares to do a list with that tactic in mind (especially when N4G is the only real good site of its kind).
Godmars290  +   534d ago
Again for what its worth, since I don't expect anything to come of this, I'm not asking for a total end to top lists, especially the vapid shallow ones, but rather the exploitative vapidly shallow ones.

This one for example:
http://n4g.com/news/1109923...
or direct:
http://n4g.com/news/clickou...

Basic retread of something that's literally been done dozens of times but at least its all on one page. Now if it were on 15 or even 16 separate, then I'd say the site needs to go. I honestly can't imagine anything of any real worth being published on a site which feels that it can get away with making a top fifteen list made up of a stock photo, a paragraph or sentence for description, and then a next button which loads another page.
#4.1 (Edited 534d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember