How Will We Fix YouTube Comments?

[N_W]

In light of John and Hank's recent brush with YouTube haters I propose we brainstorm ways to improve the quality of YouTube comments.

I would suggest we use an algorithm along the lines of the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level test to filter out comments below a certain grade level. If you're not familiar with this algorithm you can see it in action here. You will find that a coherent comment usually scores in 6-8 range while "gay... lol" scores a resounding zero.

It's not a very complicated algorithm so I believe I could code it into a bookmarklet that when clicked would filter out comments.

[Peter]

Interesting idea, though "incompetent surrealists have inundated my partridge community with nonsensical blather" achieves a definitively worse score than such prose deserves.

If we were to design "the perfect comment filter," what would be its core feature set?
- Yes, I think the grade level is a very nice start
- Language identification with a spell check "score" when possible
- Perhaps a scrape of the author's profile for "Joined" date and other user properties could affect the thresholds?

[N_W]

I think if we are attempting to design the perfect comment filter (a noble goal) we should first define it's purpose. I propose "highlight the comments worth reading" but I imagine this is not the only approach.

I would accomplish my stated goal by devising a method of scoring comments and presenting them in order of score. This is also probably not the only approach but I think at least the scoring part is where you were going.

Down to the details of making the scoring system (now that I've breezed past those first two assumptions), I agree spelling should play a role but it would have to be generous, perhaps allowing a misspelled word per every five or six to allow for acronyms and undictionaried words (like undictionaried).

I worry about giving weight to profile data because I don't know if it is "fair" to judge a comment's worth on the commenter's number of views, age, date joined or number of subscribers. I, for instance, joined today and this will be my second post. Still, who is to say it has to be fair?

So, what do you think about the purpose and method?

[IFTBA]

140 character minimum comment limit. That way people would have to have something to say in order to comment. Most people wouldn't bother cheating to fulfill it, because people are lazy. Even haters.

How come nobody ever makes a video about all the "lol awesome" posts? It's proportionately equal in positivity to the level of negativity in a "ur gay" post, yet just as ultimately meaningless. If people continue to focus on the comments they hate, haters will continue to comment on the videos they hate.

[N_W]

Wow, If you think there should be a 140 character minimum than you must loathe Twitter. That said, I think a 140 minimum might be a little high but a character minimum could be made a setting?

Secondly, I think you're right, there's just about the same number of meaningless positive as negative posts and that suggests another feature to me: a "positivity/negativity index" for each comment. That way positive or negative comments could be brought to the top for viewing and looking at the aggregate positive/negative scores across all the comments could give you an idea of the general tenor of comments. However, that doesn't in any way address what you're talking about, "feeding the trolls", honestly I don't know what to do about that except censor them and not talk about it.

[CaitieCo]

One can't control YouTube comments without seeming to be censoring them. The whole purpose of YouTube is for people to express themselves, and while some (moronic) people feel the need to express themselves using idiotic and senseless insults, it's not our place to restrict them from doing that.

The haters, unfortunately, are a definitive part of YouTube and they will always be there.

[N_W]

Forgive me for playing devils advocate, because I do very much appreciate you bringing up this issue, buuuut:

We aren't the programmers at YouTube so we technically can't stop people from posting hater-ish comments even if we wanted to - and I'll be right there next to you defending the haters is if they do decide to try that. What we can do and what we are talking about doing is sifting through comments after they've been posted. I think it's as much my right to ignore the haters as it is for them to post, so I have no qualms with having a program help me ignore them as I would be doing anyway. What say you?

[CaitieCo]

If it is a personal programme that one can choose to have on their computer then I have no qualms with it. I thought the post was referring to a universal censorship of hater's comments. But, if that isn't so, then I agree that having something that does that would be quite useful. :)

[Joey Joe Joe Jr. Shabadoo]

This doesn't fix the problem, but, Firefox has a plugin that filters comments. It's not infallible, but it's very well-programmed and anything to the likes of "u r gay" doesn't get through.

[N_W]

I believe you are talking about the plugin YouTube Comment Snob, which filters using the criteria:

* More than # spelling mistakes: The number of mistakes is customizable, and the extension uses Firefox's built-in spell checker.
* All capital letters
* No capital letters
* Doesn't start with a capital letter
* Excessive punctuation (!!!! ????)
* Excessive capitalization
* Profanity

Some of these are good ideas, no one has mentioned checking for profanity yet which sounds like a good idea. Also having used this plugin very briefly just now I can say that it does a fine job but we could definitely improve on it, perhaps we could send some of our ideas to its author.

[Edi]

I think this is a really admirable idea and it would be great if it could be implemented in some constructive way, but I have one major concern.

I realize that spelling and grammar are not overt criteria of the system, but I can certainly imagine conditions under which poor spelling and grammar would negatively affect the score. Granted, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but I'm concerned about discrimination against well-meaning Nerdfighters and others who have learning difficulties or for whom English is not a native language. Either of those situations could cause spelling and/or grammar issues that result from neither ignorance nor laziness. Some may argue that spell checking is easy enough to come by, and that's true, but are we going to penalize people for not using up-to-date technology?

As I've said, I think a filter of some sort is a very good idea, but I also think the design and implementation must be approached with caution.

[N_W]

Good points all - I agree that we must proceed with caution to avoid censoring well-meaning nerdfighters. In fact,that is the reason I proposed an ordering of comments rather than a censor. Using an ordering comments aren't lost but likely buried beneath other comments. I'm still not convinced this is the best way to do it, but until someone talks me out of it I'll be working on it with this in mind.

Also to be technical, a spelling and grammar check would be the last features on the list of things to add if I were making this because those would be the most difficult to implement well and especially difficult to implement as a browser-independent javascript bookmarklet (rather than a browser specific plugins). As of reading what everyone has said so far I would start with the grade level then add a profanity checker and from there I'm still open to ideas.

Lastly, constructive is a word that I would just love it if could be applied to this. The ideal solution would help educate comment posters on writing read-worthy comments - which is why it's nice that the YouTube Comment Snob plugin shows you the reason the comment was filtered.

[Matt]

I think people should just get over it.