addressing the new "slop filter" and why it's absolute bullshit #2
Description
Hello. Here's a question that I want an honest-to-god answer for.
What the fuck is this shit? I was just going through a channel, archiving reuploads of Kayati Chop's videos that were on it. And on one of the videos, this pops up. Is this a joke? As I've just found out, it isn't.
The worst part about this? "Slop" is entirely an opinionated term. What one person may think is slop, another could enjoy. The biggest consensus formed by the internet of what slop is right now, is mindlessly produced and low-quality content, including stuff generated by AI.
Here's how the script for the slop filter describes it.
Slop is derivative content using popular movie/TV footage + trendy audio + basic editing.
This sounded reasonable at first (except for "basic editing", because not everyone has to be good at editing), until I got to the slop signals section.
It's a mixed bag, really. There are some signals I agree with, and some I don't. Here are a few examples.
Known slop franchises: This list is definitive, not illustrative. Only the following qualify: Johnny English, Mr. Bean, Breaking Bad, Peaky Blinders, American Psycho, Patrick Bateman, The Boys, Homelander, Dexter, Joe Goldberg, Squid Game, Rick Grimes, Thomas Shelby, John Wick, Kingsman.
I'm sorry, MR. BEAN?! Excuse me?! That show's too funny to be consider slop in any fashion! I agree with the rest, though. Only thing it needs is Skibidi Toilet, that shit is undeniably slop.
Song name explicitly in title — especially if slowed/remixed.
Oh well, wrap it up guys, guess we can't remix songs anymore. Not even in a transformative fashion.
Description — if it contains hashtag spam, or music credits it reinforces slop signals from the title.
Too much hashtags? I guess it is sloppy. The music crediting part? Oh no, God forbid a YouTuber credits the music they use in their content! That's going on my slop radar, bucko!
The first exception listed:
Tutorials, news, commentary, politics — score 0 automatically
The AUDACITY to let all 4 of these slide as if none of these can have slop problems. Guess what? THEY CAN. Slop comes in all forms, it's not just TikTok edits. That seems to be the main thing you're blacklisting in this filter, because all of the channels listed in the blacklist are mainly about edits. Bit biased, don't you think?
But overall, this just isn't a good idea to add to a website meant for archiving YouTube videos. What makes most archive sites like this work is that anything goes. Does the Internet Archive care if you upload slop to it or archive a slop site? No. Does GhostArchive care if you archive a website widely considered to be slop? No. Does Archive.today care if you archive slop? No. Believe me, this filter is going to be absolutely detrimental to your website. If the Internet Archive or any other archive site had this filter, people would hate it and call it censorship. And also, if you want people to believe you're dedicated to "preserving internet history" and not "SOME internet history", you better fucking live up to that expectation. Please remove this filter, or at least make it more lenient. Thanks for reading.