questionslol @ sponsored deals. that's what you get for…


Today's sponsored deals are not all that great... usually I upvote three or four, sometimes five; today I upvoted two and downvoted one (I do not like deals that start with a popup wanting personal information).

As for what I've done this woot-off: I worked yesterday afternoon and evening; drank wine from previous woot-offs; watched tv; did laundry; cooked a new ROM for my Android phone and looked into ways to use the Dream Cheeky USB button I got last woot-off as a big F5 key (not yet successful on that quest).

I've been up for about 41 hours and have to go to work later, so I figure I'll try to get two or three hours of sleep before heading to work.


Don't act like you can live without a $3 LED watch. You are only lying to yourself.


I just pretend like I'm working.


I'll just pretend like this is a question and not a statement with a "yes?" at the end of it.


Actually, I think the sponsor hate is not a good thing. 3 sponsored deals in the negative, and that LED watch in the positive? I would rather have the Koi onsie than the watch - if they had a size that fit my 16 month old son I would buy it. I understand that sponsored deals during a woot-off is bad timing but can we please stop the sheep mentality of down-voting many of these deals.


@mfladd: I upvoted your comment to prove I am not a sheep...

Oh wait...crap... nvm


I'm with @okham. I get about 10% work accomplished during Woot-Offs. The rest of the time I'm chatting it up on IRC Channel.

EfNet channel #wootoff


Okay, I'm still kinda new here. But it looks to me that the chum is in the water and the sharks are attacking. Is it really necessary to downvote sponsored deals that are not liked/needed or whatever?

I realize that some deals need to be downvoted, but there really seems to be a feeding frenzy of negative voting.

Or since this is Woot, perhaps I should say, "Monkey see, monkey do."


@barnabee: " Is it really necessary to downvote sponsored deals that are not liked/needed or whatever?"

It may not be necessary, but this is precisely what we are asking folks to do.

Maybe if we called the down button "tell us in a friendly way that you personally would like to see something else" it would feel better?


@snapster: So, let me get this straight--I'm supposed to go and downvote EVERYTHING I don't like or need? Normally, I just walk on by and go on to the next deal. I do downvote if it is a spammer, or if I consider it a really bad deal (in my humble opinion).

I really need to know, have I been doing this wrong? Yeah, I'm confused.


@barnabee: you've been doing it right. i mean, i remember snapster saying in a discussion a while back that there really is no rule for downvoting. it's up to you


direct quote from snapster: "voting is largely unregulated; it is what you want it to be, which means it is what the crowd decides it to mean on a per deal basis. you have to read the comments to figure out the motivation sometimes."


thanks @cornellbigred - I do feel correct keeping voting a community defined function.

@barnabee: I could be seen as conflicting my general input by saying we're asking for negative input. I mainly mean that we respect all input equally in the sponsor section. I consider sponsor feedback to be feedback to woot. The team here is not getting their feelings hurt - they are tasked with determining the validity of downvoting and navigating the sponsor landscape the best they can with this input. So from Woot's perspective, we love any feedback on the sponsors we can get.


@snapster: But there is also no reason why some of these deals are being down-voted so rigorously except for a feeding frenzy climate. Travel Zoo is a respected site which I use. The onsies deal was not bad either. The LED watch deal we have seen over and over. What is to keep these sites coming back to this site with the rampant down-voting. (who I greatly appreciate) came back because of a forum drive (they are an exception rather than rule)and if not for that they would probably be gone too.

I think this strategy need to be reconsidered. JMHO.


@snapster: Your sponsored deals are getting trashed just because people enjoy seeing how many negative votes can be created. Is this what you really want for this site? Potential sponsors, seeing how other businesses are treated, just might decide to go elsewhere. (I don't know is there an "elsewhere"?) I know I wouldn't enjoy the negative publicity.

@mfladd: is correct a different strategy in this area might be considered.

Oh, and thank you! @cornellbigred: I really thought I had been doing things the wrong way.