DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Voting turnout question.
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 52, descending (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/07/2017 08:19:32 PM · #1
all threads lead to Rome. let the people come.
09/07/2017 08:12:33 PM · #2
I think these suggestions are fair because we want to stimulate. Stimulate votes and participation. No one's trying to (willy-nilly) fix things that aren't broke.

That being said, what about some sort of reunion or anniversary challenge-where we try to get the oldies but goodies back for a one time event, maybe some will realize they miss the place and stick around.

You know who I'm talking about. Could be fun.
09/07/2017 07:39:20 PM · #3
Originally posted by tnun:

malling the mall
I'mallin
I win

Excuse me, you must think you're in this thread.

Here is (supposed to be) a semi-serious discussion about actual issues.
09/07/2017 07:35:42 PM · #4
malling the mall
I'mallin
I win
09/07/2017 07:23:43 PM · #5
I was just at the mall for the first time in like five years. Nothing exciting going on there. I'll check again in 2022.
09/07/2017 05:14:41 PM · #6
maybe sometimes at the mall
09/06/2017 08:06:33 PM · #7
battered! a veritable punch bowl of spitwit. where else does this happen?
09/06/2017 07:52:39 PM · #8
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

We DO muzzle or ban people who seem to come here only to be difficult.

And yet I've been stirring up trouble unabated for the better part of 13 years.

Oh, I think you've been bated a few times ... ;-)
09/06/2017 07:51:41 PM · #9
Originally posted by Cyrilda:

Originally posted by nygold:

It's pretty much over here, out of the few people that are left only a fraction of them vote. DPC had a good run.


I've been a paying member for almost 2 years and even though there is low attendance and low voting, I continue to learn and expand my knowledge about Photography. I'm sure other new members feel the same way. This is the best learning site I've found. It was suggested to me by a former member who now has his own educational site and charges much more than the small fee we pay. Plus I've met some very nice people who are willing to share what they know for free. Where else can you get that?

Yes, perhaps if people could remember that the purpose of the site is for people to help each other become "better" photographers there would be less angst over the number of participants ... most people don't stay in "school" forever ...

Originally posted by About DPC Page:

The original idea behind the site was for it to be a place where the two of us and a couple of our friends could teach ourselves to be better photographers by giving each other a 'challenge' for the week.
09/06/2017 07:30:55 PM · #10
[quote=nygold] It's pretty much over here, out of the few people that are left only a fraction of them vote. DPC had a good run.

I've been a paying member for almost 2 years and even though there is low attendance and low voting, I continue to learn and expand my knowledge about Photography. I'm sure other new members feel the same way. This is the best learning site I've found. It was suggested to me by a former member who now has his own educational site and charges much more than the small fee we pay. Plus I've met some very nice people who are willing to share what they know for free. Where else can you get that?
09/06/2017 06:52:11 PM · #11
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

We DO muzzle or ban people who seem to come here only to be difficult.

And yet I've been stirring up trouble unabated for the better part of 13 years.

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

We just don't (and never will, I hope) make a public production of these decisions.

*heads over to WikiLeaks*
09/06/2017 02:41:43 PM · #12
I can say unequivocally that none of us in SC, or for that matter Langdon, consider ourselves to be (or even wish we could be) "social engineers". I've got a lot of experience going back to the beginning of the internet moderating one site or another, and this is as laid back a group as I can imagine actually doing the job. So we'd have no inclination to even consider some of the more draconian proposals, or even any of them really. Shooters are gonna shoot, voters are gonna vote, anyone who doesn't like the results knows s/he has options out there. We are what we are :-)

That said, we DO enforce rules, we DO take steps to keep things coherent and fair. We DO muzzle or ban people who seem to come here only to be difficult. We DO take away the voting privileges of people who are clearly abusing the system, for whatever reason. We have members who cannot speak but are still welcome to play, and we have members who cannot vote but are still welcome to enter and comment. We just don't (and never will, I hope) make a public production of these decisions.

Message edited by author 2017-09-06 14:42:54.
09/06/2017 11:57:41 AM · #13
Originally posted by ubique:

Originally posted by K3Master:

It's not the DPC it used to be, that's for sure.

Yes, it is. The 'problem' is that it's not the world it used to be. The digital wonders that impressed and excited nearly everybody in 2007 are of no interest to most people in 2017.

Don't change a thing about voting & commenting. DPC is a society. All attempts at social engineering fail, nearly always by having the opposite of their intended effect.


exactly.
09/06/2017 02:18:05 AM · #14

Originally posted by K3Master:

It's not the DPC it used to be, that's for sure.

Yes, it is. The 'problem' is that it's not the world it used to be. The digital wonders that impressed and excited nearly everybody in 2007 are of no interest to most people in 2017.

Don't change a thing about voting & commenting. DPC is a society. All attempts at social engineering fail, nearly always by having the opposite of their intended effect.

09/06/2017 01:21:08 AM · #15
Originally posted by jomari:

I think that some sort of voting requirement is a good idea. It would need a bit of flexibility. I can see people having time to take their photo, process it and submit, but then being unable to vote (they might be away from home, sick or their computer may have died). But there shouldn't be a large, ongoing discrepancy between participation and voting.


I actually just put my votes cast above my votes received this week! 5,889 cast to 5,817 (or approx.) received.

Hooray!
09/06/2017 01:19:14 AM · #16
I think that some sort of voting requirement is a good idea. It would need a bit of flexibility. I can see people having time to take their photo, process it and submit, but then being unable to vote (they might be away from home, sick or their computer may have died). But there shouldn't be a large, ongoing discrepancy between participation and voting.
09/06/2017 01:02:20 AM · #17
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

In this fantasy world where site code change options are on the table, I have a few suggestions I think would be worth discussing...
- Throw out the lower and upper 10% or 20% votes and use the average of what's left
- Hold challenges in voting until votes cast >= # of entries
- Un-Anonymize votes (allow everyone to see what user gave what score) *not for purposes of retaliation or criticism, just to see how it affects how people vote
- Must maintain a certain weekly voting threshold to enter a challenge or some form of voting requirement

I'm not married to any of these and these kinds of changes are a pipe dream anyway, but I just think they would be interesting to discuss.


1. Absolutely not. This has been discussed before. It only moves the goalposts. It makes no appreciative difference and punishes people for using the full scale.
2. I kind of like this idea, but it could get old or even stagnate things further.
3. Yeah. I know people too well. NO WAY.
4. I like this one too!
09/05/2017 11:30:25 PM · #18
Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

- Throw out the lower and upper 10% or 20% votes and use the average of what's left


I've heard similar suggestions before. I would immediately leave the site if such a conformity-seeking rule were put in place. I have no interest in appeasing the snowflakes who melt from votes below 4.

Fair point, Don. While I believe there are legit low and high outlier votes, I believe there are more Troll/Sycophant votes. Not evidence based, so I could easily be wrong and as indicated, I am not passionate about any of the suggestions - just interested in the discussion. And no, I won't defend my use of "legit" - it's purely subjective and presumptuous. :)
09/05/2017 06:13:51 PM · #19
Originally posted by Pixelstate:

Well... I've been away for a while... back now and determined to re-ignite my previous levels of entry, voting and participation... it is quieter than it was it's true..


Hi, Chris!

Liven us up a bit!

*sings "I love this bar..." *

*shouts "NORM!" *
09/05/2017 04:37:47 PM · #20
Well... I've been away for a while... back now and determined to re-ignite my previous levels of entry, voting and participation... it is quieter than it was it's true..
09/05/2017 04:30:22 PM · #21
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

- Throw out the lower and upper 10% or 20% votes and use the average of what's left


I've heard similar suggestions before. I would immediately leave the site if such a conformity-seeking rule were put in place. I have no interest in appeasing the snowflakes who melt from votes below 4.
09/05/2017 03:43:26 PM · #22
In this fantasy world where site code change options are on the table, I have a few suggestions I think would be worth discussing...
- Throw out the lower and upper 10% or 20% votes and use the average of what's left
- Hold challenges in voting until votes cast >= # of entries
- Un-Anonymize votes (allow everyone to see what user gave what score) *not for purposes of retaliation or criticism, just to see how it affects how people vote
- Must maintain a certain weekly voting threshold to enter a challenge or some form of voting requirement

I'm not married to any of these and these kinds of changes are a pipe dream anyway, but I just think they would be interesting to discuss.
09/05/2017 11:45:52 AM · #23
Originally posted by blindjustice:

What about something where only the first 75 votes count?


I wouldn't like that. Early votes are usually my lowest. I usually see a rise in score with the later votes.
09/05/2017 11:05:10 AM · #24
What about something where only the first 75 votes count? You could still vote, and know what you voted, but if it was more than 75, it would not factor in anywhere else.

Can you cure a problem of lack of voters with making it worth something?
08/31/2017 01:44:52 PM · #25
Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:

I admit to being one of the problem children.


Holy cow, spiffy!! You're one of the nice voters! Get your rear in gear and vote!! :P

Trolls, you don't need to bother to vote. I'm sure you're way to busy, and we don't want to bother you...


I've voted on every current challenge and pledge to vote more. I'm not sure people will WANT that, as I'm picky as hell, but I'm honest too.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 03:46:21 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 03:46:21 PM EDT.