| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/30/2012 12:30:47 PM · #51 |
I agree with CS on many points, and I agree with the majority of people who dislike low votes because, like them, i want my pictures to have nice, lofty scores. Thing is, if my picture deserves it, it'll get it. If it doesn't - well, it won't. Plain and simple.
Voting on a comparative scale is not cheating because all entries are being rated compared to the subset of images they came from. CS (and sometimes myself) as well as others, i'm sure, vote on a comparative scale for their own reason, but the votes are not against previous entries by the photographer, against other entries still in voting in other challenges, or trying to improve our own images score.
Giving 1's and 2's is fine in this manner as you feel that these are the weaker images in the group. If an entire challenge is 'weak' in terms of meeting criteria and only a few stand out as exemplary then they will receive high scores from everybody, regardless of if you vote 1-10 individually on a picture or 1-10 on the challenge and with higher marks on the most suitable images. You're voting each image in the same mindset so it's fair to all entrants.
Regarding the comment about not letting people with low averages vote, i want to slap you for that. Nothing comes across as 'holier than thou' than when you said that.
As someone with a sub-5 average you would say that I cannot vote. I, a paying member, someone who is LEARNING from this site, what the site was intended for, cannot participate because "i'm not good enough"? It's elitist comments like those that can cause people to purposely start low-voting you if they can pin-point your photographs (such as if you're in the picture and the anonymity is out the window, or the same unique signature of a photograph is present). Quite frankly, if that was the case, i say you deserve every low vote you get so that you cannot vote either.
Lastly, suck it up if you don't like your score. If you want someone to wipe your backside and tell you how pretty the picture is, show it to your mom. We all expect our images to do better than they do. It's like complaining that you got wet when you went for a run in the rain. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 12:31:32 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Definitely. I agree with that. It's fine when something resonates -- that's a good photograph (at least in relation to that person)
And it's fine when there's a photograph that you truly hate.
Those are both fair votes.
Perhaps I've misunderstood you in the past, but you've said in the past that you find the ones you like and you vote the other ones down because you want to make sure that your favorites get the full benefit of your vote.
That sounds like padding the favorites.
But maybe I misunderstood. |
You didn't misunderstand. I have written, close to verbatim, that sentence somewhere on here.
I think it's still the correct thing to do. I'll try to give a quick example to shed some light, feel free to poke holes in it if you see any. In this Free Study challenge I was voting and giving scores on individual entries. Should point out I don't look for my favorites in free studies ahead of time because it's an anything goes, lots of entries, kind of challenge. Well, when I came across  , there was no way I could have any photo share a vote with it. I really thought it was superior to every other entry in that challenge. So I did go and lower all the entries that shared a vote with it. Now two things happen. First, I have to look at the tier below and see which photos should share that level with the newly demoted entries, some scores may get lowered by a vote. And second, now it means for any other entry to get that same high vote is nigh impossible because it's ingrained in the memory banks.
I do this with every challenge. It's not that I'm trying to suppress scores, but I would argue it's impossible to look at entries outside the context of the entire challenge for the quick example I just gave. You might say that it was padding the favorite, I would say it was being honest with every other photo in the challenge.
CS
Message edited by author 2012-05-30 12:32:42. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 12:38:22 PM · #53 |
| Wow. That's really disheartening. Would you really want us all to do that? Give high marks to the few entries we find most worthy and then lowball everything else regardless of whether it's any good or not?? Wow again. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 12:48:07 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by RyanWareham:
I agree with CS on many points, and I agree with the majority of people who dislike low votes because, like them, i want my pictures to have nice, lofty scores. Thing is, if my picture deserves it, it'll get it. If it doesn't - well, it won't. Plain and simple.
Voting on a comparative scale is not cheating because all entries are being rated compared to the subset of images they came from. CS (and sometimes myself) as well as others, i'm sure, vote on a comparative scale for their own reason, but the votes are not against previous entries by the photographer, against other entries still in voting in other challenges, or trying to improve our own images score.
Giving 1's and 2's is fine in this manner as you feel that these are the weaker images in the group. If an entire challenge is 'weak' in terms of meeting criteria and only a few stand out as exemplary then they will receive high scores from everybody, regardless of if you vote 1-10 individually on a picture or 1-10 on the challenge and with higher marks on the most suitable images. You're voting each image in the same mindset so it's fair to all entrants.
Regarding the comment about not letting people with low averages vote, i want to slap you for that. Nothing comes across as 'holier than thou' than when you said that.
As someone with a sub-5 average you would say that I cannot vote. I, a paying member, someone who is LEARNING from this site, what the site was intended for, cannot participate because "i'm not good enough"? It's elitist comments like those that can cause people to purposely start low-voting you if they can pin-point your photographs (such as if you're in the picture and the anonymity is out the window, or the same unique signature of a photograph is present). Quite frankly, if that was the case, i say you deserve every low vote you get so that you cannot vote either.
Lastly, suck it up if you don't like your score. If you want someone to wipe your backside and tell you how pretty the picture is, show it to your mom. We all expect our images to do better than they do. It's like complaining that you got wet when you went for a run in the rain. |
Sorry but a lot of this is not true, I have 3 images in voting now, all 3 I thought could ribbon, 2 still may well and 1 is 6.5+ - The other 2 shots are sitting at 7+ one with no vote lower than 5 and the other with no vote lower than 6 (according to Nialls tracker) - both images received a 2 within 25 minutes of each other.
And if you want to slap me I guess playing Rambo over the internet is your style and a debate is not...
You need to go back and re read my statement you jumped in with both feet and made yourself to look a complete pratt. I didn't say people with a low average vote RECEIVED score shouldn't be allowed to vote - I said people with a considerably low average VOTE GIVEN (which I consider to be anything sub 4 ish) - whats elitist about it? I said it would be an interesting study to see if those persons averages went up considerably. Anyway get over yourself, here to learn indeed but by your own admission you have a low vote average? Who are you here to learn from when you consider most shots here are not worthy of a reasonable score.
And I love your tone in this thread your photography speaks volumes.
ETA: Apologies actually, your vote given is high - I've strike marked the comments I'd like to retract...
ETA2: Another strike comment as it was childish and unnecessary.
Message edited by author 2012-05-30 12:52:06. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 12:54:08 PM · #55 |
| For what it is worth I believe the participant vote is from entrants in that particular challenge. Non-participants can include those who comment but don't have a horse in the race. SC can correct me of I am wrong. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 12:56:32 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
For what it is worth I believe the participant vote is from entrants in that particular challenge. Non-participants can include those who comment but don't have a horse in the race. SC can correct me of I am wrong. |
Then they've changed it, but I said they might have. It used to have a note next to it that said entrants and commenters. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 12:56:53 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by cosmicassassin:
I think it's still the correct thing to do. I'll try to give a quick example to shed some light, feel free to poke holes in it if you see any. In this Free Study challenge I was voting and giving scores on individual entries. Should point out I don't look for my favorites in free studies ahead of time because it's an anything goes, lots of entries, kind of challenge. Well, when I came across , there was no way I could have any photo share a vote with it. I really thought it was superior to every other entry in that challenge. So I did go and lower all the entries that shared a vote with it. Now two things happen. First, I have to look at the tier below and see which photos should share that level with the newly demoted entries, some scores may get lowered by a vote. And second, now it means for any other entry to get that same high vote is nigh impossible because it's ingrained in the memory banks.
I do this with every challenge. It's not that I'm trying to suppress scores, but I would argue it's impossible to look at entries outside the context of the entire challenge for the quick example I just gave. You might say that it was padding the favorite, I would say it was being honest with every other photo in the challenge.
CS |
This is all fine at the top end Christopher, but what about the bottom end, I am almost certain you would have some really low voted images in there that can not possibly be considered to be in the same place as others in that same tier, you adapt it for the top end but I personally believe you should do the same at the lower end, putting scores up if necessary to accomodate the tiers, this would then make better use of the scale surely? |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:00:12 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Originally posted by Melethia:
For what it is worth I believe the participant vote is from entrants in that particular challenge. Non-participants can include those who comment but don't have a horse in the race. SC can correct me of I am wrong. |
Then they've changed it, but I said they might have. It used to have a note next to it that said entrants and commenters. |
There is, of course, the Commenter Average which includes all who comment, whether they are entered or not. Check out the Commenter Average on the jmritz red ribbon, for example. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:01:27 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Originally posted by Melethia:
For what it is worth I believe the participant vote is from entrants in that particular challenge. Non-participants can include those who comment but don't have a horse in the race. SC can correct me of I am wrong. |
Then they've changed it, but I said they might have. It used to have a note next to it that said entrants and commenters. |
There is, of course, the Commenter Average which includes all who comment, whether they are entered or not. Check out the Commenter Average on the jmritz red ribbon, for example. |
Yeah, that was there before.
This was originally those who entered and those who posted at least one comment on any image. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:04:48 PM · #60 |
Ryan, I am sorry I just reread my statement it wasn't clear that I meant those with low average scores given CAST unless you took it in context with the rest of the text, of course I didn't mean those with low averages received that would be elitist and completely unacceptable.
ETA: Cast instead of given it's too confusing lol
Message edited by author 2012-05-30 13:09:01. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:08:04 PM · #61 |
| It is official... will be over 6 but who knows in what level |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:33:44 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Originally posted by Melethia:
For what it is worth I believe the participant vote is from entrants in that particular challenge. Non-participants can include those who comment but don't have a horse in the race. SC can correct me of I am wrong. |
Then they've changed it, but I said they might have. It used to have a note next to it that said entrants and commenters. |
There is, of course, the Commenter Average which includes all who comment, whether they are entered or not. Check out the Commenter Average on the jmritz red ribbon, for example. |
Just checked it out, wow it got an incredible commenter average. I also noticed that all of the top ten exept one have lower non participant averages than participant averages, I then checked the recent member only challenges and it's the complete opposite, seems like the non participants constantly vote lower in an open challenge.
Christopher, just vote how you want but stop constantly going on and on about how low you vote, I know we all like getting attention somehow but it's better to do it with a decent photo than bragging about a stingy voting system, you'll still be able to do exactly the same but we won't have to hear about it every challenge. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:37:46 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
Wow. That's really disheartening. Would you really want us all to do that? Give high marks to the few entries we find most worthy and then lowball everything else regardless of whether it's any good or not?? Wow again. |
If the entry was any good they wouldn't have got a low vote. Don't know why you think I'm lowballing entries I think are good. Now, I might be lowballing entries you think are good. That's a different argument.
CS |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:41:29 PM · #64 |
*tone = pleasant conversational*
Yeah, I reread it after reading your whole thing. The tone for your post was unclear and I read it as "those with low vote averages" meaning those who do not score well. I have a problem with people who think they are entitled to things for no reason, or people who assume they are better than another person without a valid quantifiable reason.
I am not saying that you are either of those, but that post did come across that way which is what made me jump in with both feet.
Yes, I tend to vote every image individually and rarely give out sub-3 scores. On two occasions I have voted the set on a 1-10 scale which did merit 1's and 2's to be cast. They were, in my opinion, the worst images for either the technical or criteria side (or both). I try to be fair and find what i like and don't like in an image and be subjective to what is being presented to me. If it appeals to me and the theme it gets good marks. If it doesn't appeal but is technically well done it gets mid-marks. If it's technically bad and unappealing...well, no surprise what happens there. :)
I can understand where you come from by saying people who vote low on images to improve their own standing should be penalized in some way, but that is ultimately up to the SC and is covered in the voting rules. If they suspect abuse they can (and i'm sure that at least one time HAVE) revoke a membership.
The thing is, unless they're in ribbon contention territory, it really doesn't change things to the point where it is worth fighting over.
*still pleasant*
And to answer PennyStreet, no, i am not advocating for people to vote this way. People should vote the way that appeals to them for a given challenge and be consistent to the voting in that challenge. As long as everybody is consistent in their voting manner on every image, the outcome will not drastically be altered by a single person.
As Christopher has shown before though, skipping an image can have far worse consequences than giving it a token median score.
Believe me when I say i hate getting low votes and it frustrates me when an image scores substantially below where I thought it could, but honestly, hearing people complain about dropping from a 6.6 to a 6.48 on an image doesn't really register on my radar. Try submitting an image that is technically and/or thematically better than other entries and scoring more than a full point less than them because "hey, it's one of the notables on here, i like them. Their image has nothing to do with what we're supposed to be shooting, but i'll give them a good score anyways".
Anyways, i feel the pleasantness starting to ebb and i don't want to turn bitter, but in all honesty it's just not worth the hassle of going through this debate on such a regular basis. People will always low vote and some people will always up-vote for their own reasons. The challenge is to prep and capture an image that appeals. Whether it appeals to you and you don't care if it ribbons; whether it appeals to the masses because you want a ribbon; whether it appeals to the sub-genres and you want mention in the PH thread. Make an image that you are pleased with. Accept that others will not like it before you submit it. Enjoy positive reactions that you will inevitably get for the image and learn from the negatives. But do it for the right reasons and you'll learn that the score is just a number, and at the end of the day has no bearing on who you are.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:42:06 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Christopher, just vote how you want but stop constantly going on and on about how low you vote, I know we all like getting attention somehow but it's better to do it with a decent photo than bragging about a stingy voting system, you'll still be able to do exactly the same but we won't have to hear about it every challenge. |
What bothers me is when people complain about a system that isn't broken in every challenge. It's always trolls this, Monday voters that. Holiday voters are the worst. Many people have a one track playlist the minute they get a low vote. That's why I speak up. Let them know it's not a troll, but could actually have some legitimacy behind it. When that stops happening every challenge, then there won't be a reason to enlighten them anymore.
CS
Message edited by author 2012-05-30 13:43:37. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:43:08 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Christopher, just vote how you want but stop constantly going on and on about how low you vote, I know we all like getting attention somehow but it's better to do it with a decent photo than bragging about a stingy voting system, you'll still be able to do exactly the same but we won't have to hear about it every challenge. |
Where's the 'like' button? |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:43:41 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by cosmicassassin:
Originally posted by jagar:
Christopher, just vote how you want but stop constantly going on and on about how low you vote, I know we all like getting attention somehow but it's better to do it with a decent photo than bragging about a stingy voting system, you'll still be able to do exactly the same but we won't have to hear about it every challenge. |
What bothers me is when people complain about a system that isn't broken in every challenge. It's always trolls this, Monday voters that. Holiday voters are the worst. Many people have a one track playlist the minute they get a low vote. That's why I speak up. Let them know it's not a troll, but could actually have some legitimacy behind it. When that stops happening every challenge, then there won't be a reason to enlighten them anymore.
CS |
My recommendation to you - don't read the scores threads. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:45:15 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by cosmicassassin:
Originally posted by jagar:
Christopher, just vote how you want but stop constantly going on and on about how low you vote, I know we all like getting attention somehow but it's better to do it with a decent photo than bragging about a stingy voting system, you'll still be able to do exactly the same but we won't have to hear about it every challenge. |
What bothers me is when people complain about a system that isn't broken in every challenge. It's always trolls this, Monday voters that. Holiday voters are the worst. Many people have a one track playlist the minute they get a low vote. That's why I speak up. Let them know it's not a troll, but could actually have some legitimacy behind it. When that stops happening every challenge, then there won't be a reason to enlighten them anymore.
CS |
Have you extinguished many fires using a lighter?
|
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:49:21 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Have you extinguished many fires using a lighter? |
Swailing can work in some instances.
CS |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:50:19 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Have you extinguished many fires using a lighter? |
*tongue-in-cheek humorous* Small ones that you can stamp out without it; or in outer space where you use up available oxygen sooner to prevent worse issues?? ;-p
seriously though, responding back and asking/telling/pleading/threatening him to stop will have the same effect as what you're asking about with a lighter/fire.
I've even chimed in on occasion and said similar comments about voting lower on a particular image or a challenge and nobody has piled onto me the way they do with him. Yes he's more vocal about it in more areas, but people just see him as the boogey-man of the dpc voter community. I understand why he defends his position the way he does. He's just as justified in his voting method as any other and is continually under fire whenever he speaks up.
I will say that i do not always agree with his votes, but he is at least honest about things and scores things consistently. you always know where you stand with him and I appreciate that from a learning where i went wrong perspective
Message edited by author 2012-05-30 13:51:05. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 01:59:03 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by RyanWareham:
Originally posted by jagar:
Have you extinguished many fires using a lighter? |
*tongue-in-cheek humorous* Small ones that you can stamp out without it; or in outer space where you use up available oxygen sooner to prevent worse issues?? ;-p
seriously though, responding back and asking/telling/pleading/threatening him to stop will have the same effect as what you're asking about with a lighter/fire.
I've even chimed in on occasion and said similar comments about voting lower on a particular image or a challenge and nobody has piled onto me the way they do with him. Yes he's more vocal about it in more areas, but people just see him as the boogey-man of the dpc voter community. I understand why he defends his position the way he does. He's just as justified in his voting method as any other and is continually under fire whenever he speaks up.
I will say that i do not always agree with his votes, but he is at least honest about things and scores things consistently. you always know where you stand with him and I appreciate that from a learning where i went wrong perspective |
Well the only problem is now that it actually looks like his voting style might be against the rules of the site, I'm not bashing Christopher as such and have mentioned 2 other people with far lower voting averages than his, however the fact he defends his voting is probably what gets peoples backs up most. Especially if others do interpret the voting style to be against the rules in light of a link he posted himself
I admire the fact he is honest I just wish he would be a little more open to others concerns regarding the voting system he uses, I mentioned something earlier about being as consistent at the lower end of his scale as he is when identifying a top image such as the one posted - this would utilise the full scale more and probably be a bit fairer and still have his basic voting system in place. But I got no answer think I'm on ignore ;)
|
|
|
|
05/30/2012 02:05:21 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Have you extinguished many fires using a lighter? |
Actually... it's common practice to use high explosives to fight oil wellhead fires. :) |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 02:07:21 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by RyanWareham:
Originally posted by jagar:
Have you extinguished many fires using a lighter? |
*tongue-in-cheek humorous* Small ones that you can stamp out without it; or in outer space where you use up available oxygen sooner to prevent worse issues?? ;-p
seriously though, responding back and asking/telling/pleading/threatening him to stop will have the same effect as what you're asking about with a lighter/fire.
I've even chimed in on occasion and said similar comments about voting lower on a particular image or a challenge and nobody has piled onto me the way they do with him. Yes he's more vocal about it in more areas, but people just see him as the boogey-man of the dpc voter community. I understand why he defends his position the way he does. He's just as justified in his voting method as any other and is continually under fire whenever he speaks up.
I will say that i do not always agree with his votes, but he is at least honest about things and scores things consistently. you always know where you stand with him and I appreciate that from a learning where i went wrong perspective |
I actually hardy pop into read these current challenge threads anymore and it's because I'm sure to stumble across CS boasting about the one's he's dished out, shouldn't have stopped to look at this one either, silly me. |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 02:09:04 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by Mark-A:
I admire the fact he is honest I just wish he would be a little more open to others concerns regarding the voting system he uses, I mentioned something earlier about being as consistent at the lower end of his scale as he is when identifying a top image such as the one posted - this would utilise the full scale more and probably be a bit fairer and still have his basic voting system in place. But I got no answer think I'm on ignore ;) |
Not on ignore, just lost in the shuffle.
I feel that I take everything into consideration while voting. Whether I don't like a photo, think it's DNMC, lack of creativity, or whatever, I feel that every vote I give out on the low end was merited. The problem with the typed medium is sometimes context and intonation are missing, but I can assure you I have put thought into every vote.
That's why when someone asks "How could this have done better?" or "How did this get ten votes of 4 or below?", I'll always chime in with my thoughts. I'm only one person in their average, but at least they may understand where some of the other votes are coming from.
CS |
|
|
|
05/30/2012 02:11:21 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by jagar:
I actually hardy pop into read these current challenge threads anymore and it's because I'm sure to stumble across CS boasting about the one's he's dished out, shouldn't have stopped to look at this one either, silly me. |
Show me where I start boasting about my voting without the troll precursor in any of these scoring threads.
I'll sit tight while you look.
CS
[HINT] You won't find one. |
|
