| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/23/2009 08:11:34 PM · #1 |
Weighted, handicapped, whatever term is apt 'Vote Scrubber'.
I'd like to see Members (Members only, another reason to get people to become Members) have a weighted Vote Scrubber attached to their profile, so that their votes are not scrubbed if:
1. they vote less than 20% in a Challenge (perhaps due to time constraints)
2. they vote low in a Challenge
___________________________________________________________
This could apply to either or all:
* Members who have a high Votes Cast number and/or ratio.
* Members who have a high average vote received (with the assumption that they have photographic talent).
* Members who have been registered for more than 3 years (or pick a number, but substantial).
I know there will be objections. There are at least two sides to this: those that do not trust the integrity of above mentioned members and those that do, among other reasons.
In the case of low voting, the 'voting patterns' could still be recorded and if the stats ended up too extreme after a period, they could be 'queried' by SC, in private.
Of course, it may not be 'codable'. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 08:15:05 PM · #2 |
| What problem is this supposed to solve? |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 08:19:54 PM · #3 |
The problems of:
investing time voting in a Challenge and then having your votes scrubbed if your votes were 'low'.
or
not enough people voting in Challenges. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 09:12:17 PM · #4 |
How would you know your votes were 'scrubbed' unless you knew they were of the 'scrubbable' variety or were less than the 20% requirement?
If they were of the 'scrubbable' type, I hope they do get scrubbed. Are you advocating troll voting be allowed?
If they were less than the 20% required, why should 'you' (meaning anyone, not you personally) be afforded an exception for not voting the minimum requirement?
I guess I think of the saying, "Are you right and everyone else is wrong?"
If you cannot or do not vote the minimum, oh well. For whatever reason, you did not have the time or the inclination. Why should the votes stand? The minimum is there for a reason and the system works fairly well (despite opinion or preference).
And for reference, it is not only low votes that get scrubbed. If you vote all 10's in a challenge, they will be scrubbed as well.
Message edited by author 2009-01-23 21:14:36. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 10:19:51 PM · #5 |
| Bottom line, unless someone's votes are incredibly, unthinkably low, they are not scrubbed. Also, requiring 20% voting does ensure that the voter must at least invest *some time* in voting a challenge, discouraging "drive-by voters" who just want to register a vote to vote up (or down) a particular image. While it's not a sure thing, it has proven its worth. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 11:10:19 PM · #6 |
Hey  kirbic, I thought you were on site council? Is this new or have I been blind? |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 11:23:26 PM · #7 |
It has happened to me on at least two occasions that I am aware of (that I noticed). I knew they were not counted because the vote wasn't highlighted on the image page post challenge. That is one reason I don't vote much anymore. I wouldn't consider them "incredibly, unthinkably low" either. I voted honestly, on my 'scale' - which, if I'm not mistaken, is what we are supposed to do.
Not advocating 'troll voting' or anything of the sort, in fact it wasn't even in mind.
As for the 20% minimum, I may be overlooking one or two factors, but isn't it better to contribute what you can, when you can - than not vote at all because you know you don't have time to make it to 20%?
Also, I suggested criteria to go along with this - I'm not suggesting this rule is open to all. Maybe it would be an incentive to get people voting more too, if they knew they then could qualify for a 10% rather than 20%... I don't know.
The main purpose of the Vote Scrubber is to eliminate malicious voting. I am talking about non-malicious voting that gets thrown out because a coded 'algorithm' cannot decipher human intent. |
|
|
|
01/24/2009 02:27:52 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by macrothing:
...The main purpose of the Vote Scrubber is to eliminate malicious voting. I am talking about non-malicious voting that gets thrown out because a coded 'algorithm' cannot decipher human intent. |
I fully agree. I hardly vote anymore for precisely this reason. |
|
|
|
01/24/2009 09:21:42 AM · #9 |
He has been off the SC for about a month, He needed more time to play.
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Hey kirbic, I thought you were on site council? Is this new or have I been blind? |
|
|
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: 04/17/2024 11:01:02 PM EDT.
