Masters Chal... Err. Invitational Challenges

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

11/16/2004 04:32:39 PM · #101

Originally posted by EddyG:

An "Invitational Challenge" is the new generic term for any challenge which has an eligibility requirement. Those who meet the eligibility requirement (which could be anything), are "invited" to participate.

Really? Can they really be anything? How about an invitational for women, my age, who live in my state and have the same eye and haircolor as me? Or one for right-handed, right-eyed photographers who use a DSLR? Or one for college graduates who have 9-5 day jobs and live in Northeast U.S.?

Now, I do have some faith that invitationals will not be quite so prejudiced, but we might as well create a permanent Rant category for those who feel left out.

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

11/16/2004 04:34:22 PM · #102

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by Kavey:

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
But I've had a shift in paradigm...I've come to realise that the value of the ribbon should be subjective. As in any series of competitions or fairs or events, you can't put all of your ribbons together and say "I've won 7 ribbons in my life"...it's dumb. What really counts is each individual challenge. Some may have been easy wins...others more difficult.

TOTALLY well said!
Of course, zero ribbons is still zero ribbons but haven't given up yet!
:o)

I'm cheering for you, Kavey, "GO, KAVEY, GO!!! GO, KAVEY, GO!!!" Just don't fall on your face again :)

ROFL Thanks Ursula.
You should SEE how carefully I'm walking everywhere at the moment! I'm so paranoid!

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

11/16/2004 04:37:12 PM · #103

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Kavey:
Of course, zero ribbons is still zero ribbons but haven't given up yet!
:o)

Um... 14 challenges entered since 2002? Don'tcha gotta enter to win?

I don't enter for the sake of it. I enter only when I have an idea that strikes me as good and fun to do and something that I can achieve or nearly achieve! And as I'm not that good at the ideas side of it so I don't enter much.

Also there was a long period when I didn't enter deliberately - I was doing a photography evening class with a number of assignments and didn't want to assignment myself all out.

I'm much better at travel photography and impulse photography than planned stuff BUT I do enjoy it every now and then.

So I guess you could say I'm still trying for a ribbon in that I haven't stopped entering but I'm not striving for one in a desperate sense as it's not that important or valuable a goal to me.

:o)

11/16/2004 05:00:23 PM · #104

Originally posted by KaDi:

Really? Can they really be anything?

Yes, they really could. However, they likely will not be based on age, sex, location, camera type, etc. because there is no way to verify that that information provided in user profiles is accurate. So I expect that future Invitationals will likely continue to be based on challenge statistics, which are not as easily "manipulated".

In terms of feeling "left out", sorry that you feel that way, but the concept of an "Invitational" is a common thing in almost every type of competitive event. Sure, it would be nice if every team in the Big 10 got invited to the Rose Bowl, but only one team is invited each year. Same goes with any of the other "bowl games" -- teams are invited to participate based on some criteria. Same goes for the AKC/Eukanuba National Invitational Championship dog show. The top 25 dogs in each breed are invited ("top 25" determined based on the number of dogs defeated in the show ring that year) and that's it. There are countless other examples of "Invitationals" as well... at least here at DPC, there is the possibility of multiple "Invitational" criteria...

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 17:45:19.

11/16/2004 05:22:03 PM · #105

Well I'm a one ribbon wonder. I've hovered in and around the 80%-90% for a good number of challenges. I missed both masters, and now this challenge.

I do feel a little pissed off about this, but I know that the admins are gong to have to target my fellow one ribbon winners next, so theres likely to be a field of 20-25 maximum in the next invitational challenge.

We can wait for a couple of weeks for the 'One ribbon wonders' Challenge.

Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II

11/16/2004 05:25:05 PM · #106

Originally posted by EddyG:

Originally posted by KaDi:
Really? Can they really be anything?

Yes, they really could. However, they likely will not be based on age, sex, location, camera type, etc. because there is no way to verify that that information provided in user profiles is accurate. So I expect that future Invitationals will likely continue to be based on challenge statistics, which are not as easily "manipulated".

I do realize this. Guess I should have put little smiley faces on my "suggestions"...

Originally posted by EddyG:

In terms of feeling "left out", sorry that you feel that way...

Actually, I don't feel left out and never said I did feel that way. (In fact, I qualify for the challenge for the ribbon-deficient.) <>

I'm not the first to point out, though, that here's another point of contention on the site. Just as we always have threads about scores and how a topic should be interpreted, we will now have an additional thread about who's in who's out and is it fair that I can't put a photo in such-n-such a challenge when it's what I'd dreamed all my life would become a topic on DPC. <>

debitipton

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

11/16/2004 05:38:37 PM · #107

Originally posted by Falc:

You know of course that by then we will have on another ribbon and won't be able to participate! I'm planning a one ribbon pity party for those of us left out winners. So close yet so very far away!

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 17:41:35.

Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II

11/16/2004 05:48:13 PM · #108

Admins - you have a chance to rectify this today - by changing the entry criteria to include the one ribbon guys.

You can do it today and we will call it even .... go on you know its the right thing to do.......

bod

11/16/2004 05:58:23 PM · #109

Originally posted by KaDi:

I'm not the first to point out, though, that here's another point of contention on the site. Just as we always have threads about scores and how a topic should be interpreted, we will now have an additional thread about who's in who's out and is it fair that I can't put a photo in such-n-such a challenge when it's what I'd dreamed all my life would become a topic on DPC. <>

So even the people who like to whine are catered for. Everyone's happy : )

debitipton

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

11/16/2004 06:01:25 PM · #110

Originally posted by Falc:

I'm okay with a "One Ribbon" challenge as long as anyone winning a second ribbon by yesterdays date get to participate.

11/16/2004 06:06:15 PM · #111

Originally posted by bod:

Originally posted by KaDi:
I'm not the first to point out, though, that here's another point of contention on the site. Just as we always have threads about scores and how a topic should be interpreted, we will now have an additional thread about who's in who's out and is it fair that I can't put a photo in such-n-such a challenge when it's what I'd dreamed all my life would become a topic on DPC. <>

So even the people who like to whine are catered for. Everyone's happy : )

Wow! You're right! We're not being exclusive, we're being inclusive! I never thought of it that way....

Now that the Thought Police have explained it to me, I'm happy.

Thanks for the smile, bod.

11/16/2004 06:33:12 PM · #112

[As usual, speaking for myself, and not as a representative of DPC or the SC]

Originally posted by Falc:

Admins - you have a chance to rectify this today - by changing the entry criteria to include the one ribbon guys.

I fail to see the point of this.

The criteria has been set for this challenge. Sure, the admins may still change it, but IMHO, they shouldn't; there is no need to.

In a few weeks, let's say there is an Invitational Challenge where only those who have placed in 4th place are invited to participate. Will there be "public demands" that the admins also include those that have placed in 5th too?

Or, how about a challenge where only those with an average of 6.000 or above are invited to participate. Will there be "public demands" to have the admins also include those with an average of "5.9500 or higher" just because they are "so close"?

The eligibility requirements have been set for this challenge. It is a simple requirement. It isn't like eligibility is being determined based on some off-the-wall combination like "zero ribbons -or- 2 or more ribbons". It's simply "members without ribbons". There will be future Invitationals (which are extra challenges above and beyond "the norm") that you may be eligible for. In the mean time, the regularly-scheduled challenges will continue, with no requirement for entry, just like always... the challenges you are "entitled" to enter (and I use the term "entitled" lightly) have not changed.

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 18:39:18.

11/16/2004 06:39:44 PM · #113

Originally posted by EddyG:

The criteria has been set for this challenge. Sure, the admins may still change it, but IMHO, they shouldn't; there is no need to.

The point is you have 2 invitationals running concurrently, with a small group of individuals who are excluded from both. Now that can't be fair.

I agree with you that changing the entry conditions is not good, so how about a concurrent one hit wonder challenge to run in parallel?

11/16/2004 06:47:35 PM · #114

Originally posted by Falc:

Now that can't be fair.

So by your way of thinking, isn't it also "not fair" that registered users can't participate in member-only challenges? Or that registered users can't normally participate in Speed Challenges? Or that member's are the only ones who get to use the Advanced Editing rules?

I'm not sure where this idea of "entitlement" or "fairness" came from, but there is certainly nothing in the DPC Member Service Agreement that I'm aware of that says "all challenges will be open to every paying member of the site". These are extra challenges, above and beyond "the norm". Nobody has lost any "privilege" that they previously had. Nothing has been taken away.

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 18:50:08.

11/16/2004 06:55:58 PM · #115

I never said something had been taken away. Its the opposite of that - exclusion from the added value.

Your argument about non registered users and members challenges doesn't stack up - we have paid our membership in order to participate in the additional challenges.

By my way of thinking the admins made a big mistake in starting this exclusive challenge thing, but now the monster is out and roaming around its going to piss off a lot of people.

11/16/2004 07:01:12 PM · #116

Originally posted by Falc:

Your argument about non registered users and members challenges doesn't stack up - we have paid our membership in order to participate in the additional challenges.

And that's where there is confusion.

Paying for a membership entitles you to participate in the additional weekly Member challenge, along with any members-only extra challenges (such as month-long challenges or speed challenges) that may or may not be scheduled at the admin's discretion. It also gives you a DPCPrints store front, 10MB of portfolio space to allow others to view and comment on your non-challenge entries, the ability to "subscribe" to e-mail notifications about forum threads that interest you, and probably some other stuff I'm forgetting.

Paying for a membership does not entitle you to participate in every single challenge. I don't know why that is so hard to understand?

Look at it another way:

The admins have decided to make every Member without a ribbon an "Invitational Member" instead of just a Member. For FREE (how generous of them! Business must be good!) Or, you can PayPal them US$100,000 to upgrade your account to an "Invitational Member" (Seriously. I checked. They'd do it.) "Invitational Member" status is good for 2 weeks. Only "Invitational Members" can participate in the Invitational Challenge.

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 19:18:57.

bod

11/16/2004 07:06:29 PM · #117

What's the big hurry? Surely you can see that there will be invitational challenges that you will be able to enter? Why do they have to happen right now?
In fact, surely it would be better to have "your" challenge when there are no others running so that people can spend more time voting and commenting on your work?

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/16/2004 07:10:08 PM · #118

EddyG,

We are not going to get to an amicable agreement here. What you have to realise is that as soon as you split up the users you are going to annoy someone somewhere. The membership argument is not a valid comparison for very obviuous reasons.

I don't enter every single challenge, and don't expect to. So yes I do understand, but I don't agree. Simple really.

frisca

Nikon D70

11/16/2004 07:37:52 PM · #119

Originally posted by KaDi:

Not to nitpick, but George Orwell wrote 1984. :)

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/16/2004 07:43:41 PM · #120

Originally posted by KaDi:

Now that the Thought Police have explained it to me, I'm happy.

Thanks for the smile, bod.

Ray Bradbury wrote Fahrenheit 451, George Orwell wrote 1984.

Looks like you need to be sent back for "reprogramming"

11/16/2004 07:59:02 PM · #121

Originally posted by frisca:

Originally posted by KaDi:

Wow! You're right! We're not being exclusive, we're being inclusive! I never thought of it that way....

Now that the Thought Police have explained it to me, I'm happy.

Thanks for the smile, bod.

Not to nitpick, but George Orwell wrote 1984. :)

OUCH! You're right, of course. Heat of the moment and I always seem to attribute all great SciFi to my favorite author. Thanks for the correction.

11/16/2004 08:00:24 PM · #122

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by KaDi:

Now that the Thought Police have explained it to me, I'm happy.

Thanks for the smile, bod.

Ray Bradbury wrote Fahrenheit 451, George Orwell wrote 1984.

Looks like you need to be sent back for "reprogramming"

NOOOOOOO!!!!! Not the rats! Not the rats! I'll memorize that book, really, I promise, just......well, just give me a composition book, a pencil and a quiet, secure booth to write in.

Edit: to correct the inedible typo.

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 20:03:14.

Stagolee

Kodak Easyshare C180

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

11/16/2004 09:12:11 PM · #123

[quote=EddyG] [As usual, speaking for myself, and not as a representative of DPC or the SC]

Eddy I am glad you are speaking for yourself because if the logic and attitude you have displayed on this issue was a reflection of the admin of DPC i for one would be very concerned.

You seem to have a very aggressive attitude to anyone that does not agree with your logic, it is not very impressive.

Please listen to peoples concerns instead of a response to belittle members.

Do you honestly believe that to exclude 1 and 2 ribbon winners from an invitational challenge is an equatable arrangement.

Message edited by author 2004-11-16 21:16:22.

wewillexplore

11/16/2004 09:48:21 PM · #124

Originally posted by keegbow:

Do you honestly believe that to exclude 1 and 2 ribbon winners from an invitational challenge is an equatable arrangement.

Yes. I'm excluded from the US Open tennis championships every year. And Andre Agassi is excluded from playing in my amateur division at every event I've ever been to.