| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/17/2004 04:41:15 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
By the way...HAVE the votes for the Macro challenge been updated to everyones stats already? That happen on Tues or am I wrong? |
I believe they have been "scrubbed" against this mysterious algorithm - because my vote of a 1 (or a 2, still can't remember) for the plane photo does not show up anymore. Even though 85 other voters agreed with me on that one.....
Clearly, the system throws out good votes.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:41:16 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by xian:
Originally posted by mavrik:
If this is how you vote, YOU ARE HEREBY DISCOURAGED. |
See there you go again. Telling people how to vote... And who are YOU to tell ME or yurasocolov how or when to vote?
|
Actually, Drew and Langdon are telling you. And it's their site. If you don't like it, type a different address in the address bar. It's that simple. They created the algorithm to keep people from giving all 1, 2 and 3 when they created a 10 point scale to be used. Use it. Or find that address bar. It's really that simple.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:43:50 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by dtoombs:
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
By the way...HAVE the votes for the Macro challenge been updated to everyones stats already? That happen on Tues or am I wrong? |
I believe they have been "scrubbed" against this mysterious algorithm - because my vote of a 1 (or a 2, still can't remember) for the plane photo does not show up anymore. Even though 85 other voters agreed with me on that one.....
Clearly, the system throws out good votes. |
Do your other votes for that challenge show up? Because the scrubber doesn't discard random votes...they either all stay or all go.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:47:23 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by xian:
See there you go again. Telling people how to vote... And who are YOU to tell ME or yurasocolov how or when to vote?
xian |
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:53:28 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by mk:
Do your other votes for that challenge show up? Because the scrubber doesn't discard random votes...they either all stay or all go. |
They all appear to be gone because my highest vote -- an 8 -- was for this photo (//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=118629 ... oh, what a coincidence, my highest vote also ended up being the winner!) and that vote does not appear to exist anymore either.
So, I gave my highest vote to the winner of the challenge, and one of my lowest votes to a very bad photo that 85 other people agreed with me about.
But my votes were tossed.
Yeah ... nothing wrong with that system at all ....
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:00:39 PM · #81 |
any chance you and xian are the same person?
Originally posted by dtoombs:
Originally posted by mk:
Do your other votes for that challenge show up? Because the scrubber doesn't discard random votes...they either all stay or all go. |
They all appear to be gone because my highest vote -- an 8 -- was for this photo (//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=118629 ... oh, what a coincidence, my highest vote also ended up being the winner!) and that vote does not appear to exist anymore either.
So, I gave my highest vote to the winner of the challenge, and one of my lowest votes to a very bad photo that 85 other people agreed with me about.
But my votes were tossed.
Yeah ... nothing wrong with that system at all .... |
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:01:52 PM · #82 |
I think hopper is xian.
:) |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:02:28 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
They created the algorithm to keep people from giving all 1, 2 and 3 when they created a 10 point scale to be used. Use it. Or find that address bar. It's really that simple. |
The rules say rate each photograph on a scale from 1 to 10. They say the scores you give out matter for the end result. The rules say nothing about how your scores should be distributed. And any number between 1 and 10, inclusive, belongs to that scale.
What if i think that no photo deserves a score less than 5 simply because there was an effort involved in its production?
Or for a masters challenge, for example, with people who apparently have mastered the technique of producing mass-appealing images, obviously all of my scores are going to be over 5. Do they not count because the masters didn't manage to take even a single photo of their cat? Or should i give out a few ones just to keep things balanced? |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:03:59 PM · #84 |
i ask because they both became members on the same day
:)
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
I think hopper is xian.
:) |
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:08:01 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by yurasocolov:
What if i think that no photo deserves a score less than 5 simply because there was an effort involved in its production?
Or for a masters challenge, for example, with people who apparently have mastered the technique of producing mass-appealing images, obviously all of my scores are going to be over 5. Do they not count because the masters didn't manage to take even a single photo of their cat? Or should i give out a few ones just to keep things balanced? |
Distributing your votes between 5 and 10 is at least a little better than distributing them between 1 and 2. Or 9 and 10, as the case may be.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:08:11 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by dtoombs:
[So, I gave my highest vote to the winner of the challenge, and one of my lowest votes to a very bad photo that 85 other people agreed with me about.
But my votes were tossed.
Yeah ... nothing wrong with that system at all .... |
It is obviously something about the way you voted on the other 698 photos which triggered the action.
If it's an algorith, it means it was created without anyone particular in mind ... you've been voting with this process in place beforehand, and so has everyone else. People sound like they've been singled-out for punishment, when in fact it is their own actions which initiated the automated response -- nobody checked your votes and decided to discard them.
You all sound like speeders who usually "get away with" driving 75 now complaining because this time radar caught you going 77. Never mind that the legal limit was 65 ...
Most pictures submitted here are "average" which on our scale is about 5. If you are giving a large majority (80%) of images a score below 3, you are on a far-off fringe of the scoring bell-curve, and your scoring scale is apparently out-of-step with the site as a whole. If your standards are so high that you thing the "average" photo is substantially below-average (a 1 or 2 or 3) then you are probably participating in the wrong site, because that's the kind of photos you're going to see here.
This is a site created to help photographers learn to become better photographers. It is not a curated competition for display space in the Museum of Art ...
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 17:08:49. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:11:59 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
It is obviously something about the way you voted on the other 698 photos which triggered the action. |
You (and hopper) seem to have me confused with Xian. I've only voted the 20% required in the last two challenges, so that'd be about 100 or so votes each.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:12:00 PM · #88 |
Drew and Langdon started this site to help themselves learn how to take better photographs. For the most, this is a community with a common thread of moving yourself forward by helping others move forward.
I don't really care how you justify giving out low scores, but ask yourself honestly, just what purpose does it serve? Are you finding enough faults in the submissions that you are becoming a better photographer by being able to recognize those faults? Are you helping someone else become a better photographer by hammering them?
A lot of people start off here barely able to take a decent snapshot, but with encouragement and guidance, they have become stars in their own right (and their families now appreciate the improvements). I don't care how you want to justify honesty, but a little tact and common courtesy can go a long ways towards helping the community move forward as a whole, or simply being another annoying bump in the road.
Personally, I'm looking for comments I can respect. If I get a comment from someone whose own efforts in scoring, placing, and commenting give me little to respect, I discard it.
If your votes aren't getting counted and you understand the system and still want to complain, that's your problem, not the communities.
Skip |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:13:40 PM · #89 |
I have to say from reading this thread taht I really have to stand behind xian on this. I understand that you don't want some poop head crapping all over everyone's pictures, but at the same time, if someone is just a hard ass when it comes to voting, neglecting those votes is just as bad. I just returned to the site after being gone for almost a year, the reason I left was that I got tired of everything looking the same. I think it is important to get new view points into the compotitions to change the look of all the winners to something new.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:15:08 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by MrCaN:
I have to say from reading this thread taht I really have to stand behind xian on this. I understand that you don't want some poop head crapping all over everyone's pictures, but at the same time, if someone is just a hard ass when it comes to voting, neglecting those votes is just as bad. I just returned to the site after being gone for almost a year, the reason I left was that I got tired of everything looking the same. I think it is important to get new view points into the compotitions to change the look of all the winners to something new. |
And yet you give an average of 1.5 points per photo higher than Xian. Seriously what does it say to you when someone averages giving a 3 or 2.9 or 3.4 or something? You give a 4.9. If 5 was average, you're RIGHT on it. So however hard you thought you were voting, you weren't, really.
:)
M
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:18:20 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
This is a site created to help photographers learn to become better photographers. It is not a curated competition for display space in the Museum of Art ... |
Well said!!!
In my opinion [everyone has there right to there own opinion] I believe this site has set up a 1 to 10 voting scale and that scale should be used. I base the way I vote on that scale and that̢۪s why I put a link to it in my signature area. I don̢۪t mind anyone seeing how I vote. It may not be perfect but I believe its fair to everyone.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:19:30 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by xian:
Of 700+ images that I voted on, I gave out plenty of 5s, 6s, 7s, 8s, 9s and even a few 10s.
xian |
Originally posted by langdon:
Just confirming that your votes were marked as suspect. Out of your 802 votes, 80% of them were 1, 2, or 3. You've never given a 10.
|
you dont have to lie to make friends :P |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:20:47 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by dtoombs:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
It is obviously something about the way you voted on the other 698 photos which triggered the action. |
You (and hopper) seem to have me confused with Xian. I've only voted the 20% required in the last two challenges, so that'd be about 100 or so votes each. |
Sorry ... I used your quote and then started talking in generalities, and didn't check the math.
Still, my point was that if you gave the top-rated photo a ten, and the bottom-rated photo a one, your votes might (I don't know) still be purged if you gave the other 98 photos all one/twos/threes. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:20:56 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by riotspyne:
you dont have to lie to make friends :P |
And you can't make friends with salad. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:22:11 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by MrCaN:
I just returned to the site after being gone for almost a year, the reason I left was that I got tired of everything looking the same. I think it is important to get new view points into the compotitions to change the look of all the winners to something new. |
Why? If most people are comfortable with things the way they are here at DPC why should things be changed to suit you or any of the other people who enlessly complain about DPC. Most of the people who are members here enjoy this site very much just the way it is. Why should things have to change if MOST people like them just the way they are.
This site is owned by Drew and Langdon - they have the final say. That's the way it is. If some don't like it then they should go elsewhere and let other people enjoy this site.
I, for one, am glad there is a way in place of getting rid of the votes from mean and nasty voters who think 80% of the pictures they vote upon are a 1 or 2.
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 17:23:43. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:22:46 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by mk:
Distributing your votes between 5 and 10 is at least a little better than distributing them between 1 and 2. Or 9 and 10, as the case may be. |
It may be a little better because the absolute score in the end is slightly higher so less people are crying about it, yes. But it's the same and equally irrelevant as if it was 1 through 5. It's the relative placement of images that counts, not absolute scores.
Imagine two images, an awful one and a good one. I give the good one 10, you give it 2. I give the bad one 8 you give it 1. The good image wins with a score of 6. The bad one looses with 4.5. Would things have changed if we both gave them 2 and 1 respectively? No, the good one would still win with a score of 2. The bad one would still lose with a score of 1.
But as someone mentioned, this is not the juried competition, so the end score doesn't mean much in, and out, of itself. As long as the better image wins.
I agree, though, giving 1s and 2s only doesn't provide sufficient granularity with this many entries. Although if i can't really say how much i like a particular image, and only can say that i like it more or less than average, 1 and 2 only also makes sense. And should be interpreted as me saying 'this is better than average, and that is worse than average'. And should be counted as a vote. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:38:04 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by yurasocolov:
... Although if i can't really say how much i like a particular image, and only can say that i like it more or less than average, 1 and 2 only also makes sense. And should be interpreted as me saying 'this is better than average, and that is worse than average'. And should be counted as a vote. |
Except you can't vote on your own image - which presumably would, on average, be rated using the full scale - so the net effect of your scheme is to raise your score relative to the rest of the pack, which is why these sorts of voting distributions are eliminated in the first place. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:47:10 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by dtoombs:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
It is obviously something about the way you voted on the other 698 photos which triggered the action. |
You (and hopper) seem to have me confused with Xian. I've only voted the 20% required in the last two challenges, so that'd be about 100 or so votes each. |
If you only vote on 20%, and following that some photos which you voted on get disqualified, your percentage may be reduced to 19% in which case your votes would not be counted. It is always best to vote on 22% or 23% just to be on the safe side.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:59:40 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by joebok:
Originally posted by yurasocolov:
... 1 and 2 only also makes sense... And should be counted as a vote. |
Except you can't vote on your own image - which presumably would, on average, be rated using the full scale - so the net effect of your scheme is to raise your score relative to the rest of the pack, which is why these sorts of voting distributions are eliminated in the first place. |
Good point, however it's impossible to come up with a good way of fighting that, i don't think so, with the exception of relying on common sense and honesty of people. Throwing votes out based on some obscure arbitrary criteria is certainly not one of them.
An improvement would be not to know your own current score and standing until the voting process is done.
And realistically, with 600 entrants lately, how many people do you think lack common sense and integrity and only vote 1-2? I would venture to guess not a sizeable lot. Even if 20% were like that (i really, really doubt it), the overall outcome would still be reasonably close to unbiased, i think. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 07:09:06 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by Sammie:
Originally posted by MrCaN:
I just returned to the site after being gone for almost a year, the reason I left was that I got tired of everything looking the same. I think it is important to get new view points into the compotitions to change the look of all the winners to something new. |
Why? If most people are comfortable with things the way they are here at DPC why should things be changed to suit you or any of the other people who enlessly complain about DPC. Most of the people who are members here enjoy this site very much just the way it is. Why should things have to change if MOST people like them just the way they are.
This site is owned by Drew and Langdon - they have the final say. That's the way it is. If some don't like it then they should go elsewhere and let other people enjoy this site.
I, for one, am glad there is a way in place of getting rid of the votes from mean and nasty voters who think 80% of the pictures they vote upon are a 1 or 2. |
Actually the point of changing isn't to suit me or anyone else. The point I was making is that it is important to have new viewpoints to improve your photography. Which, according to others here, and why I use it, is the point.
|
|
