| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/19/2004 07:29:32 AM · #126 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
If the photographer put up an entry that was so easily misunderstood he should pay the price, not all the others who didn't receive a comment from you. How many other entries where there in that same challenge that were in a similiar situation (misunderstood) that you did not comment on? You can't answer that can you. |
I think you missed the point. The photograph isn't easily misunderstood. It was obviously a rare and isolated case here, yet you're turning it into some mass conspiracy. Even if Colda does comment on every entry in a challenge, and catches all.. say.. 5% of them that are misunderstood, and votes accordingly to the PMs that come his way, the overall effect is entirely negligible. Even if Colda ignores the PMs and keeps the vote the same, the effect is negligible. Even if EVERYONE that does what colda does keeps the votes the same, or changes them, the effect is, essentially, negligible.
I just don't understand what your real concern here is?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 07:30:04 AM · #127 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Manic:
Originally posted by keegbow:
I don't want to see complete anonymity i just want to see it postponed till after the voting.
Imagine the excitement when you go check your score after the close and you then could also put names to the comments you got. This would add another element to the site. |
This was exactly the system we used to have, sorry if I didn't convey this fully. We still had problems with trolls, since they could post with impunity for the entire week, and created a lot of bad feeling on the forums before we could find out who it was... |
... or by which point they were long gone. Talk about an incentive to create phony accounts! |
Sorry bit slow tonight but what do mean about the phony accounts. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 07:37:51 AM · #128 |
Originally posted by Manic:
OK, time to throw some stats into the mix :o)
The ratio of voters to commenters is anything between 20:1 and 100:1 for most images in most challenges. The means that commenters make up somewhere between 1% and 5% of the overall score. Of these commenters, if they are all PM'd by the photog, maybe only half will go back and adjust their score (I'm being generous here). This effectively means that photogs who PM users will get - at best - an increased vote from 2.5% of the voters. I'm going to say that these voters on average will increase their vote by 3 (which again is generous), which would lead to a total score increase of (by my reckoning) about 0.01. Is this tiny fraction really worth worrying about? |
I don't think this is the kind of issue that can be quantified, and even if it was, your figureing has a lot of assumptions. It is more of an integrity kind of a thing. Why shouldn't we fix a fault that downgrades our dhallenges even if it is by only a small amount?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:00:37 AM · #129 |
I agree wholeheartedly with Ed Clarke`s (E301)opinion on this as it more or less mirrors my thoughts on the subject.
Perhaps the need to correct misunderstandings which arise (perfectly illustrated by the rugby pic) could be alleviated with the inclusion of a small write up to accompany the submission.
Suggestions of this type have been slated previously as it was thought that anonymity could be breached with what was included in the write up.
In the unlikely event of that being the case then it is a simple matter (surely) of a recommendation for DQ in the same manner as you would if you found a problem with the image.
I think we get ourselves a bit too concerned about the breaching of anonymity from the relative few PM`ers..in comparison to the effect that well known photographers who include easily recognisable images of themselves in submissions can have..taking into account that their image is reaching everyone..equivalent to PM`ing the whole voting public and letting them know whose submission it is.
Don`t get me wrong, I`m not complaining about those inclusions..people are welcome to do that for me...as it could just as easily work against you,as for you..it just makes an interesting comparison and has me wondering why the people who are concerned about breaches of anonymity never complain about this ?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:08:55 AM · #130 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Sorry bit slow tonight but what do mean about the phony accounts. |
People who create new accounts solely for the purpose of trolling. These could be existing users making 2nd accounts, or completely random people just trolling dpc for the fun of it. Basically, someone would create an account, troll all the images with offensive comments, then never use that user again (thus they wouldn't care if that user got banned or whatever)...
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:18:32 AM · #131 |
Originally posted by Manic:
FYI, when DPC originally started, all comments were anonymous. However, after a while, the number of "troll" comments was such that it was decided to remove the anonymity, which has reduced the number of trolls to virtually zero. IMO, troll comments have a much greater negative effect compared to the small percentage of PM sent to commenters, and thus we should not go back to anonymous comments... |
Ok understand now, so what you are saying the reason we have the system we have now is because the SC decided to change due to the number of "troll" comments. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:25:09 AM · #132 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Ok understand now, so what you are saying the reason we have the system we have now is because the SC decided to change due to the number of "troll" comments. |
It was actually back in the days before the SC was founded, but yes. You might want to check the first 20-50 challenges from the archives, have a look at the sort of comments we were getting back then...
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:25:40 AM · #133 |
Why cant make option then to cancel pm's during voting so everybody can choose. If its fustrating for so many people... even that some of them want to leave... which i believe are nice people and great photographers.
Sigh :(
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:27:34 AM · #134 |
Originally posted by colda:
Originally posted by coolhar:
"I quite like to recieve messages from comments that I make, and in the case of misunderstandings on my part (due to my ignorance of a subject) then I am not ashamed to say that I return to amend the score."
On the surface this approach seems inofensive and even constructive-- correcting misunderstandings. But give it a bit more thought. Think about trying to keep the playing field level for all. If you are willing to amend your score in response to an explanation received from an entrant whose photo you have commented upon you are offering that entrant something that all the other (the ones you didn't comment on, likely the vast majority) entrants don't get. Unless you are going to offer the opportunity to clear up misunderstandings to all the entrants, it's fairer to just let the entry (image with title) stand on it's own regardless of the risk of it's being misunderstood.
I think waiting until after voting to reply to comments is a small sacriface to ask when balanced against the benefit of enhancing the "level playing field" we share. |
Case in point
If you look at my comment I did not understand what the object was, I actually thought that it was a mistaken entry where an attempt to spot edit a ball into the pic was made (it was early in the morning at the time). I have never seen such a tee before, and due to my ignorance I marked it down (a 4 I believe), after an explaination was given I realised MY error and ammended the score to a deserved 7.
Clearly this is an image that deserves it's top ten placement, and I'm happy to have been given the opportunity to correct my error.
In the case where I don't get an image and it's subliminal message then that's the fault of the image itself and I agree with your sentiments.
I do not alter scores where a reply to my comment is along the lines of 'but it's supposed to be out of focus' etc.
Darren
edit:typo |
From the other side of the fence this was the first and only time I have replied to a comment. I took this photo knowing that people who know NFL and Rugby (league and union) would know what the tee was. I would expect most countries represented here would know those sports. Of course several european contries wouldn't know as in this case. I actually replied to educate Coldhar about my beloved game. I thought long and hard before doing it and I don't regret it.
IMO being anonymous is a personal choice on a photo by photo, comment by comment basis. Being an international site it is very hard to take a photo that 100% of the members understand, especially in a sports challenge.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:27:54 AM · #135 |
Originally posted by Manic:
Originally posted by keegbow:
Sorry bit slow tonight but what do mean about the phony accounts. |
People who create new accounts solely for the purpose of trolling. These could be existing users making 2nd accounts, or completely random people just trolling dpc for the fun of it. Basically, someone would create an account, troll all the images with offensive comments, then never use that user again (thus they wouldn't care if that user got banned or whatever)... |
what stop anyone from doing that right now? if a person uses a phony account it doesnt matter if its anonymous or not... |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:30:00 AM · #136 |
Originally posted by nordicgirl:
Why cant make option then to cancel pm's during voting so everybody can choose. If its fustrating for so many people... even that some of them want to leave... which i believe are nice people and great photographers.
Sigh :( |
Now this sounds like a very good idea a compromise really. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:32:28 AM · #137 |
Originally posted by BooZon:
Originally posted by colda:
Originally posted by coolhar:
"I quite like to recieve messages from comments that I make, and in the case of misunderstandings on my part (due to my ignorance of a subject) then I am not ashamed to say that I return to amend the score."
On the surface this approach seems inofensive and even constructive-- correcting misunderstandings. But give it a bit more thought. Think about trying to keep the playing field level for all. If you are willing to amend your score in response to an explanation received from an entrant whose photo you have commented upon you are offering that entrant something that all the other (the ones you didn't comment on, likely the vast majority) entrants don't get. Unless you are going to offer the opportunity to clear up misunderstandings to all the entrants, it's fairer to just let the entry (image with title) stand on it's own regardless of the risk of it's being misunderstood.
I think waiting until after voting to reply to comments is a small sacriface to ask when balanced against the benefit of enhancing the "level playing field" we share. |
Case in point
If you look at my comment I did not understand what the object was, I actually thought that it was a mistaken entry where an attempt to spot edit a ball into the pic was made (it was early in the morning at the time). I have never seen such a tee before, and due to my ignorance I marked it down (a 4 I believe), after an explaination was given I realised MY error and ammended the score to a deserved 7.
Clearly this is an image that deserves it's top ten placement, and I'm happy to have been given the opportunity to correct my error.
In the case where I don't get an image and it's subliminal message then that's the fault of the image itself and I agree with your sentiments.
I do not alter scores where a reply to my comment is along the lines of 'but it's supposed to be out of focus' etc.
Darren
edit:typo |
From the other side of the fence this was the first and only time I have replied to a comment. I took this photo knowing that people who know NFL and Rugby (league and union) would know what the tee was. I would expect most countries represented here would know those sports. Of course several european contries wouldn't know as in this case. I actually replied to educate colda about my beloved game. I thought long and hard before doing it and I don't regret it.
IMO being anonymous is a personal choice on a photo by photo, comment by comment basis. Being an international site it is very hard to take a photo that 100% of the members understand, especially in a sports challenge. |
And I'm ashamed to say that I actually went to a rugby playing school, and later on played american football (nose tackle) - and still didn't get what it was :) |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:34:58 AM · #138 |
Originally posted by Manic:
Originally posted by keegbow:
Ok understand now, so what you are saying the reason we have the system we have now is because the SC decided to change due to the number of "troll" comments. |
It was actually back in the days before the SC was founded, but yes. You might want to check the first 20-50 challenges from the archives, have a look at the sort of comments we were getting back then... |
So the real reason is for the purpose to stop the trolls. Well if you were serious about stopping this activity why not just make the voting available to see by all and then you would get some real feedback going. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:36:47 AM · #139 |
Originally posted by urmig:
what stop anyone from doing that right now? if a person uses a phony account it doesnt matter if its anonymous or not... |
Nothing is stopping the account from being created, but we are able to respond much quicker if several people start posting "user x is leaving offensive comments on my image", and either suspend or ban that user.
In an anonymous comments situation, all we'd know is that there are troll comments being left (since people would moan about them on the forums), but we won't be able to identify whether they are all coming from one user, and/or which user(s) are responsible for them, until the challenge is over - by which time the account will have been abandoned.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:43:25 AM · #140 |
Originally posted by Manic:
Originally posted by urmig:
what stop anyone from doing that right now? if a person uses a phony account it doesnt matter if its anonymous or not... |
Nothing is stopping the account from being created, but we are able to respond much quicker if several people start posting "user x is leaving offensive comments on my image", and either suspend or ban that user.
In an anonymous comments situation, all we'd know is that there are troll comments being left (since people would moan about them on the forums), but we won't be able to identify whether they are all coming from one user, and/or which user(s) are responsible for them, until the challenge is over - by which time the account will have been abandoned. |
A report abusive comment button, which would let the sc read that comment, maybe? even if he wasnt anonymous I guess the sc had to read the users comment before taking any action anyway. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:48:50 AM · #141 |
I remeber this guy's comments causing quite a fuss, he pretty much seemed to be a troll.
Troll?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:49:47 AM · #142 |
Originally posted by Manic:
Originally posted by urmig:
what stop anyone from doing that right now? if a person uses a phony account it doesnt matter if its anonymous or not... |
Nothing is stopping the account from being created, but we are able to respond much quicker if several people start posting "user x is leaving offensive comments on my image", and either suspend or ban that user.
In an anonymous comments situation, all we'd know is that there are troll comments being left (since people would moan about them on the forums), but we won't be able to identify whether they are all coming from one user, and/or which user(s) are responsible for them, until the challenge is over - by which time the account will have been abandoned. |
Seems to me that it could be set up so that SC and/or admins could find out who left comments when needed to roust the trolls, but no one else until after voting. Aren't there other bits of info and privileges that are separated from the masses already?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:51:54 AM · #143 |
Wouldn't it be a simple solution to make the Private Message an optional thing that each user would have to tick in their Preferences?
That way if you don't want any PM's you will not get them.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:58:58 AM · #144 |
The SC currently have no way of seeing the current comments on any image, so they can't see who is making what comments until after the challenge ends, just like every user. Since the SC also compete and vote in challenges, I suspect that most of us wouldn't want to see what comments are being left by others until after the challenge (unless the comment in question is marked as offensive, which would require another layer of coding)...
As for disabling PMs, this would mean that certain users would be uncontactable while that user has an entry in a challenge, which would annoying for anyone trying to contact them for non-challenge related reasons!
Spaz, if I remember correctly, that user was given a written warning from the SC regarding their commenting style, and hasn't been on DPC since.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 09:12:10 AM · #145 |
I don't understand why someone would want to make comments and not give the person whose work they are commenting on a chance to say anything. That seems like a very one sided way of thinking. If you make a comment that is polite and helpful and someone responds to you, to explain what is the big deal? If you say something nasty, you should expect a nasty reply. If you are polite and they are nasty, then report them. I think everyone should have a voice, the commented on and the commenter.
I also think comments should be in a form. You should have to fill out certain criteria, they way Imageneer(sp?) Post his comments.
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 09:21:02.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 09:22:53 AM · #146 |
Originally posted by Manic:
Originally posted by keegbow:
Sorry bit slow tonight but what do mean about the phony accounts. |
People who create new accounts solely for the purpose of trolling. These could be existing users making 2nd accounts, or completely random people just trolling dpc for the fun of it. Basically, someone would create an account, troll all the images with offensive comments, then never use that user again (thus they wouldn't care if that user got banned or whatever)... |
How is that any different than with the current "identified" comments?
Anybody can create a new account and not only comment away with impunity, but also cast low votes... all with the intention of never using it again (or continuing to use it until the account is canceled, or whatever). See earlier link in this thread to this user...
I like the idea of comments being anonymous during the voting stage, since I despise getting PM's from people trying to "defend" their photo or blast my comment.
There are solutions to the "create a new user account" problem. One idea would be a "participation requirement" before an account can vote/comment. Not only would you would have to have your account for a certain amount of time (no more "instant entitlement"), but perhaps you'd have to submit photos to at least 3 challenges to gain voting/commenting privileges. That way, when the challenge is over and the identities are revealed, they can go look at the user's profile, and see what that user is capable of submitting/scoring -- it won't be "empty" like is so often the case today... and then accurately assess the worthwhileness of the comments. (The "put up or shut up" analogy comes to mind...) |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 09:24:27 AM · #147 |
Originally posted by Karalew:
I don't understand why someone would want to make comments and not give the person whose work they are commenting on a chance to say anything. That seems like a very one sided way of thinking. If you make a comment that is polite and helpful and someone responds to you, to explain what is the big deal? If you say something nasty, you should expect a nasty reply. If you are polite and they are nasty, then report them. I think everyone should have a voice, the commented on and the commenter. |
Well said! I dunno why people are making such a big deal out of this. Communication people! Communicate!
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 09:32:05 AM · #148 |
I agree, I like to receive PM's to comments. I can understand people who don't, which is why I think the tick box to allow you the choice would work for those people.
Yes they'd be out of contact for a while but that seems to be what they want.
Is it not people........???
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 10:04:11 AM · #149 |
I feel pretty strongly about this, so I'd like to weigh in on the PM / comments issue. I really don't like receiving defensive PMs. I rarely feel that they're disrespectful / rude. Quite the contrary - this community is overall one of the friendliest ones on the 'net. Hell, even the Canon vs. Nikon wars are friendly, even entertaining, here.
Here's my suggestion for responding to criticism: Don't ever defend your image. With all due respect, I even challenge the individual who thoughtfully said they would always defend (family) model criticism in their submissions. If you chose the models, and asked for critique, you need to be ready to accept criticism of your choices. Images are chosen by subjective aesthetic appeal, and family ties run no deeper than the photographer's viewfinder. I appreciate the frustration, but as I said, if you sumbit it, be prepared to accept good, bad, and valueless criticism.
Rather than defending images, think about what could have lead the viewer to their conclusion. If you conclude are ignorant, unobservant, or rude, then move on the the next more valuable comment. Your response won't change their personality. However, if you conclude they might be on to something, then think about how you could have avoided leading the critiquer to their suggestions. At a minimum respect the critiquer's time by making your PM's value a multiple of the value of the critique. Remember that 0 X 0 = 0, so valueless criticisms get no response.
As for anonymity, I have no problem with the DPC as it exists today. You can't please everyone, yet I think DPC finds a nice groove in terms of compromise and keeps the majority very happy. I've been on enough other sites to know that whatever is in place today is WORKING WELL. The community is mostly self-policing, and the number of forum wars, member abuse, etc. is TINY compared to many other communities.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 10:11:05 AM · #150 |
Well I thought this thread would have been dead by now...but obviously not...and I am quite glad it hasn't. I think it is an important element of this web site to express thoughts and opinions.
I think cghubbell is so money with his most recent comment. It was precisely the point (albeit I was sipping on some wine last night so my point may have been a bit sluggish) I was trying to make.
If you feel the need to "defend" your image, it simply isn't a very good image (i.e. mass appeal (or at least plurality appeal)) and no amount of PM lobbying should change that. |
|
