DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Voting on large entry challenges
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 37 of 37, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/03/2005 03:48:42 PM · #26
By adding some more requirements for challenge participants could help reduce the number of entries. However, this would increase the amount of policing required especially if new requirements are added related to comments.

my 1.5 cents
 05/03/2005 04:26:19 PM · #27
Originally posted by kpriest:
Originally posted by SDW65:
This subject has come up many times before. I donĂ¢€™t think DPC would make it mandatory for everyone to vote or even everyone that entered a particular challenge to vote. Different users have different ways of doing things. So will not vote in a challenge they enter, some will. Some will vote the required 20%, some shoot for 100%. Then we have to think about the ones that have gone on vacation, working extra hours, family business, etc. There are a lot of variables to take into consideration.

Hmmm Scott, I'm not agreeing that you would have to take any of that into consideration. If you submit an entry, it is fair to expect you to contribute. Business, vacations, etc. aren't taken into consideration as far as the submission dates.

What is the downside to this requirement? More votes? Less Entries? (Repeat Question 1). ;-)


I do agree that people should vote but not because it mandatory. I use to try to vote on 100% of the challenges but with high number of entries that has become impossible because of time issues.

I would rather view a picture for as long as I have to in order to cast a vote that I believe is justified than rush a vote and take the chance of under or over scoring that picture. I believe if you mandate someone to vote then you will have votes that are not accurate to what the viewer sees because they rushed there vote.

A good guideline, I think, is to look at your profile. If you have given more votes than received you are in good shape. If you have received more than you have given then maybe you should consider voting more.

In my case the following is true:
Votes Cast: 9639
Votes Received: 8586 = 1.12:1 Ratio on votes cast vs. votes received.
Challenges entered: 33 = 301:1 Ratio on votes cast vs. challenge entered.
Eligible challenge I could have voted in: 82 = 121:1 Ratio on votes cast vs. Challenges eligible to vote in.
05/03/2005 05:00:01 PM · #28
I am new here but I waited almost 5 months to enter a challenge. I voted as many times as could. I never made a comment until I entered my first challenge, but it is very disheartening to see this "Votes: 125
Views: 222". If someone has the time to open the picture then how long does it take to plunk down a score. I do have to agree that after the first 25 votes the score changes very little. The biggest issue I have is that if you don't vote the 20% then they don't count and in some cases that could mean the loss of a ribbon.
Just my newbie thoughts
Karen

Message edited by author 2005-05-03 21:02:59.
 05/04/2005 05:24:26 AM · #29
Originally posted by khdoss:
... it is very disheartening to see this "Votes: 125 Views: 222". If someone has the time to open the picture then how long does it take to plunk down a score. ...

Karen

It is not uncommon for views to exceed votes -- but, it should only become disturbing if it ever becomes the other way around. Thee are generally more views due to a number of reasons, just to list a few:

- Many want to look over the challenge without the pressure of voting before they settle into the task of evaluating each one. It's viewing for pleasure rather than to fulfill any responsibility to vote.
- The opposite is also true; many images call people back several times after they have placed a vote.
- Sometimes there are images that a person doesn't feel comfortable voting on, so they skip it. The way skipping is handled means the image goes back into the pool the next randome image to vote on is pulled from, so they can see (and skip) the same image many times. This is made worse when there are just a few left without votes, as the skipped image comes up more and more often.
- Some people have voting methods that involve useing 'place holder' votes, which they then make a second pass as times allows adjusting the votes up or down as desired. The adjustment is not counted as an additional vote, but if the image page is opened it counts as a view.
- Some make voting their fist priority and then return later to make comments.

There are many reasons to open the image page and register a view of the image, but not all of them have anything to do with voting. In fact, having a view count that is much higher than the vote count is a sign the image has caught some attention from the voters.

David
 05/04/2005 09:52:16 AM · #30
"A very large number of votes is not required for the outcome to be fair and accurate -- statistically, it only takes a few dozen random votes to have a largely accurate view of how the populace as a whole will view the image. After four or five dozen have voted on a shot the score for that shot stops moving much at all.

A lot of votes are simply not needed .... "

"Why do we need so many votes? If fifty people look a your photo thoughtfully isnt that enough? I'm still for lowering the minimum to 10% - In the old days the challenges were smaller and 20% was more reasonable. Seems to me people have a certain amount of time to vote a week, if they vote on fewer, they then spend longer on each photo. There is nothing to gain from encouraging speed voting, after 100 votes your score hardly changes."

"statistically speaking... after 30 votes your score isn't going to move more than a tenth or so in either direction..."

Those are quotes from three different posters, all saying nearly the same thing -- but they are all ignoring the fact that more votes is a highly desirable goal. The more votes there are on a challenge the less influence the trolls and friends have to push the outcome away from the true wishes of the majority.

It's true that your score moves less for each vote as the number of votes received goes up, but the higher number of votes also serves to fine tune the choices of the voters, and that becomes more important as the number of entries increases.

No matter what your own situation (slow connection vs high speed, very busy vs time on your hands, entered vs not entered) it is always desirable to have more votes as opposed to less votes. We should always be encouraging of more voting, just as we are always encouraging more commenting.
05/05/2005 07:12:02 AM · #31
Originally posted by coolhar:
... Those are quotes from three different posters, all saying nearly the same thing -- but they are all ignoring the fact that more votes is a highly desirable goal. The more votes there are on a challenge the less influence the trolls and friends have to push the outcome away from the true wishes of the majority.

Quite frankly -- I have yet to see any indication of troll voting other than those rapidly removed by the existing mechanisms. I find it humorous the votes constantly tagged as 'troll votes' are those that differ significantly from the majority of the voters -- or at least differ from the one doing the complaining. A difference in opinion is not an indication of ill will -- it is just the natural and completely predictable result of having a very diverse membership. Diversity is good, it keeps things interesting and the community active and strong.

Originally posted by coolhar:
... It's true that your score moves less for each vote as the number of votes received goes up, but the higher number of votes also serves to fine tune the choices of the voters, and that becomes more important as the number of entries increases.

There is also one other factor that you are failing to take into consideration. The voting as a margin of error. Each vote placed, is not placed in isolation -- that is, there are outside influences on the voting process that spoil the poll. Regardless of if it's the voter haven't a good day or a bad, the images that appeared immediately before the one being voted upon or a host of other factors -- the vote placed by each voter is significantly influenced by things other than the image itself. This to a certain extent is good, but it does present the problem that the votes placed do not 'exactly' measure the 'true wishes of the majority'. The view they represent will change, sometimes drasticly, if viewed later in the week. While it would be quite the task to find what that margin is, it is enough to acknowledge that it is there.

If we assume a margin of error of +/-3%, which seems to be fairly standard on polls, there would only be two significant digits to the final score. The numbers may be wrong, but they serve to illustrate the point -- there is no need for the scores to be more accurate than the level of error in the voting, except to line up the results numerically.

A much more accurate representation of the votes, especially when comparing them challenge against challenge, is the percentage rating. This keeps the relative rankings withing the accuracy of the poll, and allows the results to be compared with previous results.

Originally posted by coolhar:
... No matter what your own situation (slow connection vs high speed, very busy vs time on your hands, entered vs not entered) it is always desirable to have more votes as opposed to less votes. We should always be encouraging of more voting, just as we are always encouraging more commenting.

I don't think anyone was actively trying to discourage anyone from voting on any image they wanted to -- I certainly wasn't -- but there is no need for any extra attention to be given to ensure a large number of votes. The attention placed on trying to get all of the images voted upon is, in my opinion, misplaced -- both the creator of the image and the one viewing it would benefit greatly by the voter slowing down, looking the image over, and expressing what they think, feel or experience. This is true even if the expression of what they experienced is simply to place a vote.

David
 05/05/2005 09:03:18 AM · #32
Originally posted by SDW65:
A good guideline, I think, is to look at your profile. If you have given more votes than received you are in good shape. If you have received more than you have given then maybe you should consider voting more.

Remember that for any one challenge, the most vosts you can cast is the same as the number of entries, while up to 26,000 registered users could vote for your photo. Ratio of votes given to those recceived is a good guideline, but can also be a wildly inaccurate picture of someone's participation.
 05/05/2005 09:31:08 AM · #33
Originally posted by Britannica:
... -- there is no need for the scores to be more accurate than the level of error in the voting, except to line up the results numerically.
Actually "line(ing) up the results numerically" is a pretty important objective in itself. If anyone doubts the need for this to be accurate beyond two decimals just look at my score, and the one just ahead of it, in the Minimalism challenge.

Originally posted by Britannica:
A much more accurate representation of the votes, especially when comparing them challenge against challenge, is the percentage rating.
While we are talking about being more accurate let's change that percentage to percentile.

Originally posted by Britannica:
I don't think anyone was actively trying to discourage anyone from voting on any image they wanted to -- I certainly wasn't -- but there is no need for any extra attention to be given to ensure a large number of votes. The attention placed on trying to get all of the images voted upon is, in my opinion, misplaced -- both the creator of the image and the one viewing it would benefit greatly by the voter slowing down, looking the image over, and expressing what they think, feel or experience. This is true even if the expression of what they experienced is simply to place a vote.
I believe there is a need to strive toward a large number of votes in every challenge. To do otherwise plays into the hands of those who would manipulate the results. The larger the number of votes the more accurate the results.

The need for voters to give fair consideration to every image they vote on is a separate issue.

I don't think there is too much attention placed on trying to get all images voted upon. It is up to each individual to decide how much time they can spend voting. As we grow, and have more entries in more challenges to vote on, each of us will have to make adjustments. And that might be painful for those who have been in the habit of voting on all images in a challenge, or voting on all of the challenges. However, as each of us makes those adjustments in their own way, it is still desirable for each individual to vote as many images as possible in as many challenges as they can.
05/05/2005 09:47:01 AM · #34
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by Britannica:
... -- there is no need for the scores to be more accurate than the level of error in the voting, except to line up the results numerically.
Actually "line(ing) up the results numerically" is a pretty important objective in itself. If anyone doubts the need for this to be accurate beyond two decimals just look at my score, and the one just ahead of it, in the Minimalism challenge.

I don't know if this addresses your point, but results are calculated to more than four decimal places, but that's all which are displayed.
 05/05/2005 09:48:24 AM · #35
My thought....

Allow for the following:

a) you must vote on at least 20% of images for your votes to be counted.

but add the following

b) any vote "with comment" will also be counted.

This allows people like me who sometimes are too busy to vote on a 100+ entries or people on 56k connections to still participate. Second, it will increase comments. (And I believe that overall most of those comments will be relevent and "good" comments thanks to our great member base.)
 05/05/2005 10:31:02 AM · #36
Originally posted by theSaj:
My thought....

Allow for the following:

a) you must vote on at least 20% of images for your votes to be counted.

but add the following

b) any vote "with comment" will also be counted.

This allows people like me who sometimes are too busy to vote on a 100+ entries or people on 56k connections to still participate. Second, it will increase comments. (And I believe that overall most of those comments will be relevent and "good" comments thanks to our great member base.)

I think this would work against the reason, or one of the reasons, the 20% rule is in place. That is to prevent people from "cherry picking" just the ones they think look cool on the thumbnail page, or to vote only on the entries they know to be friend's or families's. 20% is not really a very high requirement. You can be helpful to photographers by commenting on shots not in the voting phase.
05/10/2005 06:18:56 AM · #37
You must all have a lot of time on your hands. Looks like I've stired up a hornets nest with my comments which I stand by. I do not vote on the thumbnails as was misinterpreted by one post, but some thumbnails immediately stand out and demand further investigation while others do not and I do not have the time to vote for every single picture. I have always found that the best way of learning is to learn by example, looking at the best images is a learning process in itself. Personally I learn the most from reading the photographers own technical comments on pictures that subjectively strike a chord.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/18/2025 09:31:03 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/18/2025 09:31:03 AM EDT.