| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/22/2005 10:12:54 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by JayWalk:
Originally posted by rex:
Originally posted by JayWalk:
I think I am going to start a rant for all the crappy pictures taht get a 10 vote! For some reason we never see that posted here! |
Why so harsh......He posted a suggestion and wanted a civilized discussion. Yet you start complinaing right off the bat or at least it seems that way. |
Actually it was sarcasm.... trying to throw out a bit of humor is all. Geesh... |
ok you just came off wrong.....sorry for not catching it.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:13:02 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by rex:
Why so harsh......He posted a suggestion and wanted a civilized discussion. Yet you start complinaing right off the bat or at least it seems that way. |
Thanks rex. Yes, this was meant for civilized discussion and I'm open to alternatives... I like the "open critique" suggestion just to examples of the wide varieties of taste as suggested by bear_music.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:14:29 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by saracat:
Off to start th open-critique thread!! |
I wouldn't post one of your all time favs Sara if I were you.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:14:43 AM · #29 |
also it depends on how you use the voting scale. I tend to use the votes between 4-10 with very few below that.
Someone else might use between 1 and 7 with very few above that.
As long as each person votes consistently it doesn't matter if they give out an average of 4 or 6 the the scores will be fair.
And for the few who do troll, either the site picks it up, or it's statistically insignificant.
Message edited by author 2005-09-22 10:17:35.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:18:35 AM · #30 |
Critique thread started here.
Don't worry about hurting my feelings. I'm a big girl. And I'm more interested in learning how to do it right than trying to salvage my pride.
I will say that if I don't understand a comment, I may well ask you about it!
Sara |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:19:15 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by neophyte:
You're kidding? right? Who determines what's fair? YOU? |
No, you're missing the point of what I'm trying to say.
Example: Person A sees a photo they think is worthy of a 9 and they feel it is much better than the photo they submitted in the same challenge. Person A then votes a 3 or a 4 to bring down the score of what they feel is a great shot in an effort to better his/her own overall placement in the final scoring. If person A did not have a submission in the challenge, they would be more likely to give the 9. I'm not saying everyone does this or even a majority, just a few, but enough to skew the end results.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:31:27 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by ldowse:
No, you're missing the point of what I'm trying to say. |
I think it might actually be you that is missing the point here. I think what is being said is that the 1-votes are so statistically insignificant that they have no effect on the overall scores. 1 voter out of 200 only has a 0.5% effect on the entire scores. Lets say 10% of the voters do this, you have at maximum an effective 5% shift in total scores. When comparing the lower end of the spectrum w/the higher rated shots, this is effectively meaningless. If you apply the theory that these people will downgrade ALL of the higher shots, all of these shots will scale linearly with each other, thus, the highest rated photos are still the highest rated photos. It will statistically have no effect on ribbon placement, although may switch placement with those who ranked 57th and 58th, which inevitabily has no real bearing on the outcome.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:34:09 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by davmct:
Originally posted by ldowse:
No, you're missing the point of what I'm trying to say. |
I think it might actually be you that is missing the point here. I think what is being said is that the 1-votes are so statistically insignificant that they have no effect on the overall scores. 1 voter out of 200 only has a 0.5% effect on the entire scores. Lets say 10% of the voters do this, you have at maximum an effective 5% shift in total scores. When comparing the lower end of the spectrum w/the higher rated shots, this is effectively meaningless. If you apply the theory that these people will downgrade ALL of the higher shots, all of these shots will scale linearly with each other, thus, the highest rated photos are still the highest rated photos. It will statistically have no effect on ribbon placement, although may switch placement with those who ranked 57th and 58th, which inevitabily has no real bearing on the outcome. |
What he said. In the end It's about tastes. What you're looking for here, or at least it seems to me, is for people to be held responsible for their votes. I don't see it happening, all good intentions aside. Freedom of choice comes at a price... Sometimes you don't like the other people's choices...Sorry.....
Message edited by author 2005-09-22 10:38:11.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:34:56 AM · #34 |
maybe some people just don't like the photos, it's a matter of opinion, we can't disagree with an opinion.
however, i think we could catch the trolls by looking at people's "average vote given" or maybe some way of searching users that have continuously given a string of 1's or 2's.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:35:02 AM · #35 |
Where's the dead horse? Oh, there it is
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:39:11 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by saintaugust:
maybe some people just don't like the photos, it's a matter of opinion, we can't disagree with an opinion.
however, i think we could catch the trolls by looking at people's "average vote given" or maybe some way of searching users that have continuously given a string of 1's or 2's. |
thats not fair. I give 1's and 2's all the time, however, IMO, I give them to shots that justify such a bad score. However, whenever I give such hideous scores, I am sure to justify w/at least a 2-3 sentence critique on what I didn't like about the image. if we discounted the 1's for the "good" pictures, we'd have to discount my 1's for the "bad" pictures too.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:41:14 AM · #37 |
I wish i had a nickel for every time this discussion comes up. I could buy something nice with all that money.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:44:28 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by davmct:
... It will statistically have no effect on ribbon placement, although may switch placement with those who ranked 57th and 58th, which inevitabily has no real bearing on the outcome. |
You may very well be right. I'm not trying to start a debate where a fence get's thrown up and and everybody picks a side. I'm also not trying to beat a dead horse... just merely throwing out a suggestion for something to try as a test. I think this discussion has brought up some good points most of which are very valid.
Do you at least think the possibility of what I'm suggesting is true. Also I think your point about the down voting of "ALL" higher shots may not be entirely true since as you approach mediocrity, the voter "A" will be more likely to vote his/her true impression of the photo.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:48:56 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by ldowse:
I find it hard to believe that everyone has the ability to cast fair votes on direct competition. |
I agree with you.
See this thread and look at the chart. Make of it what you will.
The best solution, IMHO, is an "I've finished voting" button for participants that hides their scores and comments until they click it and lock in their votes. (Which I would suggest would only be possible after 24 hours have elapsed since voting began and they have reached the 20% required minimum.)
And thanks to vfwlkr who had the honesty to post the following in the aforementioned thread. I guarantee you he isn't the only one.
Originally posted by vfwlkr:
When I've entered, and I think I have a strong entry, my votes are heavily skewed. If I'm scoring a 4.x, any image that's not as good as mine in my biased opinon (which might happen to be a large percentage) automatically gets a 4 or less. |
Message edited by author 2005-09-22 10:54:25. |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 10:51:39 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by ldowse:
My opinion is that no one should be able to vote on a challenge they enter. This would help us to see more "unbiased" scores since the scoring would be done by those who have no personal interest in the outcome. |
I usually vote only in the challenges that I do enter. It gives me the chance to see what other photographers come up with for their challenge entries. By doing this, I learn alot more not only in the creative aspect, but in a technical aspect as well, because I can compare my idea and work to theirs.
I do think that if a person is to vote an image as a 3, 2, or 1 that a comment should be required. If a person doesn't want to waste their time, like somebody said they would just write "i don't like it", then that's their choice to make. But maybe they would be fair to the photographer and would be more indepth on why they didn't like the photograph.
Just my honest opinion on the subject.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:06:07 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I wish i had a nickel for every time this discussion comes up. I could buy something nice with all that money. |
I've been away for several months. Seeing this thread upon my return makes it feel like coming home. :) |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:07:29 AM · #42 |
Since I just posted to my first 2 challenges I hadn't given this much thought previously but have now developed the following conclusions.
There should be a total blackout on interim scores. You get what you get at the end of voting. It should be just the image, the title and the voter. No other influences. No active threads on a challenge in voting.
Not voting on your own challenge has pluses and minuses. Would there be enough other voters if you couldn't vote on your own challenge? I have felt morally obligated to vote thus far.
Comments are useful when they expain a poor vote. Problem is, that takes time. It's time consuming enough to vote on 300-500 images. If a voter is required make comments on 50 or even 75 of them, will they be disuaded from bothering? |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:12:06 AM · #43 |
I agree with ldowse - I have suggested the same thing myself in the past.
Righ now, with the side-by-side open challenges going on, would be the perfect time to introduce this.
Originally posted by strangeghost:
I think we all need to accept the fact that some people view things very differently than "we" do, and that, in fact, some photos we regard as 10s are somebody else's 1s. It's not right or wrong, it just is.
|
I think that view is oversimplified.
There are certain techniques that don't appeal to me at all, yet if the photo is technically well executed and fits the challenge well, I have no right to give it a VERY low score, just because it is not my preferred style.
If I did, it would come under the spite/troll category. |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:15:35 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by photodude:
There should be a total blackout on interim scores. You get what you get at the end of voting. It should be just the image, the title and the voter. No other influences. No active threads on a challenge in voting. |
This would also be an excellent alternative IMHO. Besides it would help with my "update" addiction.
Hello my name is Lee and I'm addicted to update.
Maybe we could pick one photo that's not ours to see the active scoring on but not vote on... This would help ease the pain for us update junkies!
:-)
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:21:31 AM · #45 |
What about an option... If you vote on a challenge you enter, you don't get to see the score on your entry. If you opt not to vote, you get an update button. Decisions should be made at the time of your entry and locked during the week.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:22:22 AM · #46 |
Maybe I'm anal. When I do participate in voting, I try to go back and see how my voting scored up with others. The ones I thought were winners turn out not to be, so even my judgement is poor.
I wouldn't try to control the trolls. They'll just find some other way to circomvent the control. Just rely on the adverage to flush out the trolls.
Evil hath no bounds. |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:22:25 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by photodude:
There should be a total blackout on interim scores. You get what you get at the end of voting. It should be just the image, the title and the voter. No other influences. No active threads on a challenge in voting.
|
I agree with this also. I just do not know if I am ready to give up my precious update button! lol
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:24:09 AM · #48 |
Just turn off your own scores if it bothers you...the option is available on your preferences page. :)
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 12:07:36 PM · #49 |
First off, Trolls don't factor all that much because they spread their stupidity evenly and rarely make any difference in the end.
There IS only one solution if it's worth bothering with and that would be to set up "Outlier Vote, Algorithm"
Basically...ANYTHING that doesn't fit within the curve (or an oddity) will be cut out...dropped...adios...see ya. You can set the range to your specs so it should completey, unbiased and fair.
...but does it really matter?
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 12:46:12 PM · #50 |
Updates are fun and I'm against anything that would take this away! If I enter or vote I can't see how my photo's doing in that challenge??? This seems absurd, to be as diplomatic as I can be. I can't believe you want to take away things from everyone, change the rules or place new restrictions because you're unhappy with a few low votes on photos you think deserved better.
Expand freedoms! Don't restrict them!
|
|
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: 09/04/2025 07:31:01 AM EDT.
