| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/08/2003 05:34:39 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Proposal: You must have a photo in the challenge to be able to vote in the challenge.
|
I would leave the site for sure if this happens - I am not saying that me leaving is something people would care about in the slightest - I am not a paying member and I don't take photos - but I do spend a heck of a lot of time voting and critiqueing (because I learn from it and get around to it more than I get around to entering).
I think stopping non-entrants voting would be cutting of noses to spite faces - losing lots of good voting and critiqueing to try and get rid of a smaller number of weird voters.
Message edited by author 2003-01-08 17:35:03.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2003 05:44:46 PM · #27 |
i totally agree, kavey!
Originally posted by Kavey:
I think stopping non-entrants voting would be cutting of noses to spite faces - losing lots of good voting and critiqueing to try and get rid of a smaller number of weird voters. |
|
|
|
|
01/08/2003 05:48:40 PM · #28 |
Well, I don't agree with that either. And we have tried the "vote on all" the photos route before (I know you said 60% this time).
I think John's idea about modifying the script is a good idea though,.. if it is possible.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2003 05:57:13 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Karen Bryan:
Well, I don't agree with that either. And we have tried the "vote on all" the photos route before (I know you said 60% this time).
I think John's idea about modifying the script is a good idea though,.. if it is possible. |
These are not mutually exclusive solutions. John's can be implemented entirely by the admins -- mine should have a 1-2 week poll first.
I myself would NOT vote for a super-high threshold, but I think 20% is too low to be effective. I could live with anything higher up to 75-80%, and would support something low enough for those with low-bandwidth and limited time to still participate. |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 06:05:35 PM · #30 |
i disagree with the whole percentage thing. i would much prefer that a specific number would be set, say, 100. or whatever number everyone feels comfortable with. for challenges that have less entries, that would mean voting on every entry...
just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2003 06:08:16 PM · #31 |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 06:16:51 PM · #32 |
| The members are just as guilty. Look at magnetic9999 excellent 3rd place cat photo in the black and white portrait challenge. Two 1s. Must be a cat allergy. I suggest to leave out the highest and lowest 15% of votes. |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 06:40:53 PM · #33 |
Here's the problem:
Everyone would like to see their scores higher. Any changes you have made to get your scores higher will be across-the-board changes that will affect everyone. What is there to gain by doing it at all? |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 06:52:53 PM · #34 |
| Yes maybe it`s best just left how it is. |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 07:35:58 PM · #35 |
On my lousy pics (and ok one) I cast off the the low votes as well as overly negative comments and the tens, cause nobody's perfect. Nor do I give 1's any more. I got tired of everybody crying , and it hurt my feelings too when I received them. I doubt that the people with talent who vote give out too many 10's. All I hope for in my stuff is to hit the middle somwhere, I hope to get to a point where I get higher marks. But the voting system works fine for me. A curve type voting would round every body out , so that there wouldn t be any Losers or winners. sounds a little too PC to me.
...........but what do I know..... |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 07:54:59 PM · #36 |
I want a fair score...not necessarily a high score. And I'd like to see those photos that would actually win, if not for the troll votes, win (or place where they belong in the rankings).
Taking measures to eliminate troll voting would not necessarily have an across the board impact, as not all photos are targeted by trolls.
And no matter the voting scale or system a person uses, one can not argue the point that a quality image that wins blue deserves the same 1 that the same voter gave to an 'ebay shot.' There is a great difference between the two images and that should be reflected in the votes.
You can't explain away the 1's you give out by saying the lighting in an image wasn't perfect or the topic didn't interest you (unless it was completely offensive). If 90% of the voters vote a 4 or above on a specific image and you vote it a 1...chances are your voting scale is completely out of wack or you are troll voting.
Granted the voting system will always be imperfect...but I don't think it has to be this imperfect. |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 07:58:12 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
here's an action that I would request to start with:
D&L have this script that cleans out troll voters. I would modify that script so that it generates a list of names of those who get their votes dumped. If the name appears on the list more than once, the account gets suspended for a period of time. If it appears on the list a third time, it gets suspended permanently. |
I like this idea, i just worry that somewhere along the way people will start coming up with excuses for voting for less than 20% of the images. But still, I think this would eliminate alot of trolls...even if you just make their names public, without any suspensions.
z |
|
|
|
01/08/2003 08:16:24 PM · #38 |
I don't think it is a matter of wanting our scores to be higher.
And I don't mind getting low votes if I deserve them. I also know that appreciation is subjective. All of this has been discussed and has been agreed to. I concur with Froober once again that it is about voters taking the responsibility to act fairly, and if they choose to be a troll that they face consequences. If I submit a crooked blurred photo of something no one can make out, then maybe I deserve a 1.. or maybe a 2 for effort in some people's minds. But an obviously well done photo..like mag's..since it was already referred to in this thread, doesn't deserve a 1. Let's all face it (oops.. no pun intended)...
I admit to having my feelings hurt by low end scores. But I can most times step back from the situation and look at it fairly and say.. Ok, I think that is fair - even by the end of the voting week. But to have a photo you KNOW .. and most other people KNOW is not a 1, or even a 2 or 3 to have those votes.. it is preposterous. I know a few of my photos could have had a higher average if not for the unfair rankings. (Sorry.. no other way to say it).
I could beat this to death.. so, I'll stop now.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2003 11:11:22 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by BadPigg:
I doubt that the people with talent who vote give out too many 10's. |
That's not really true. I'm not sure if you'd say I'm one of the ones with talent, but I give out lots of 10s. I get excited about photos, and the ones that inspire me just cry out for the highest score I can give. I would say that the people who love photography the most have the same kind of feeling when they see something that inspires them, because they're the kind of people who get enthusiastic about visual stimuli :).
We had a thread a little while ago where people posted their voting averages, and mine was on the high side, but not the highest. So I know there are others like me. |
|
|
|
01/09/2003 01:23:15 AM · #40 |
I believe a low score of 1, 2, 3 or 4 should require an explanation as to why the score is given. The site should be programmed to require comments before these scores can be allowed. This comment in today's DPC environment will cause the commentor to be known but his score would still remain anonymous. After all I believe one of the strengths of DPC is the learning process. This includes the process of learning to critique, judge, and appreciate quality of images as well as the art of capturing and creating art from these images. If someone feels an image is lacking something enough to justify a lower than median score then it should become the voter's responsibility to let the photographer know what elements need attention.
Bob
Message edited by author 2003-01-09 01:24:30.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2003 08:24:56 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by RLS:
After all I believe one of the strengths of DPC is the learning process. This includes the process of learning to critique, judge, and appreciate quality of images as well as the art of capturing and creating art from these images. If someone feels an image is lacking something enough to justify a lower than median score then it should become the voter's responsibility to let the photographer know what elements need attention.
Bob |
Well said.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2003 09:36:28 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by marbo:
The members are just as guilty. Look at magnetic9999 excellent 3rd place cat photo in the black and white portrait challenge. Two 1s. Must be a cat allergy. I suggest to leave out the highest and lowest 15% of votes. |
Perfect example -- isn't is possible that two voters thought that a pet photo is not really a portrait? In my opinion (and apparently yours too) they are wrong, but one could make an argument for the opposing position. They thought the photograph didn't meet the challenge, so they gave it a one. In my opinion, they're wrong, but in the end, judging art is all about opinion, and my opinion is no more valid than someone else's. I'm not about to support imposing rules that tell people what their opinions should be.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
01/09/2003 10:22:51 AM · #43 |
Anarchy is great! It's the perfect solution to everything. There should be no moral standards. I think I'll go lowball vote all of the stiff competition so that my photo has a better chance!! What is that? A hot pixel?? Awesome! That gets a 1 because I can justify it!!! If I vote 2's on the best photos, the script that tosses out some of the 1's won't be able to detect my subversive activities. Woo hoo!
Though this is an extreme example...some people are of the opinion that molesting children is okay. Should we toss out the laws that protect our children? Far be it from anyone to actually provide general standards of acceptable behavior.
I give up on this discussion. But if things remain status quo...I doubt I'll be wearing a blue shirt this time next year as apathy towards improvement frustrates me greatly.
Happy day all! :) |
|
|
|
01/09/2003 10:38:36 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by RLS:
I believe a low score of 1, 2, 3 or 4 should require an explanation as to why the score is given. The site should be programmed to require comments before these scores can be allowed. Bob |
But don't forced comments mean that we are just going to get a lot of "this sucks" messages from people? Forcing comments on low votes is not going to actually help anyone to receive better information about what the voters didn't like. I would rather have people give me a 1 because they honestly didn't like my photo and not tell me why - than to either leave a comment that doesn't help me, or to vote it a 5 just so they don't have to say anything. None of those options actually help me become better at photography. |
|
|
|
01/09/2003 11:16:24 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by Froober:
Anarchy is great! It's the perfect solution to everything. There should be no moral standards. I think I'll go lowball vote all of the stiff competition so that my photo has a better chance!! What is that? A hot pixel?? Awesome! That gets a 1 because I can justify it!!! If I vote 2's on the best photos, the script that tosses out some of the 1's won't be able to detect my subversive activities. Woo hoo!
Though this is an extreme example...some people are of the opinion that molesting children is okay. Should we toss out the laws that protect our children? Far be it from anyone to actually provide general standards of acceptable behavior.
I give up on this discussion. But if things remain status quo...I doubt I'll be wearing a blue shirt this time next year as apathy towards improvement frustrates me greatly.
Happy day all! :) |
I'm not apathetic toward improvement... I just think that "improvement" should not be equated with "make everyone vote like me" or with "make my score higher." There are already measures in place to protect against ghost balloting and illegal vote swaying efforts. These measures work, and users who have attempted to abuse the system have been suspended indefinitely.
Everyone's voting scale is different... to many people, 3-4 means a really bad photo. To me, 5-6 is average, 4 is a little below average, and 3 is a photograph that needs a bit of work to be considered average. Since 5-6 is the center of my voting scale, I give about as many 4's as 7's, and about as many 3's as 8's. I use the entire voting scale, which is 1-10 last I checked. I have had photos that I've scored as low as 2 or 3 make the top 10. So be it, I'm just one voice among many, and I've learned a lot by finding out why others appreciate what I did not.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
01/09/2003 11:47:05 AM · #46 |
Well, I'm new to the thread, but here are my opinions in a nutshell:
Requiring comments is going to ruin the entire commenting process.
The 1-10 scale is fine, but I believe that there needs to be more than just one scale.
I tend to have a pretty equal distribution of votes between 4 - 10. I'm not shy about doling out the 1-3's either, if I feel it's warranted. Sorry. This is a challenge and if it's obvious that someone is not taking the "challenge" seriously, they deserve what they get.
The problem remains that there are lots of people with lots of different opinions and voting criteria. Everyone interprets the challenges differently as well. This is never going to change. But if there was a way to differentiate between creativity, technical competence, and relation to the challenge, I think that serious voters would be much more likely to have a true representation of their feelings recorded.
Which also presents another problem...there are lots of non-serious voters out there too. How to clear those out of a public forum? Dunno....
Rob |
|
|
|
01/09/2003 12:05:29 PM · #47 |
| What do you think about having the most respected 10 or 20 members select their pick of the 10 best photos of the week and list them along with the current method. Be interesting to see the results I think. |
|
|
|
01/09/2003 01:19:24 PM · #48 |
| most respected to who? How is that determined? |
|
|
|
01/09/2003 01:41:20 PM · #49 |
How about the winners of the past X # of contests? Or,use the Top Favorite Photographer list. They are on that list cause most here respect their judgement.
Message edited by author 2003-01-09 13:44:08.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2003 03:02:52 PM · #50 |
When critiquing photos I allocate points for the following.
.Creativity
.Lighting
.Does it meet the challenge
.Composition of the photo
.Does it tell a story
.Does it elisite an emotion. (Aw, Yuk, Cute, etc.) If so, then the photographer probably meant for that to happen. Which in my opinion is good.
.Were Elements of Design used?
.Effort
.Make up your own list
Depending on who was voting, that person might want to allocate more points for "meeting the challenge" than you would for "telling a story".
By knowing what to look for and then adding or subtracting scores, (your preference,) you come up with a score that is fair and just. The problem is, how many users of this site are knowledgeable on how to critique other than "I like what I see" or "I don't". This may sound like a lot of time to spend on one picture but with practice you will be able to form an opinion quickly based on the criteria you used for voting. Using this format it is almost impossible to receive a 1 or 2 and a 10 is also difficult to achieve. On a personnal note, I could never give a (1) to any picture simply because a person took the time and effort to take the picture and enter the work... That alone should give them a grade higher than one.
|
|
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: 08/27/2025 08:09:08 AM EDT.
