| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/09/2005 10:01:36 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by keegbow:
yes an honour system |
We currently have checkboxes that say you've read the rules and that you've taken your photo within certain dates. There are still multiple disqualifications per challenge. Why do you think a third checkbox would be effective? |
Because there is no rule in place that says you can't post your image on another site during the challenge. |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:02:55 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by keegbow:
yes an honour system |
We currently have checkboxes that say you've read the rules and that you've taken your photo within certain dates. There are still multiple disqualifications per challenge. Why do you think a third checkbox would be effective? |
Because there is no rule in place that says you can't post your image on another site during the challenge. |
I'm not sure how this answers my question. |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:03:11 PM · #78 |
Why should there be a rule for this?
|
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:23:44 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by keegbow:
yes an honour system |
We currently have checkboxes that say you've read the rules and that you've taken your photo within certain dates. There are still multiple disqualifications per challenge. Why do you think a third checkbox would be effective? |
Because there is no rule in place that says you can't post your image on another site during the challenge. |
I'm not sure how this answers my question. |
You could make it effective by simply increasing the penalty because it would be a an outright breach of the rules not just a date/time mix up |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:25:20 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Why should there be a rule for this? |
To stop people manipulating the voting. |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:28:40 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
To stop people manipulating the voting. |
Maybe it will help explain what happened to JFK, Hoffa, and most of the Bermuda Triangle disappearances too. ;)
That was a joke btw...but seriously, there is absolutely no way that having a shot posted somewhere else is going to be manipulating the voting in any way. If that were true, I'd have blue ribbons out my wazoo. :)
|
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:33:32 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Originally posted by keegbow:
To stop people manipulating the voting. |
Maybe it will help explain what happened to JFK, Hoffa, and most of the Bermuda Triangle disappearances too. ;)
That was a joke btw...but seriously, there is absolutely no way that having a shot posted somewhere else is going to be manipulating the voting in any way. If that were true, I'd have blue ribbons out my wazoo. :) |
My comments are based on the original post in this thread.
Maybe it wouldn't influence it to the degree of ribbons but may give you a much higher rating which is still to the detriment of everyone else in the competition. |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:35:36 PM · #83 |
| Should photos with subjects/places that can be linked to a certain photographer be disqualified, too? |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:38:31 PM · #84 |
So in the spirit of maintaining my personal integrity, I really shouldn't do self portraits, or take pics of my children, or my dog, or of things in the immediate DFW area, or of the other DPCers that I might go shooting with...and even if I did, I couldn't post them to my own website or to any other site on the world wide web, because my cover might be blown? Am I the only one who is failing to see the insanity in this???
|
|
|
|
12/09/2005 10:44:03 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Maybe it wouldn't influence it to the degree of ribbons but may give you a much higher rating... |
So you might think a photo is worth a 6, but if you spot it on another site it suddenly becomes a 10? Does not compute. Even Librodo gets low scores on occasion when we know darn well it's his shot. |
|
|
|
12/09/2005 11:08:35 PM · #86 |
Somewhere in this thread, some moron concieved the idea that post a picture for the reasons of peer review prior to a challenge, might not be in the best interest of the other contestants. Now granted that moron has now realized that the incident eluded to by the OP, wasn't as devious as he thought. However, considering that any idiot, including the affore mentioned moron, can now post an image for peer review within an social group they please, would it not seem prudent to at least demonstrate the site distain for this practice?
|
|
|
|
12/09/2005 11:21:10 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by Jammur:
Somewhere in this thread, some moron concieved the idea that post a picture for the reasons of peer review prior to a challenge, might not be in the best interest of the other contestants. Now granted that moron has now realized that the incident eluded to by the OP, wasn't as devious as he thought. However, considering that any idiot, including the affore mentioned moron, can now post an image for peer review within an social group they please, would it not seem prudent to at least demonstrate the site distain for this practice? |
But I (personally) don't have disdain for this -- I do not think we have to work in lonely isolation in our garret studio to produce a valid entry. You just have to not be trying to hype the vote.
Your photo need only be anonymous to the voters, not the world. And, as has been pointed out repeatedly, such anonymity is a courtesy and a common practice, but not a "rule."
I think way too much is being made out of this issue. |
|
|
|
12/10/2005 12:26:00 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think way too much is being made out of this issue. |
I'd have to say I agree with that. This thread has me dumbfounded. I'd be willing to bet if we removed ALL emphasis on anonymity and let people promote their images any way they wished, the results would change very little if at all. I completely refuse to believe, especially, that (just to name one example) Manny's images score so well because people recognize that they are Manny's and vote him up. I'd think the opposite would happen, actually...
As for "voting blocs" of off-site friends, and off-site "publication" of the images, well... Do people realize that for this to have any significant effect, this off-site bloc would have to be DPC members (and PAID members at that, for the member's challenges) and would have to vote on the minimum 20% for the votes to have any effect?
Let's be realistic here, and weigh the negatives of an increasingly fascistic site versus the imagined (but not proven) "benefits" of suppressing possible (but thus far undiscovered) bloc voting. I mean, how often is this going to happen? Where's the BENEFIT of it? There's no real upside to this, compared with the effort it would take.
R. |
|
|
|
12/10/2005 12:33:57 AM · #89 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
So in the spirit of maintaining my personal integrity, I really shouldn't do self portraits, or take pics of my children, or my dog, or of things in the immediate DFW area, or of the other DPCers that I might go shooting with...and even if I did, I couldn't post them to my own website or to any other site on the world wide web, because my cover might be blown? Am I the only one who is failing to see the insanity in this??? |
No, Laurie, you are not the only one... :) This practice has been going on as long as I've been associated with DPC, and that's a long time, and I doubt there is a single verifiable case of "sharing with friends" actually manipulating the voting.
It's the standard "you've got friends and I don't" witch hunt that happens about every two months. It'll blow over :)
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 12:57:18 AM · #90 |
*laughing*
* OK, so if I put a challenge shot on a website and shared with say 20 friends. (well wish I had 20 friends anyway)
* Of those 20 friends, 12 actually took the time to pay attention to the picture.
* Of those 12, 9 bothered to read the comments saying it was a DPC challenge picture.
* Of those 9, 4 were halfway hammered from happy hour and passed out.
* Of those 5 remaining, 2 never made it past voting on 20% and their "swayed" votes never counted.
* OK now we have 3 friends, that might have voted my picture a 7 had they not known it was mine, now voted it a 10.
* 3 votes - hmmmm....sounds like an unfair 0.0185 advantage to me.
The cash prizes here demand that we have an unbiased and fair voting process, so we take 3 votes off off everyone's results to even it out.
(Do I have a future in politics or what?)
Message edited by author 2005-12-10 01:00:39. |
|
|
|
12/10/2005 12:59:34 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by BradP:
(Do I have a future in politics of what?) |
Not if you keep making sense like that. |
|
|
|
12/10/2005 01:36:27 AM · #92 |
OK, so to summarize what i missed here while at work...
I can start a thread - for example:
DPC Froums- Photograph Discussion.
"I was thinking of entering this in the 4-5AM challenge. can i have some feedback on what would make it better?
Thanks!"
Currently, this is legal. Be it here on DPC, or at DPReview, Fujimugs, FredMiranda, wherever. It is done here periodically for other competetions.
I am not swaying the voters. I am not obligated to maintain anonymity. i am not restricted in posting it, or getting feedback to make it better.
So unless there is rule to stop this, perhaps i will try it! The only backlash might be voters sandbagging me for trying it with lots of 1,2 votes, right?
SO I agree with Keegbow - add a rule (or a checkbox) that states "No challenge entry shall be published or displayed on any website during the challenge and voting period. Violation will be an automatic DQ".
Policing? If i see something I email the SC with the link of the infraction. Duh! The SC click the link and decide for themselves. Self policing is a moot point - to post it would be breaking the rules, so honest folk would not do it in the first place.
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 01:42:50 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by BradP:
*laughing*
...
(Do I have a future in politics or what?) |
Only if you quit laughing and make certain the three votes your advocating removing are the top three. A politician would never take anything less than the cream of the crop -- and never do they have a sense of humor.
David
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 02:09:43 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
OK, so to summarize what i missed here while at work...
I can start a thread - for example:
DPC Froums- Photograph Discussion.
"I was thinking of entering this in the 4-5AM challenge. can i have some feedback on what would make it better?
Thanks!"
Currently, this is legal. Be it here on DPC, or at DPReview, Fujimugs, FredMiranda, wherever. It is done here periodically for other competetions.
I am not swaying the voters. I am not obligated to maintain anonymity. i am not restricted in posting it, or getting feedback to make it better.
So unless there is rule to stop this, perhaps i will try it! The only backlash might be voters sandbagging me for trying it with lots of 1,2 votes, right?
SO I agree with Keegbow - add a rule (or a checkbox) that states "No challenge entry shall be published or displayed on any website during the challenge and voting period. Violation will be an automatic DQ".
Policing? If i see something I email the SC with the link of the infraction. Duh! The SC click the link and decide for themselves. Self policing is a moot point - to post it would be breaking the rules, so honest folk would not do it in the first place. |
It seems logical but it won't get anywhere, too many people been here for so long they are set in their ways and resist change even when it's too the betterment of all. |
|
|
|
12/10/2005 02:18:15 AM · #95 |
This discussion has come up before, and this is our take on it.
There is actually nothing in the Challenge Rules that says that an entry must remain anonymous. This is why we do not disqualify entries for posting entries to the forums, but rather just remove the forum posts.
The official position of DPChallenge is that you own your image, and therefore have a right to do pretty much what you want with it offsite. Our only restrictions are:
- You may not reveal your challenge entries within DPChallenge before voting is complete. If you do so, we will delete the relevant forum post. If you do so willfully or repeatedly, we reserve the right to disqualify and/or suspend.
- You may not link directly to an offsite page that contains your current challenge entry. If you do, we will take the same actions as above.
- You may not use an offsite page to "campaign" for your entry in any way, such as encouraging friends to sign up for DPC and vote for your image. This is considered vote swaying and subject to the penalties listed in the rules.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 02:46:02 AM · #96 |
So Terry...then my 'idea' is legal? After a challenge is announced, but before voting begins, i can post the image in the forums and ask for feedback to improve the image?
I believe if i remove an image from my portfolio, it will vanish from the forums posts...so this would then be acceptable, rules wise?
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 03:03:00 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
So Terry...then my 'idea' is legal? After a challenge is announced, but before voting begins, i can post the image in the forums and ask for feedback to improve the image?
I believe if i remove an image from my portfolio, it will vanish from the forums posts...so this would then be acceptable, rules wise? |
No.
As I posted above:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
- You may not reveal your challenge entries within DPChallenge before voting is complete. If you do so, we will delete the relevant forum post. If you do so willfully or repeatedly, we reserve the right to disqualify and/or suspend. |
This is in place to prevent exactly that.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 11:10:02 AM · #98 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
I'd have to say I agree with that. This thread has me dumbfounded. I'd be willing to bet if we removed ALL emphasis on anonymity and let people promote their images any way they wished, the results would change very little if at all. I completely refuse to believe, especially, that (just to name one example) Manny's images score so well because people recognize that they are Manny's and vote him up. I'd think the opposite would happen, actually...
As for "voting blocs" of off-site friends, and off-site "publication" of the images, well... Do people realize that for this to have any significant effect, this off-site bloc would have to be DPC members (and PAID members at that, for the member's challenges) and would have to vote on the minimum 20% for the votes to have any effect?
Let's be realistic here, and weigh the negatives of an increasingly fascistic site versus the imagined (but not proven) "benefits" of suppressing possible (but thus far undiscovered) bloc voting. I mean, how often is this going to happen? Where's the BENEFIT of it? There's no real upside to this, compared with the effort it would take.
R. |
To follow in your theme of Let's be Realistic, I'd like to point out that we don't really know how much effect the activities complained about in this thread have on the challenge results now, or how much a change in the rules to support anonymity and tighten the "loopholes" would change those results. For all we know, the voting blocks and appeals to friends for help, etc. are already determining who gets ribbons. Two things we are sure of are that the site continues to grow, and that the desire to strengthen the provisions regarding anonymity keep coming up again and again in the forums. Even the current leadership cannot deny that sooner or later change will have to come.
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 11:42:47 AM · #99 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
As I posted above:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
- You may not reveal your challenge entries within DPChallenge before voting is complete. If you do so, we will delete the relevant forum post. If you do so willfully or repeatedly, we reserve the right to disqualify and/or suspend. |
This is in place to prevent exactly that.
~Terry |
Ahhh...but the image has now vanished (see below...) So if i posted an image NOW for the 4-5Am challenge (without saying that is what it was for) - just a 'Help me make the i better' or C&C this please and then it vanishes BEFORE voting begins, then i have not 'revealed before voting is complete'.
And just to make it more fun, it can be a differnt image. i mean, if you take 100 shots to get that 'one', it could be one of the other 1200 nearly the same, or perhaps close to the final (b&w vs color, slightly diff crop, etc).
Unless someone read the thread and can remember the image once they start voting who could know? Since it is not in the forums once voting has begun, or ever again for that matter, then it's OK?
or is OK only if it is off-this-site, as in DPCFanatics for example?
|
|
|
|
12/10/2005 11:52:00 AM · #100 |
Trying to assess the power of a voting block, mathematecilly speaking.
If you double the number of 10 votes on the Industrial winner the score moves from 7.4 to 7.7. Not an impressive move.
If you take my less impressive entry and add the same number of 10 votes (34) as i added to the winner, it moves the score from 5.5 to 6.01. A more significant move for sure.
I would bet you couldn't get 34 people to give you a 10 (actually, they'd all give eachother 10s in all likelyhood) and i'm not sure that it would get you a ribbon unless you had a pretty good image to start with.
Interesting side note - the winner got a 1 vote, i did not. The Trolls may be more of an issue than we know, but it does suggest that images are seen elsewhere and given 1s in retribution perhaps?
|
|
