Proposal to improve(?) the voting system

03/21/2006 07:54:26 PM · #1

I believe it is generally the case that more successful and accomplished members tend to vote on the quality attributes of an entry whereas lessor accomplished voters tend to vote on the subject of an entry. Of course there are and always will be exceptions to these generalizations.
Are you frustrated by your well thought out, carefully planned and lighted image scoring in the low 4s just because a majority of the voters find the subject unappealing? How about a weighted voting system whereby more expert voters (by demonstrated success) have a more significant impact on the score than a newbie that has no experience? For example, a newbie with only a few entries and little success would be weighted one for one while a multi-ribboned voter with a longer history would have an impact of 5 for one (or something to this effect). Members would steadily progress as they gained experience and success to higher levels of voting impact.

Any ideas or thoughts on this concept?

sir_bazz

Pentax K-5

Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 AF

03/21/2006 07:59:55 PM · #2

It's good to see your thinking out of the box but I personally don't think there's anything wrong with the voting system.

As long as each voter is consistent in their voting through all submissions it doesn't really matter how they score.

cheers,
bazz.

fotomann_forever

03/21/2006 08:04:29 PM · #3

Surely one of the most unique systems that's been introduced. It's certainly an interesting idea.

Message edited by author 2006-03-21 20:04:43.

03/21/2006 08:07:49 PM · #4

How will you define "more expert"? If you base it on average scores received, or ribbons won, you are absolutely reinforcing the status quo, because these are the result of commanality of taste.

R.

03/21/2006 08:10:58 PM · #5

The present voting system tends to discourage development of a new photographer because the quality merits of an image are often overshadowed by the voters reaction to the subject, in other words, the score frequently bears little relationship to the quality of the image, reflecting rather the gut reaction of the voters to the subject. Of course the opposite also occurs, a very appealing subject with mediocre quality sometimes ribbons.

Olympus 17.5-45mm f/3.5-5.6

03/21/2006 08:18:13 PM · #6

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

How will you define "more expert"? If you base it on average scores received, or ribbons won, you are absolutely reinforcing the status quo, because these are the result of commanality of taste.

R.

At present the voters are still more often right than wrong in their selections. But look at this example:

This image is mediocre at best, yet scored in the top ten of the challenge (yes, it was my entry). Why? It was selected by the voters whose reaction on average to the subject and title was very positive. It should have scored in the high 4s or low 5s.

kirsty_mcn

Olympus E-500 EVOLT

03/21/2006 08:21:04 PM · #7

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

How will you define "more expert"? If you base it on average scores received, or ribbons won, you are absolutely reinforcing the status quo, because these are the result of commanality of taste.

R.

Amen brother

Actually, maybe what you could do is use the same idea but instead of given high-scorers higher weighting, make it the people who have been on dpc longer / voted on more challenges / entered more challenges have more impact

MrEd

Sony DSLR-A100

Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF for Minolta

03/21/2006 08:21:31 PM · #8

Who's to say a new member has any less experience than anyone on here?

Nikon D200

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

03/21/2006 08:24:20 PM · #9

Originally posted by MrEd:

Who's to say a new member has any less experience than anyone on here?

Agreed. Just because someone is new to DPC doesn't mean they are new to photography....

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

03/21/2006 08:32:23 PM · #10

Originally posted by MrEd:

Who's to say a new member has any less experience than anyone on here?

We often have very qualified new members. They would tend to move up to higher voting weight more quickly than lessor qualified members.
I don't know about the criteria for establishing voting levels, I leave that to people more qualified than I am to make that call. But some combination of experience on this site and success on this site would likely be a fair measure of expertise. I don't believe a single fluke ribbon should be qualifying by itself, but rather a consistant pattern of demonstrated expertise.
Reinforcing status quo? Do you know anyone that consistantly wins ribbons by producing bad photography?

David.C

03/22/2006 01:24:46 AM · #11

Sounds like an implementation of a 'karma system' (search for it, I'm getting some food :P ) that has been brought up a few times. The main difference would be the karma system adjusts the weighting automatically while this proposed system requires someone to make the choices.

David

DefyTime

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/22/2006 02:04:26 AM · #12

It would have to be based on your average score or something along those lines to see how much your vote is worth...if you give it to human judgment you are back in the same boat. Sounds pretty cool to meâ�¦It would give the site a bit more depthâ�¦might see some of the more unnoticed photos be more acknowledged.

Clint

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/22/2006 02:29:19 AM · #13

I have been studying voting for sometime now and notice a few things that make me ponder on the thought of possible voting problems.
1). There seems to have been an increase of users w/o cameras voting and the majority votes 5 or less.
2). There seems to have been an increase of users that only vote and not enter challenges and have no other site activity or very little.

People can say what they want but there are things going on that are out right bad when it comes to voting. Let's take the education challenge for an example.
143 entries / 39722 votes cast
51 above avg. (5.5000)= 36% / 14300 votes were above avg.
92 below Avg. (5.5000)= 64% / 25422 votes were below avg.

Another example the Footwear Challenge.
267 entries / 67698
58 above avg. (5.5000)= 22% / 14894 votes were above avg.
209 below Avg. (5.5000)= 78% / 52804 votes were below avg.

My conclusion is that FEW USERS have multiple accounts, sharing images before or during voting and the voter ups the vote because they know the person. Users voting down photographs that they do not recognize the photograph or photographer.

Now I know I am going to get hit hard for my statements. But thats how I feel and if you are not one of the users I described above then don't take offense. If you are the you have a reason too.

EDIT: To add
If you look at member challenges in the same way.
Example: Literary Adventure
162 entries / 31,827 votes cast
99 above avg. (5.5000)= 61% / 19414 votes were above avg.
63 below Avg. (5.5000)= 39% / 12413 votes were below avg.

Example: Pick Two
109 entries / 24,324 votes cast
51 above avg. (5.5000)= 47% / 11432 votes were above avg.
58 below Avg. (5.5000)= 53% / 12892 votes were below avg.

Message edited by author 2006-03-22 02:41:40.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

03/22/2006 02:31:30 AM · #14

Originally posted by TomFoolery:

I don't buy that. My average score is like 5.4 or something. I enter a lot of challenges for "fun", I do whimisical or extreme things that the voters don't respond well to, and so forth. None of this makes me less-qualified to judge images than the guy/gal who enters a few challenges a year and ribbons consistently.

R.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

03/22/2006 02:43:01 AM · #15

How about y'all send me $50, and I'll see if I can talk Langdon into making your vote count double ...

Azrifel

Fujifilm X100VI

03/22/2006 02:51:58 AM · #16

Most buyers of photographs are not advanced photographers, there is nothing wrong with them judging your work. Same applies to paintings, 99% of the buyers are not painters.
You'll just have to learn to appeal the masses or stay true to your art and appeal only the small group that sees what your worth.

So bring in more no camera voters.

David.C

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

03/22/2006 03:02:11 AM · #17

Originally posted by southern_exposure:

... People can say what they want but there are things going on that are out right bad when it comes to voting. Let's take the education challenge for an example.
143 entries / 39722 votes cast
51 above avg. (5.5000)= 36% / 14300 votes were above avg.
92 below Avg. (5.5000)= 64% / 25422 votes were below avg.

Another example the Footwear Challenge.
267 entries / 67698
58 above avg. (5.5000)= 22% / 14894 votes were above avg.
209 below Avg. (5.5000)= 78% / 52804 votes were below avg.

My conclusion is that FEW USERS have multiple accounts, sharing images before or during voting and the voter ups the vote because they know the person. Users voting down photographs that they do not recognize the photograph or photographer. ...

I don't follow your logic -- what in the stats you posted lead you to believe in trolls.

In a challenge primarily aimed at individuals that don't know much about photography trying to learn photography by trying something new, I would be very suprised if there were not a great many more images below average than above.

David

MistyMucky

Nikon D700

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

03/22/2006 03:15:09 AM · #18

If one's image is doing badly, we have two possibilities. First: blaming the voting system. Second: asking ourselves why this picture did not appeal to the masses, as Azrifel pointed out. I think we can learn something out of the latter. If I wanted solely professional critique, I would go to a photography workshop instead of this site.

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/22/2006 03:18:22 AM · #19

Originally posted by David.C:

Originally posted by southern_exposure:
... People can say what they want but there are things going on that are out right bad when it comes to voting. Let's take the education challenge for an example.
143 entries / 39722 votes cast
51 above avg. (5.5000)= 36% / 14300 votes were above avg.
92 below Avg. (5.5000)= 64% / 25422 votes were below avg.

Another example the Footwear Challenge.
267 entries / 67698
58 above avg. (5.5000)= 22% / 14894 votes were above avg.
209 below Avg. (5.5000)= 78% / 52804 votes were below avg.

My conclusion is that FEW USERS have multiple accounts, sharing images before or during voting and the voter ups the vote because they know the person. Users voting down photographs that they do not recognize the photograph or photographer. ...

I don't follow your logic -- what in the stats you posted lead you to believe in trolls.

In a challenge primarily aimed at individuals that don't know much about photography trying to learn photography by trying something new, I would be very suprised if there were not a great many more images below average than above.

David

It has already been stated time and time again that anyone deserves the right to vote. Just because they are new users should not make a difference. I agree! But take a look at the members vs. open challenges.
Members avg around 50% and greater votes above average while open challenges hover around 20-35% above average photographs.

What I'm saying could it be possible that people are signing up as R-Users to down vote the site? People from other sites, Not current members or users. There are a lot of R-Users that are here to learn and respect this site. But there always will be some bad apples (R or M)that will try to get a few high votes in while countering with a few low votes to widen the gap, what ever it takes.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/22/2006 03:25:33 AM · #20

Originally posted by southern_exposure:

Is it not at least conceivable that the explanation is as simple as this: the average quality of mebers' challenge entries is higher than the average quality of open challenge entries?

Robt.

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

03/22/2006 03:41:58 AM · #21

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by southern_exposure:
It has already been stated time and time again that anyone deserves the right to vote. Just because they are new users should not make a difference. I agree! But take a look at the members vs. open challenges.
Members avg around 50% and greater votes above average while open challenges hover around 20-35% above average photographs.

Is it not at least conceivable that the explanation is as simple as this: the average quality of mebers' challenge entries is higher than the average quality of open challenge entries?

Robt.

Yes thats conceivable but I don't see where paying $25 makes a user a better photographer or voter. And members participate in the open challenges on a consistent basis.