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

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Critique Club name
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 38 of 38, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/10/2006 09:43:24 PM · #26
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by yanko:
Ah ok, it was a petty reason.


I take that as an insult. I volunteered my time to help others as a whole community to improve their photography. I'm insulted that a small clique of users would also use that title. Instead of playing in your little reindeer group, join the club. The excuse that was given in starting your little group was that no one ever really got critiques. If more people joined it would be easier to get through the huge queue that always exists...


Previous statement was out of hand, but I'm equally upset about the attitude TC and Alienyst are presenting here. This was an approved exercise and meets the forum rules thorougly. You guys are fine in asking that we not use Critique Club wording, but you need to chill on knocking the principle. It's not appreciated.


Message edited by author 2006-05-10 21:48:25.
 05/10/2006 09:43:41 PM · #27
Yanko, my 'desparate' remark was not a knock to you or your efforts at all. Seems to me there is an attitude somewhere. BUT, if you really want to help and have not gotten a response from the critique club when you check the box, think about what you are doing now with this effort. The CC cannot give out all the critiques requested due to request to member ratio. So what I see is instead of people supporting the site, they complain about it and then go and do exactly what they are complaining about not being done. So again, why not just join the CC and pass your efforts across the site as a whole and not just a small group that serves only the small group? It is the same thing in principle, just not execution.

I guess I am confused as to why we need multiple groups just for critiques when there is one that people don't join and contribute. I mean, why is it good for you to form/join a splinter group but not join the group itself that is affiliated with the site that does the same thing??

Message edited by author 2006-05-10 21:45:17.
 05/10/2006 09:46:29 PM · #28
As a member of the (er) official Critique Club, let me first say the more comments the better to help the rest of DPC.

We could certainly use more commenters in the official Critique Club. That would make the problem of too many images, not enough Critique Clubers easier to handle.

We do not get to pick and choose. We take the image dealt us.

We are vetted, and must pass some minimal requirements to be part of the group. And if our critiques are awful, we know about it.

Now, if someone wants to do a narrow group of comments among a narrow group of DPCers there's nothing stopping you.

But, absolutely, please be sure the members of your group do not tick the "Critique Button". THAT's double dipping, and we have enough to do if someone is already getting critiqued by someone else.

That's only fair. Right?

I don't know TooCool, except that I will always remember the first image I submitted to DPC (don't we all?) He gave a gentle, yet firm comment that I appreciated then, and continue to do.

Now, my suggestion: everyone take a deep breath, and remember why we are here at DPC. To learn and have fun.

To learn and to have fun.
 05/10/2006 10:00:46 PM · #29
Originally posted by nards656:
Previous statement was out of hand, but I'm equally upset about the attitude TC and Alienyst are presenting here. This was an approved exercise and meets the forum rules thorougly. You guys are fine in asking that we not use Critique Club wording, but you need to chill on knocking the principle. It's not appreciated.


Not knocking anything. I just think it would be better for the community as a whole if the energy was put into the 350+ requested critiques. Don't be exclusionary...
 05/10/2006 10:05:59 PM · #30
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
I've been using CTP2 as my intro for our group ;-)


what about C3PO? or R2D2? lol :p
 05/10/2006 10:07:00 PM · #31
Originally posted by Alienyst:
Yanko, my 'desparate' remark was not a knock to you or your efforts at all. Seems to me there is an attitude somewhere. BUT, if you really want to help and have not gotten a response from the critique club when you check the box, think about what you are doing now with this effort. The CC cannot give out all the critiques requested due to request to member ratio. So what I see is instead of people supporting the site, they complain about it and then go and do exactly what they are complaining about not being done. So again, why not just join the CC and pass your efforts across the site as a whole and not just a small group that serves only the small group? It is the same thing in principle, just not execution.

I guess I am confused as to why we need multiple groups just for critiques when there is one that people don't join and contribute. I mean, why is it good for you to form/join a splinter group but not join the group itself that is affiliated with the site that does the same thing??


As I mentioned I did inquire about joining the CC a while back and didn't get a response. I have complained about the lack of comments in the past but that was always a general statement not something directed at the CC. I don't see why complaining about lack of comments and then doing something about it should be looked at negatively especially when I'm not just doing it with one small group. I like to think I leave constructive comments during voting as well as when someone posts a photo in a thread for comments.

Btw, I did not intend to insult the CC or any of it's members. I just asked a question and felt the answer at the time was a blow off.
 05/10/2006 10:07:37 PM · #32
This is silly. Someone asked that something be done, someone else complied. Problem solved. Who cares how people are organizing their comment giving (aside from the identifier, which I understand)? At least they're giving comments. Do we really need to bicker everything to death?
 05/10/2006 10:10:28 PM · #33
Originally posted by mk:
Do we really need to bicker everything to death?


Once again, not my intention! I just PERSONALLY wish that the same energy went into the CC. It's frustrating to do several critiques a week and not make a dent in the queue...
 05/10/2006 10:12:21 PM · #34
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by mk:
Do we really need to bicker everything to death?


Once again, not my intention! I just PERSONALLY wish that the same energy went into the CC. It's frustrating to do several critiques a week and not make a dent in the queue...


It would have been very easy to simply phrase it that way in the first place. But we all appreciate comments and to the recepient, I doubt it matters much where they come from. Let's just appreciate that people are making an effort anywhere.
 05/10/2006 10:13:42 PM · #35
Originally posted by TooCool:
I just PERSONALLY wish that the same energy went into the CC. It's frustrating to do several critiques a week and not make a dent in the queue...


Fire them and hire new ones? ;)
 05/10/2006 10:16:36 PM · #36
Originally posted by Alienyst:
I guess I am confused as to why we need multiple groups just for critiques when there is one that people don't join and contribute. I mean, why is it good for you to form/join a splinter group but not join the group itself that is affiliated with the site that does the same thing??

It actually doesn't do the same thing. The "Trading Post" stuff guarantees that each member gets at least nine comments on at least one of his/her challenge submissions each week. The Critique Club, as you know, is overtaxed and cannot guarantee a response. I don't think it's problematic if little groups get together to guarantee each other at least one comment per week, so long as there's no confusion with the "real" Club. For the record, I'm in CC, and I really love giving in-depth comments, though since I joined about a month ago, I've only done twenty-five of them.

By the way, these "Trading Post" comments generally tend to be much shorter than the more in-depth CC comments. They're more along the lines of regular comments anyone else would make.
 05/10/2006 10:24:38 PM · #37
Originally posted by yanko:
As I mentioned I did inquire about joining the CC a while back and didn't get a response.


I believe if you PM hbunch or Manic you will get a response. They are fairly quick and attentive to the needs of the CC and I cannot believe they would just not respond at all. But then we all make mistakes and miss emails. I do know your presence in the CC circle would be welcome as EVERYONE's on this site would be.

"9,321 photographs have been critiqued (10,979 attempted) out of the 37,819 requested since the club's inception. " This is taken from the CC's page. Although it shows 286 members, not all are currently active. All legitimate help, I am sure, would not be turned away.

And again, I am not knocking the efforts of any of these groups. I am all for involvement/participation/encouragement. But a singular effort is always stronger than a fragmented one.

EDIT: yanko - message sent for your addition to the DPC CC club.

Message edited by author 2006-05-10 22:29:48.
 05/10/2006 11:38:25 PM · #38
Originally posted by TooCool:
I just PERSONALLY wish that the same energy went into the CC. It's frustrating to do several critiques a week and not make a dent in the queue...


I feel your pain there and I'm sorry for your frustration.

My frustration was rooted in submitting a 4.5 (or lower) image and getting ONE stinking comment. ONE. The masters with the ribbons have 300, it seems, on a single image, telling them how great the pic is. Mine? It's a single comment about me not looking old enough to be the subject of a challenge about something old. Oh, yeah, that one is really going to help my photography. I don't ask for CC critiques, because I KNOW you guys are busy. And, yes, I'm a member of that and have contributed what I think are some pretty good critiques.

I was a victim of the "can't edit the title" problem. I intended for it to be called a "Comment Trading Post" but somehow Freud made me type "Critique Trading Post". The whole purpose, if you read my first post, was simply to guarantee 9 other people some semblance of feedback from multiple viewers. It works, and it works well. The CC offers NO reward to the giver, and that's probably why it doesn't have just tons of volunteers - it's easy to check that box, but the ratios aren't balanced.

Personally, I would rather have 9 people give me short comments than one person give me a long comment. I didn't come up with this thing to "help the site" for everyone; I chose to "make the site better" for 9 other people and myself. Selfish? Yes, but not nearly as bad as you want to make it sound. But I suck, guys, and I need some help. I just thought I would offer to at least look at someone else's shots in return for them putting their eyes and words on mine. Nobody wants to look at my junk for free!!! :)

The entire purpose was to increase comments, and I think a sitewide system COULD be designed and implemented such that EVERYONE was allowed to - but not required to be - a member of such a group. It's got promise, but we seem to be more obsessed with protecting the CC than we do to finding a real solution to the fact that middle of the road photogs - and even low end photogs like me - get nearly NO feedback on our pictures.

I'm using [[Trading Post]] as a header to my comments, which I am going to continue to make. We are operating FULLY within site rules which allow trading comments when no other thing of value is exchanged. While it's not my intent to offend anyone, I'm not going to run and hide because two guys get it in a wad over something I've done. I see nineteen other people who think it's a great system. I've reiterated time and time again in the threads that "THIS DOES NOT REPLACE THE CRITIQUE CLUB" and I don't think there's anyone, at least in the first group, that has the slightest confusion about it. I have nothing at all to do with the second group, beyond encouraging xianart to start it up when our group "filled up." if they were referring to themselves as a critique club, I had absolutely nothing to do with that. I would have stopped it if I had seen it in "my" group, but marque II is doing their own thing, and that's between them.

Sorry to have upset you, gentlemen, but I offer no apology for the group I have started. It works very well for what was intended, and I don't see how it is interfering in the slightest with the operation of the Critique Club. Perhaps you should actively recruit volunteers, and maybe it would be good to privately petition SC and the site owners to offer incentives for critiques - free memberships once a month for the most crits that month, expanded portfolio space, free prints, crit club virtual ribbons, etc.

Thanks to all for your time. Yes, it is about having fun, but often one man's fun is another man's nightmare.

Message edited by author 2006-05-10 23:39:13.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/26/2025 09:40:35 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: 11/26/2025 09:40:35 AM EST.