| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/29/2003 06:53:32 AM · #1 |
I was just wondering...
My points for the symmetry challenge have made some strange turns last week. The average score after 30 or so votes was around 5.7 and stayed there for a while. Then it suddenly dropped to 5.1 a few votes (10 or so?) later. Now it's going steadily up again. I read in another thread, earlier this week that other people encountered the same phenomena of 'score-diving'.
So I was wondering, could it be that there are voters out there, consequently putting very low scores to the submissions? Or is it just a wild fantasy of mine and do I have to start taking some pills? ;o)
Marco
Edit: Not the symmetry but the time schallenge off course. Thanks for pointing that out guys! Better start taking those pills, hehe.
Message edited by author 2003-03-30 08:03:44. |
|
|
|
03/29/2003 07:01:23 AM · #2 |
I find, without exception so far, that my score goes up gradually through the week - with slight variations during the day. US evening time seems to be good for my shots.
Ed
edit: of couse, having said that, the shot's diappearing off the scale now.
Message edited by author 2003-03-30 19:47:14.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 07:04:03 AM · #3 |
Mine do the opposite. They normally start above 6 for the first day then they fall and fall and fall :)
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 07:19:22 AM · #4 |
It would be a great day if any of my submissions ever even got a sniff of a 6. I always seem to hover in the 4s. I am attracted to the suggestion of sabotage, it would be a great excuse. But, to be honest, for me it is the fact that I singularly lack in photographic talent. I could not buy a 6 for love nor money. Too bad.
So, do not complain, it could be worse. You could be me!
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 07:40:03 AM · #5 |
If someone went through and gave low scores to all the photos, then at the end of the week, the automatic score thrower-outter thingy would get rid of those scores anyway. However, it would take like 20 people doing the same thing to really affect your score much. So, if your score jumps a lot in the last minute of the challenge, then maybe it did happen.
~Heather~
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 08:36:36 AM · #6 |
Often it is tempting to suspect vote tampering especially when images get lower scores than suspected, which basically is every time.
To prove to yourself there is no tampering just review the previous winners. Are any of them undeserved? I don't think so.
When you start seeing out-of-focus snapshots with scores in the 8s taking ribbons then you are on to something.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 08:39:50 AM · #7 |
Your entry for the symmetry challenge? OMG ... have I been sleeping for a week? I thought it was due Sunday. ;)
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 10:01:01 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Often it is tempting to suspect vote tampering especially when images get lower scores than suspected, which basically is every time. |
Try to imagine what vote you would honestly give your shot if it popped up on the screen in front of you, then subtract at least 2! Works for most of my entries : )
I usually drop heavily in the first day or two of voting, then either stay still or climb slowly for the rest of the week. Weekend voters sometimes seem to vote higher, certainly higher than the Monday morning misers anyway. |
|
|
|
03/29/2003 10:06:49 AM · #9 |
My indoor macro shot started on 3.1 then jumped up to 9.3.
Then i woke up :-) |
|
|
|
03/29/2003 10:31:37 AM · #10 |
Weekend voters sometimes seem to vote higher, certainly higher than the Monday morning misers anyway
Ah, that's what it was! Just the monday morning depression :o))
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 11:34:07 AM · #11 |
I watched my brigde photo very closely, when I first checked it on Monday Morning at 1 am before going to bed it was at a 5.7 then it plummeted down to a 4.7 before it started to climb back up during the week, to finish at a 5.4.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 01:39:42 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by marco:
I was just wondering...
My points for the symmetry challenge have made some strange turns last week. The average score after 30 or so votes was around 5.7 and stayed there for a while. Then it suddenly dropped to 5.1 a few votes (10 or so?) later. Now it's going steadily up again. I read in another thread, earlier this week that other people encountered the same phenomena of 'score-diving'.
So I was wondering, could it be that there are voters out there, consequently putting very low scores to the submissions? Or is it just a wild fantasy of mine and do I have to start taking some pills? ;o)
Marco |
Or could it be that individuals are re-evaluating there vote and re-voting. I'm not one of them.....
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 04:07:24 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by marco:
I was just wondering...
My points for the symmetry challenge have made some strange turns last week. The average score after 30 or so votes was around 5.7 and stayed there for a while. Then it suddenly dropped to 5.1 a few votes (10 or so?) later. Now it's going steadily up again. I read in another thread, earlier this week that other people encountered the same phenomena of 'score-diving'.
|
I thought the symmetry challenge didn`t start until Monday?
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 04:09:50 PM · #14 |
I don't know what to say about the scores. I know my picture bites (it was my first challenge and the first time i'd shot photos in some time), but my rating on that horrible thing is going slowly up.
*shrug*
I know my entries for this week are far better.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2003 06:19:20 PM · #15 |
In my voting, I often adjust the scores I give. Usually, though, I end up making the images higher in score by the end. I usually can find the good things the photographer did, and if only one or two things were amiss in the image, I'll bump it up.
However, that would not explain a sudden plummet or rise, unless it's Monday and there are few folks who have voted.
|
|
|
|
03/30/2003 12:40:02 AM · #16 |
Well I never noticed a sharp rise or fall in the ratings on my pictures. If it starts out at 5.1 for example like in the Time challenge :(, it basically remains pretty consistent. I think the most I've ever seen my ratings change is probably .2 +/-. Maybe .4 or possible .5 at the very most (and rarely).
I don't know how the voting "engine" works here but it should analize the voting "curve" of the votes and drop the lowest and highest votes based on standard methods of doing that.
I've seen nice "curves" of voting ranging from 3 to 8, for example, but then there's an "unusual" amount of 2's and 1's in there also, and maybe a higher then expected number of 10's. Those votes should automatically be discarded. Doing this would *instantly* remove any "sabotage" from the voting system (if there is any). :)
|
|
|
|
03/30/2003 07:42:01 PM · #17 |
I don't think dropping the two's ones and tens works Chris: some photos will really polarize opinions, and that would be characteristic of the voting on those: for instance, shots that some people think don't meet the particular challenge.
Ed
|
|
|
|
03/30/2003 10:04:23 PM · #18 |
It looks like yet another discussion of "Is voting rigged at DPChallenge"...
I'm sure we've all asked the question - typically the week we first enter and can't understand why our masterpiece is doing so poorly.
At the end of the day I think the best we can aim for is to have enough honest voters that even if a few do try to rig the system the effect is minimal.
No matter how advanced the vote eliminator is there are ways around it. Perhaps not to guarantee a win, but certainly to raise certain images and lower others. I won't share the tactic, and I certainly wouldn't use it personally, but it can be done. I just vote fairly and expect that others do the same.
Also, given that the winners and losers usually look about right I can safely assume that there is nothing too sinister going on. |
|
|
|
03/30/2003 11:53:06 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by sparky_mark:
I won't share the tactic, and I certainly wouldn't use it personally, but it can be done. |
Since you don't know the algorithm that's used to determine 'vote swaying', anything you shared would be a guess :) I agree, though, that the best thing to do is be an honest voter and assume that everyone else is doing the same.
Drew |
|
|
|
03/31/2003 12:24:12 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by e301:
I don't think dropping the two's ones and tens works Chris... |
I think it would... anything that is "outside" the bell curve should be considered a deviation from the norm and discarded, and especially if the the ends of the bell curve (the 1's, 2's, 9's, and 10's for example) make the bell curve look like an "S".
Two other checks that might help: 1) Only allow 2 votes for each challenge from the same IP address. It's not likely that this would mistakenly throw out a valid vote from someone else by mistake. 2) After a user finishes voting, look at the "curve" created from the votes they cast. Then do the same thing as above where you throw out the highs and lows. Example if the user made 100 votes and 99 are 1's and 1 is a 10, you know something is up and the routine would basically throw all the votes out because they don't come close to a "normal" bell curve which indicates a normal pattern of voting. Actually #1 above wouldn't be needed if this was implemented since it doesn't matter how many times a person votes since their voting would be analyzed afterwards. :)
|
|
|
|
03/31/2003 09:03:00 AM · #21 |
There must have been photos that people either loved or hated though - who's voting analysis would not display such a curve. That was my point.
Never see any coplaints about possible sabotage from people voting ten for everything though.
Ed
PS. Symmetry challenge shpt has gone up by over a point since I first checked at 19 votes this morning.
Message edited by author 2003-03-31 09:03:51.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2003 09:09:44 AM · #22 |
Allowing a set number of votes from the same IP addy would help anything. Some people don't have static IP addresses, true?
Also, I have had shots that did not have a bell curve. They looked more like a cardiological test or soemthing, turned sideways.
Frankly, I think the current system seems to work pretty well. We are always going to have ones, because one is on the scale, and some people have some extreme opinions. If they apply that same extreme opinion to all pictures, or even most of them, or even to just 20%, I figure it all comes out in the wash anyway.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2003 02:37:02 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by marbo:
My indoor macro shot started on 3.1 then jumped up to 9.3.
Then i woke up :-) |
Look at the bright side.
For you to get an average on your indoor macro shot of 3.1, you would have had to have:
3 votes of 2
4 votes of 3
2 votes of 4
1 vote of 5
Now if that was to increase to an average of 9.3, you would have to have:
3 votes of 2
4 votes of 3
2 votes of 4
1 vote of 5
1 vote of 9
89 votes of 10
to make this work statistically.
So that would be a pretty damn good voting turnout ;) |
|
|
|
03/31/2003 05:33:21 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
Originally posted by sparky_mark:
I won't share the tactic, and I certainly wouldn't use it personally, but it can be done. |
Since you don't know the algorithm that's used to determine 'vote swaying', anything you shared would be a guess :) I agree, though, that the best thing to do is be an honest voter and assume that everyone else is doing the same.
Drew |
Yes - I should have said "what I suspect to be a tactic" - I have no idea of the algorithm. Also, if the algorithm is anything half as good as the rest of the site engine then it's probably pretty smart. Keep up the good work. |
|
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: 08/29/2025 05:30:16 PM EDT.
