Distribution graph of votes given against profile

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

07/12/2006 11:44:17 PM · #1

Did a search and didn't find any suggestions along these lines so I thought I'd offer the following up.

How about including a distribution graph of votes given against profiles (not unlike the distribution graph of votes recieved against photographs), so that we can see the balance of an individuals voting patterns. We currently get to see the average vote given; how about some more info?

Any takers?

crayon

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

07/12/2006 11:49:07 PM · #2

I think making the voting as a detailed stat on a voter's profile might make the innocent voter the target of Rants or analysis during debates. So, I think it's not a good idea - unless the detailed stat is only visible to the profile owner.

BeeCee

Nikon D40

07/12/2006 11:51:24 PM · #3

Originally posted by crayon:

I agree. That's why votes are private.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/12/2006 11:52:29 PM · #4

Surely the innocent voter would have a respectable profile. It might however make things difficult for those less than innocent.

wavelength

Nikon D300

07/12/2006 11:54:12 PM · #5

Originally posted by PaulE:

Surely the innocent voter would have a respectable profile. It might however make things difficult for those less than innocent.

It also makes it easy for people who are angry entrants to make their own reprisals.

07/12/2006 11:54:24 PM · #6

Originally posted by BeeCee:

I agree. That's why votes are private.

And individual votes should remain private.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

07/12/2006 11:57:53 PM · #7

Originally posted by wavelength:

It also makes it easy for people who are angry entrants to make their own reprisals.

Not directly; because there would still be no way of associating a any individual voter with a specific vote. It would be left up to the angry to leap to conclusions (which they tend to do already).

edit to correct typo

Message edited by author 2006-07-13 00:08:34.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

07/13/2006 12:14:31 AM · #8

I am curious as to what benefit we as a collective would derive from this if it were to be implemented.

From a personal standpoint, I fear that information of this nature could give rise to misunderstanding and unsubstantiated accusations.

If say my voting patterns occupy the lower levels of the scale, does that make me less worthy than someone whose voting patterns differ substantially from mine... In the eyes of some probably. However, if we consider that I am consistent, which is fairer... someone who consistently votes low... or one who votes too high.

The most important factor to be considered is that there are no wrong voting mechanisms, as long as the person voting does so in an honest and consistent manner.

Ray

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

07/13/2006 12:24:36 AM · #9

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Hi Ray,

Fair points. I have two comments:
1) We can tell already tell if someone votes consistently low or high, just by their voting average. Therefore this isn't a question of which end of the scale voters occupy - it is about the distribution of those votes.
2) There are already many servies available that do not provide the collective with much benefit; take the distribution graph of votes recieved buy a photo as an example. This isn't of material benefit, but it is nonetheless interesting.

Seems this idea hasn't met with a positive reseption yet. What lien does this cross that isn't crossed already by providing the average vote given stat?

Paul

crayon

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

07/13/2006 12:35:01 AM · #10

IMHO this may do more harm to the site than good - in more than 1 way.

raish

Olympus C-2500L

07/13/2006 04:35:20 AM · #11

I think it's like Zinedine Zidane's headbutt - I like the idea and agree with the principle, but I wouldn't recommend the implementation of it.

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

07/13/2006 05:13:06 AM · #12

Originally posted by PaulE:

Fair points. I have two comments:
1) We can tell already tell if someone votes consistently low or high, just by their voting average. Therefore this isn't a question of which end of the scale voters occupy - it is about the distribution of those votes.
2) There are already many servies available that do not provide the collective with much benefit; take the distribution graph of votes recieved buy a photo as an example. This isn't of material benefit, but it is nonetheless interesting.

Seems this idea hasn't met with a positive reseption yet. What lien does this cross that isn't crossed already by providing the average vote given stat?

Paul

I think the bar graph that shows you many of each vote an image received is a very valuable tool for the community. It helps us understand how an image was received, and it helps us to spot anomalies in voting patterns.

I don't necessarily agree with all of the negatives that have been raised against your proposal, but I don't see the positive value either. Can you please explain why you think it would be a good thing for the site.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

07/14/2006 01:03:21 AM · #13

Originally posted by coolhar:

Can you please explain why you think it would be a good thing for the site.

Sure.

1) It would help us spot anamalies in voting patterns - from the opposite direction.
2) Such disclosure would provide an incentive for more responsible voting (while still maintaining individual voting secrecy).
3) It would be a point of interest. I personally would be very interested to see the bell curve of my own voting habits. Of course I could plot this myself by independantly logging each vote I post, but that would be a bit tedious. I would also be interested in seeing the distribution of other voters - especially those posting complaints about trolls or defending irregualr low voting.
4) It would be a 'valuable tool for the community'. At least to the same extent as the distribution graph of votes received.

BeeCee

Nikon D40

07/14/2006 02:35:13 AM · #14

Originally posted by PaulE:

Originally posted by coolhar:
Can you please explain why you think it would be a good thing for the site.

Sure.

1) It would help us spot anamalies in voting patterns - from the opposite direction.
2) Such disclosure would provide an incentive for more responsible voting (while still maintaining individual voting secrecy).
3) It would be a point of interest. I personally would be very interested to see the bell curve of my own voting habits. Of course I could plot this myself by independantly logging each vote I post, but that would be a bit tedious. I would also be interested in seeing the distribution of other voters - especially those posting complaints about trolls or defending irregualr low voting.
4) It would be a 'valuable tool for the community'. At least to the same extent as the distribution graph of votes received.

re: 1) I believe admin can and does keep an eye out for major voting anomalies. The only thing I can see with your idea is some overreaction and vigilanteism.
2)Responsible? Or stifled instead of honest, the same as many comments have become?
4)I learn from the vote graph on my photos. Excessive high and low votes usually mean my subject matter had a greater impact, for example. I honestly don't see how knowing how a certain person votes will improve my photography.

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

07/14/2006 08:11:52 AM · #15

I feel that the anonymity of our voting process is a basic and essential element of this website and it's competitions. I am very hesitant to embrace any tampering with it. I have a gut level reaction against all the negative discussion of low votes that seems to be a constant theme in these forums. I can find no other reason for it except that people are just refusing to accept the fact that some voters don't vote in a manner that is pleaseing to the person receiving the votes. Many, many proposals to modify our voting sysytem that, when you boil them down, will have a net effect of discouraging voters from casting low votes, have been discussed in these forums in the past. Most of these involve removing the a bit of the voter's privacy in some small way or another. I just don't see much benefit at all to the community from these types of proposals, and I see a potentially very large negative in them.

1. Over the years, the observation of any individulal's voting patterns has always been left to the adminisrtators. Other than complaints and questions about "why did this shot get xxxx votes" we don't see any problem in the way they have done the job of identifying and addressing anomalies in individual's voting patterns. How and what is done is pretty much kept private, and I believe that is as it should be. You may want to privately suggest ways for them to improve their oversight but anything said in these forums that involves making individual's voting habits more public is likely to meet with harsh resistance, and questioning about one's motivation.

2. This would be true only if you equate more responsible voting to less privacy for the voter. I think this would only result in people voting artificially higher to appear more politically correct in the eyes of the community. Is that more responsible?

3. To know info about one's own voting pattern might be interesting, but it might also serve as a stimulant for voter's to change their way of doing their voting. You could make it so that only the voter could see it, but still some of it would, very selectively, and in a non-verifiable way, be made public as people told (bragged) about their vote stats in the forums and elsewhere. Again, the problem here is that you would be revealing information about a user's voting habits that is now private. This may be interesting to some but the potential to change the way we vote, in my mind at least, far outweighs any other value.

4. It wouldn't really be the opposite, or the other side of the coin, of what we are already seeing because it would reveal info about a single voter, which is not a mirror reflection of the graphs that collect and aggregate all of the voter's voices.

My bottom line is that it would be a change that would put future results out of sync with all that has gone before (our database of over 500 challenges) and remove a small portion of the anonymity that makes dpc voting so totally (and sometimes brutally) honest when taken as a whole.

Disclaimer: Just to save anyone interested the trouble of looking, I have cast 54,686 votes; and my Avg Vote Cast is 4.6141.

ralph

Nikon Z9

07/14/2006 08:15:56 AM · #16

i would like to see mode (in conjunction with mean)
it would provide the same type of information but as just a number

JunieMoon

Sony Alpha a7 II

Sony FE 3.5-5.6/28-70 mm OSS

07/14/2006 08:50:10 AM · #17

Well I've read your ideas, but still don't understand what you are getting at. I know how I vote. I simply have to look through the challenges and see where my vote fell in conjunction with the others. I also see a pattern in my voting. I tend to vote lower on overall higher scoring images as far as dp goes. Not sure why that is. The winners I often vote 7's or even 6's. Occasionally my three top votes win ribbons, but that is rare.
I think part of my problem is that I am seeing many of the winners as being very underexposed on my monitor. The shadows are very heavy in my views.
As to my images that I enter, most seem to say that my monitor must be very dark, because they can see dodging or burning lines, cloning shadows, etc. So since I can't afford calibration software, I guess I am stuck voting low on what look like dark images to me, and getting low scores on my images that appear too light to the voters.

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

07/14/2006 10:21:26 AM · #18

I don't think showing everyone how you vote is a good idea. Only the voter needs to know their pattern. However I would like to see a page (like our favorite page) that the voter can only see that would show us a little more voting information. Then if the voter wishes to make it public s/he can but if not only they can see it.

Something like this

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

07/14/2006 08:39:40 PM · #19

bump

07/14/2006 08:41:26 PM · #20

what's "bump" mean?

07/14/2006 08:45:00 PM · #21

Actually here is my idea...

Each of those bars will be clickable... and when you click on any of the bars, there will be a list with people who voted for that level... So, say I got 1 "1" and 12 "10"s, I really would like to know why that person gave me "1", and I could just PM him or her to ask that... no fighting, just honest question. If no answer, that's fine. There could be a lot to learn from those 1's and 2's I believe... if we could just ask to that person :)

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

07/14/2006 08:50:26 PM · #22

Originally posted by focuspoint:

I think you may have misunderstood what I mean by this page. This is your own voting habits. That only you can view so you can see in detail a little more information about the way you vote. "you" mean "voter".

I don't really feel letting others see how you vote will be a benefit to you, others, or the site. But I do feel if you knew how you vote in detail it (and it's a page you can only see) then I believe it may help people become better voters or more stable voters.

07/14/2006 08:53:56 PM · #23

Sorry :P

Just an idea burst... could been end of "trolls" LOL... yeah rrrright.

but I see your idea as well... could be a good one.

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

07/14/2006 08:56:22 PM · #24

Originally posted by focuspoint:

Sorry :P

Just an idea burst... could been end of "trolls" LOL... yeah rrrright.

but I see your idea as well... could be a good one.

No Prob. Actually my fault I did see the beginning of your post "Actually here is my idea".

That's what I get by trying to read, watch TV, take care of wild teen, listen to wife, and type at the same time. LOL

Message edited by author 2006-07-14 20:56:47.