| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/18/2006 11:58:53 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Yes I agreee....it should be 4 non member challenges a week with only 2 days to shoot and 2 days to vote....it would eliminate a lot of entries for the sake of entering. |
This may reduce even more some of the comments. I try to comment on at least 25+ random shots in a challenge, which means the 1st 25 that show up. For the perspective challenge it took me 6 days to get the comments in before I started voting without commenting. If it were two days voting I may have only commented on a few pictures. |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 12:16:11 AM · #27 |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 12:56:54 AM · #28 |
We get these same tired old complaints every time a challenge draws a lot of entries. Adding more challenges, or making them shorter, will not reduce the number of entries available to be voted on. The answer is for the people who don't have the time or desire to vote on all entries to just accept that they are not going to be doing that. There are many users that have already made this transaction. And there are many users who are still able/willing to put in the time necessary to vote all in a challenge no matter how large without complaint, and some who do it for every challenge. Why should we make changes to accomodate those among who are not able/willing to contribute as much as others, or as much as they have in the past?
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:05:43 AM · #29 |
| My observation here, for what it is worth is: do not submit unless you have a good image. High number challenges need instant visual impact images and this is not easily achieved. The short span of voting considration will cast many a good image down and the worst will suffer a greater downfall. Not all images lend themselves to that instant appeal and many a good image will suffer. |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:14:49 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
The short span of voting considration will cast many a good image down and the worst will suffer a greater downfall. |
Shouldn't that say, The short attention span of voters and lack of consideration will cast many a good image down and the worst will suffer a greater downfall.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:17:28 AM · #31 |
Well I stopped entering so that will shave one number off
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:24:29 AM · #32 |
At first I thought this might work... but then I thought about it, and it really won't.
Think about it... you can't help but rate images on a relative scale, I know I do. To some extent my rating is based on how much better it is than the other ones I've seen for a particular challenge. So therefore, you're gonna get a similar spread for each "group"... which would give 8s, 9s, and 10s to people who would have never come close to getting that when juxtaposed with everyone else. Therefore, they would easily move up to the next "group" without really deserving it.
Another problem: if the goal is to break it up to make voting easier, who really wants to vote for images from people with an average rating of 3-4? No one. I vote to see the BEST photos, and so you would get unsatisfying and unfair amounts of votes for these lower groups. And then, almost all the votes and effort would go to the higher groups, and no problem would be solved except for excluding people with low averages.
It's a poorly thought out idea.
and one more thing:
graphicfunk - sure, that sounds like an easy solution, don't submit unless you have a good image... but how would that really work? How many times have you seen people fight for an image that is truly not good because they personally think it's amazing? It's like american idol, when the people who really suck can't understand why they get bad reviews.
I do agree with you, however, that a shorter voting period could hurt, and I would add that a shorter shooting period would really decrease the number of absolutely stunning photos that we see here. And no one wants to see that.
Anyone agree? |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:31:39 AM · #33 |
Another way to look at the situation...
Say, you may enter a Challenge (a member or open Challenge) for which you are eligible if you have voted on (say) 200 images in that week.
That might eliminate those who just enter the challenges but don't vote.
Message edited by author 2006-07-19 01:32:10. |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:33:46 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Another way to look at the situation...
Say, you may enter a Challenge (a member or open Challenge) for which you are eligible if you have voted on (say) 200 images in that week.
That might eliminate those who just enter the challenges but don't vote. |
I suggested that in another thread....I can't remember what the outcome was.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:41:23 AM · #35 |
I have looked at this several ways and have come to the conclusion that as long as we are receiving an average of 150 to 250 votes on our picture there should be a problem.
We want the site and community to grow. And with that comes more entries. By dividing up the entries into more challenges does not really solve the issue. I would say vote on 20% of each of the challenges and then if you have time go back and vote some more.
If we start seeing a substantial decline in votes received then I feel they would be a need for change. And even then it would have to be a balanced change. You don't want the site to stagnate and not grow and you don't want to drive members or R-users away.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:46:34 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by rex:
Well I stopped entering so that will shave one number off |
Yes, I've noticed that there are a great number of people who are into population control, but don't want to practice birth control.
If you think there are too many entries, don't enter, and your desire for fewer entries will have been immediately gratified.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:47:32 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Another way to look at the situation...
Say, you may enter a Challenge (a member or open Challenge) for which you are eligible if you have voted on (say) 200 images in that week.
That might eliminate those who just enter the challenges but don't vote. |
I'm not saying I'm for it or against, but I don't remember hearing about the elimination of those people being a desirable goal. It would get rid of some of our most highly praised photographers.
Isn't it a possibility that the same people who complain about the challenges being so large that they can't find the time to vote on them all would also have difficulty finding the time to vote on 200 for every challenge they wanted to enter?
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:51:57 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
I'm not saying I'm for it or against, but I don't remember hearing about the elimination of those people being a desirable goal. It would get rid of some of our most highly praised photographers.
Isn't it a possibility that the same people who complain about the challenges being so large that they can't find the time to vote on them all would also have difficulty finding the time to vote on 200 for every challenge they wanted to enter? |
I am the OP....therefore I suppose I am categorized as one of those 'complainers'....and I have been guilty that I haven't voted on the last two challenges. But I do try to vote on ALL the images in a challenge and even comment on ALL the entries when I can.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:54:34 AM · #39 |
I have a plan:
Registration of new people at DPC should be prohibited from this point forward. Members with three or more ribbons should not be allowed to enter challenges as they have already received all the accolades they need. Losing WPL teams should have their own special challenges, all of them modeled after the Rubber Ducky challenge.
Okay so I'm not as good at writing these kinds of posts as some others are. :) But I ran this through spell check and found out I spelled accolades correctly! Wheee!
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 01:56:34 AM · #40 |
Take out all the leaf and hand pictures? and maybe power lines too....
that would work atleast for lines, and bring it down from 400 to 200.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:20:45 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by Judi:
I am the OP....therefore I suppose I am categorized as one of those 'complainers'....and I have been guilty that I haven't voted on the last two challenges. But I do try to vote on ALL the images in a challenge and even comment on ALL the entries when I can. |
I admire you for trying to vote on all entries. I do the same but am not always successful. But when I am not able to fulfill this particular goal it is because I have some other, more important, things going on in my real world life. That is not a reason to expect all the other dpc'ers to change things. If any thing needs to be changed it is for me to find more time to vote, or just be satisfied with the effort I am able to make. For me, trying to comment on all entries is an unrealistic goal as comment quality suffers too much.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:29:22 AM · #42 |
i say get rid of that 20% and make everyone vote for every image. it might take a little longer, but what is the big rush you get 7 days to vote. there are probably a few people who are already done voting on these challenges , You can bet they did not give every picture the amount of time needed to understand what the photographer is trying to get across. just click on through perhaps ribbons for 3 fastest voters should be awarded instead.
I am just ranting because my lines photo has been getting beat up out there.
But I think the voting rules might need to be tweaked to catch up with the amount of new users and members.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:31:24 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
i say get rid of that 20% and make everyone vote for every image. |
Sigh.
Can I counter your ranting with ranting of my own about how it takes me forever on dialup to vote, much less vote and comment, and I do try but I have chronic pain and sitting in this computer chair for long periods of time hurts?
Message edited by author 2006-07-19 02:32:33. |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:33:17 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
i say get rid of that 20% and make everyone vote for every image. |
Do this and you will loose many voters including myself. I have a life outside of DPC and feel it is fair to give every image more than a few seconds for my vote.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:37:53 AM · #45 |
I have a wife and 3 kids so I understand that, but is it fair to the other 80% of the participants if only the top 20-30% of the photos get a vote, that pretty much defults the rest to unworthy of the competition.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:40:23 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I have a wife and 3 kids so I understand that, but is it fair to the other 80% of the participants if only the top 20-30% of the photos get a vote, that pretty much defults the rest to unworthy of the competition. |
Which is why the photos are displayed in random order. Obviously this can be circumvented but I think on the whole this type of solution (mandatory voting on all images) might not be the best. |
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:46:18 AM · #47 |
I know it would be difficult for everyone to vote for all the photos, but really in my oppinion if you are looking at each photo in the challenge there isn't a whole lot of difference between clicking on one of the numbers vs clicking on the >>
|
|
|
|
07/19/2006 02:47:34 AM · #48 |
And often times I don't (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) view all the images.
(off to bed for the night) |
|
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: 08/03/2025 01:42:18 PM EDT.
