| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/31/2006 06:09:00 PM · #501 |
| Bear, that pretty much says it all. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:12:13 PM · #502 |
I have more insight than most people on this thread (but perhaps not everybody). I chatted regularly with Rikki. I spent 14 hours with him before and during the last Seattle GTG. I feel that I am at least a capable judge of character and I would be totally amazed if this was premeditated to the extent postulated on this thread. Rikki was very unlikely to be launching "feelers" with his ghost account thread. I remember the frustration he was feeling at that point. It may have been the cracking of pandora's box, but it was highly unlikely he had any inkling of what he was going to do before he posted that thread.
I also am starting to take umbrage at the posts who are throwing suspicions on multi-ribbon winners. Neither Drew, Landgon, SC, nor anybody else has uncovered evidence this is widespread. Perhaps I feel the eyes beating down on me extra hard due to my closeness with Rikki, but I think it is uncalled for. If you have an accusation, make it to SC and shut up. Heresay, conspiracy, and rumor are not our friends here and this thread has ventured down those paths more than a few times already with Rikki's methods or motives or other possible guilty parties.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:13:52 PM · #503 |
Originally posted by Alienyst:
Originally posted by greatandsmall:
May I use this an the reason no one listens to me?;) |
hey Roxanne - I listen to you! Loud and clear, all the time! |
Even though I obviously can't spell?;)
Thanks Chris. I listen to you too! |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:14:01 PM · #504 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by patrinus:
I don't see why everybody has to jump at Rikki's neck and flame him.
1) There was a clear mistake
2) There is a clear punishment
3) As long as I have no doubt about his intention *I* hope to see him back. (clearly subjective and everybody can have a different opinion)
|
Mistake...? ....................mistake?
I must be on a different planet because I see no mistake.
If he was aware of it then there was NO mistake.
Nobody knows his intention but him so I'm not certain why or how you're certain about his intent. For me, apologies are crap at this point...too little, too late.
I think if some of the forgiving people here worked their asses off to win a ribbon...break the Top 10/20 barrier and missed those marks which I'd bet there are a few, his actions might be taken in a different light. I especially feel for those who placed 4th and were robbed of their glory. That would piss me off to no end. |
I agree with Steve 1000%, past precedent have seen offenders Banned Permanently - I'm reminded of  who tampered with his Exif a few times over a month or so, he was caught and banned permanently. Here we have an offense that kept going on for months and he gets a 1 year ban...Is this fair? I don't think so. Again just my 2 cents... |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:15:27 PM · #505 |
Originally posted by photoheathen:
These actions speak to the character of the man, and therefor I cannot judge these actions as an isolated mistakeer actions driven by poor character. He's an adult, and he made a decision which was highly unethical. Doing this on one or two or even a handful of challenges, that, yes, I could probably forgive. But to this extent, spanning so many challenges, that should give you an indication of the kind of man we're talking about here.
Just my take of course, but I'm not at all inclined to give a pass to any person that so grossly demonstrates poor character. |
So if I'm reading you correctly, if Rikki had started down this path and then, after (say) getting his first couple ribbons he had posted to the forums confessing that he had stacked the voting by enlisting his friends to join the site, you'd rest a lot easier with that?
I'm not expressing an opinion either way (I will do that later if the thread warrants it) but is that an accurate representation of how you feel?
R.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:17:31 PM · #506 |
These actions speak to the character of the man, and therefor I cannot judge these actions as an isolated mistake but rather actions driven by poor character. He's an adult, and he made a decision which was highly unethical. Doing this on one or two or even a handful of challenges, that, yes, I could probably forgive. But to this extent, spanning so many challenges, that should give you an indication of the kind of man we're talking about here.
Just my take of course, but I'm not at all inclined to give a pass to any person that so grossly demonstrates poor character.
Understood and respectfully received. My thought is this however... I base alot on life experiences and what you take from them. Some, and maybe more than I know, think I'm the dirtiest dog they know. And based on some past acts, they may be right... :) Point is, there's also a side to me that they never noticed while others did and they chose to overlook some of my past failings in lieu of the bigger picture. Today, Rikki is a dirty low down dog. But I highly doubt he is THAT every day. And those are the days I think I'll focus on. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:22:25 PM · #507 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
I agree with Steve 1000%, past precedent have seen offenders Banned Permanently - I'm reminded of who tampered with his Exif a few times over a month or so, he was caught and banned permanently. Here we have an offense that kept going on for months and he gets a 1 year ban...Is this fair? I don't think so. Again just my 2 cents... |
We don't have the information that the admins do. I would make the working assumption that Rikki's "sin" was to encourage his many non-DPC friends to join up, and that he really hadn't considered the long-term ramifications of this. I would assume he didn't go so far as to send weekly e-mails with image ID numbers and reminders to vote his image a 10 and get the required 20% in so it counted. I would assume all this was going on in the background and he had conveniently erased from his mind the reality of what was happening. For example, if he had ONE friend at work he showed his entries to, and that friend then took it upon him/herself to "promote" Rikki to the others, Rikki could easily bury any conscious awareness of this. I'm not saying this makes him any less culpable, not at all, but it's a different level of transgression from people who who deliberately use illegal processing and lie about it, or people who deliberately falsify EXIF data on challenge entries.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:25:58 PM · #508 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
I agree with Steve 1000%, past precedent have seen offenders Banned Permanently - I'm reminded of who tampered with his Exif a few times over a month or so, he was caught and banned permanently. Here we have an offense that kept going on for months and he gets a 1 year ban...Is this fair? I don't think so. Again just my 2 cents... |
You beat me to this by just a few minutes, I just took a little longer to find the thread that announced the lifetime ban. for cheating on seven, not forty challenges. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:31:19 PM · #509 |
| I'm curious. Did these 30 people pay the $25 to become members or were all the challenges in question open challenges? Sorry if this was asked earlier. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:33:02 PM · #510 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I have more insight than most people on this thread (but perhaps not everybody). I chatted regularly with Rikki. I spent 14 hours with him before and during the last Seattle GTG. I feel that I am at least a capable judge of character and I would be totally amazed if this was premeditated to the extent postulated on this thread. |
I think this is the most intelligent thing said in this whole thread. No one here knows the whole story, and people are always quick to assume the worst when it is usually much simpler and much less insidious than that which our imaginations conjure to fill in the gaps. I'm not going to presume to know or understand what happened here. That's much of why I haven't commented on it before now, and really I'm still not commenting on the events except to express disappointment (a) that anyone would cheat, particularly to this extent, and (b) that the populace has seen fit to tear someone to pieces through rumors, gossip and hearsay. I'm sad on both counts.
Cheating is bad, and I don't condone it, and I don't condone letting cheaters off easy, but jumping to conclusions just vilifies him more than is warranted. Don't assume you know anything. We've been given very few pieces of the truth. No one but Rikki knows the whole story. No one but Rikki can fill in the gaps with any meaningful truth.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:33:12 PM · #511 |
Originally posted by TommyMoe21:
I'm curious. Did these 30 people pay the $25 to become members or were all the challenges in question open challenges? Sorry if this was asked earlier. |
Open challenges. Registered members.
R.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:34:41 PM · #512 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
So if I'm reading you correctly, if Rikki had started down this path and then, after (say) getting his first couple ribbons he had posted to the forums confessing that he had stacked the voting by enlisting his friends to join the site, you'd rest a lot easier with that? |
In general, I much prefer apologies given of a person's own accord rather than after they've been caught. I suspect many people do.
Originally posted by yakatme:
Originally posted by doctornick:
I agree with Steve 1000%, past precedent have seen offenders Banned Permanently - I'm reminded of who tampered with his Exif a few times over a month or so, he was caught and banned permanently. Here we have an offense that kept going on for months and he gets a 1 year ban...Is this fair? I don't think so. Again just my 2 cents... |
You beat me to this by just a few minutes, I just took a little longer to find the thread that announced the lifetime ban. for cheating on seven, not forty challenges. |
This is what I was questioning earlier in this thread. The answers given were as follows:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
EXIF falsification is a special case, because it directly attacks the means we use to prove an entry valid. It also requires two separate offenses -- knowingly submitting an illegal entry, and knowing covering that up after the fact. In cases of EXIF falsification, there is a deliberate attempt to defeat the means used to determine compliance. In that case, I do not wish to allow them the chance to figure out what got them caught.
I like to think Rikki will learn a hard lesson from this, and will come out of this a better person. Whenever possible, I believe in giving a person a second chance. If Rikki chooses to squander that second chance (and I doubt he will), there won't be a third.
|
Originally posted by Scalvert:
EXIF tampering used to be penalized with a suspension, too. Some people tried to falsifying the EXIF data with more sophisitcated methods, so the stakes were raised to a permanent ban. This is the first case of its type that I know of, and hopefully the last. If not, then I'm sure the penalty change to permanent as well. |
I don't personally remember exif tampering to ever not be a bannable offense but I'm sure they looked into the history. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:35:25 PM · #513 |
Originally posted by TommyMoe21:
I'm curious. Did these 30 people pay the $25 to become members or were all the challenges in question open challenges? Sorry if this was asked earlier. |
Open challenges.
I hear a lot of people guessin' about how this happened and what Rikki did or didn't do and what were his motivations. I wish everyone would stop and ask themselves "what details do we KNOW to be true" - the answer to that is NOTHING. We don't know about his relationships with the voters, we don't know how this started or how much he did or did not participate in their voting. The truth is we don't know jack.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:38:26 PM · #514 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Originally posted by Faye Pekas:
Originally posted by ggbudge:
Originally posted by colyla:
Especially when you look in past (Ghost Account) threads |
|
That thread proves he knew what he was doing was wrong and was beginning to worry that there might be a way to trace the ghost accounts. |
Actually my understanding from reading is that the ghost accounts started AFTER that thread. SC, please correct me if I'm wrong. |
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:41:30 PM · #515 |
Originally posted by idnic:
The truth is we don't know jack. |
Actually, I know a Jack. He's actually a pretty cool guy but he hates clowns for some reason. :P |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:44:10 PM · #516 |
i was kind of digging at this type of behaviour a while back when i posted a thread asking who people's 'friends' were here. then i asked if anyone saw each other's images/voted on each other and didn't get far with it.
i suspected things like this went on. it's a shame still.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:44:18 PM · #517 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I talk to Rikki regularly and he never let me in on any of this. I say that because the following is speculation. Wouldn't it make more sense that Rikki was originally excited about the site and emailed a few friends (he works in a large architecture firm) about it. One of the friends then goes and asks him what his next entry was. Rikki sends it to him. The sin has begun, but innocently enough. More people ask and Rikki complies with an email saying "I'm not looking for 10s", but we all know friends don't care about fairness (especially when they are not involved). Rikki wins a ribbon, his first. It feels good. Soon the whole ethical dilemma is forgotten and the action has become so "normal" he doesn't even think about it. It isn't a voting machine as much as a "hey guys, this is my next entry, isn't it cool?" Sometimes 4 friends decide to vote, sometimes 30. They vote on their own accord, but obviously bias their vote to Rikki. Rikki eventually forgets how much his score could be swayed and rationalizes his torrent of ribbons to the fact that he has improved as a photographer (something you can verify by looking at his early vs. late shots). The rest of his ethical standards remain and he is true when he says things like not wanting to win a ribbon through the DQ of a higher entry. |
Jason,
As I stated several pages ago I, too, had a similar incident where a co-worker told me after the challenge that he had voted a high score for me and I never previewed any DPC challenge images to any of my co-worker friends again. It may have been a moral lapse the first or even the 5th or 10th time but at some point when the scores fall in such a manner as has been pointed out by others who want to spend their time figuring out just how disproportionate Rikki's volume of 10's to 9's or 8's was, then I have to believe that Rikki should have figured out that the challenge results were tainted and come forward to express how innocently this started. At the absolute least he should have forgone showing his co-workers his challenge entries when he realized that he was experiencing what has been described in this thread as a "meteoric" rise from the number of ribbons he won.
I'm not accusing him of colluding with anyone to start this process. I do think it disingenuous to not acknowledge that at some point well before the 40th time he just didn't realize the effect that those 5, 10, 20 or even 30 votes had on his score and the whole challenge.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:45:10 PM · #518 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by photoheathen:
These actions speak to the character of the man, and therefor I cannot judge these actions as an isolated mistakeer actions driven by poor character. He's an adult, and he made a decision which was highly unethical. Doing this on one or two or even a handful of challenges, that, yes, I could probably forgive. But to this extent, spanning so many challenges, that should give you an indication of the kind of man we're talking about here.
Just my take of course, but I'm not at all inclined to give a pass to any person that so grossly demonstrates poor character. |
So if I'm reading you correctly, if Rikki had started down this path and then, after (say) getting his first couple ribbons he had posted to the forums confessing that he had stacked the voting by enlisting his friends to join the site, you'd rest a lot easier with that?
I'm not expressing an opinion either way (I will do that later if the thread warrants it) but is that an accurate representation of how you feel?
R. |
I'm not saying I'd be happy about it, or even that I'd be willing to outright forgive him immediately, but it would show me something within him that is easier to understand and forgive. Personal accountability...remorse...a conscience. Doing it twice or three times, for example, but not being able to reconcile within himself that he is cheating, forcing him to accept resonsibility and asking the for the communities' forgiveness...yes, I'd be down with that.
He didn't do that though. He kept cheating...and cheating...and cheating. Does that strike you as the actions of a man filled with remorse? |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:49:11 PM · #519 |
| Why would he have to cheat? His photographs were so good. Probably my favorite photographer on this site. : / |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:51:41 PM · #520 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I also am starting to take umbrage at the posts who are throwing suspicions on multi-ribbon winners. Neither Drew, Landgon, SC, nor anybody else has uncovered evidence this is widespread. Perhaps I feel the eyes beating down on me extra hard due to my closeness with Rikki, but I think it is uncalled for. If you have an accusation, make it to SC and shut up. Heresay, conspiracy, and rumor are not our friends here and this thread has ventured down those paths more than a few times already with Rikki's methods or motives or other possible guilty parties. |
Hiya Jason, I really didn't get that feeling that you were involved. I don't really think you should worry because you did nothing wrong. I agree if someone is making accusations they should be aimed towards the SC to be handleded, and not use the MOB lynching tactacs (again I have not seen this in this thread.)
I will say Rikki's actions leave me very disappointed, I don't wish him any ill will. Sure maybe the rational of the idea seemed like a harmless idea at the time, but when would it have stopped? I know Im guilty of making bad decisions, and paid the price for it many times. To be honest with ya Jason, this is probibly the best time for you to keep in contact with Rikki, he probibly really could use a friend like you right about now... |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:53:06 PM · #521 |
Originally posted by photoheathen:
He kept cheating...and cheating...and cheating. Does that strike you as the actions of a man filled with remorse? |
Sounds like the actions of a man who was sick to death of trolls and others influencing scores on excellent entries, and wanted to turn the tide. Well, maybe that's how it initially started. Could be things just got a little addictive after that.
I say, let it go everyone. It was a huge blunder, but nothing that can't be fixed, right? No-one has ever died from betrayal. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:53:31 PM · #522 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by doctornick:
I agree with Steve 1000%, past precedent have seen offenders Banned Permanently - I'm reminded of who tampered with his Exif a few times over a month or so, he was caught and banned permanently. Here we have an offense that kept going on for months and he gets a 1 year ban...Is this fair? I don't think so. Again just my 2 cents... |
We don't have the information that the admins do. I would make the working assumption that Rikki's "sin" was to encourage his many non-DPC friends to join up, and that he really hadn't considered the long-term ramifications of this. I would assume he didn't go so far as to send weekly e-mails with image ID numbers and reminders to vote his image a 10 and get the required 20% in so it counted. I would assume all this was going on in the background and he had conveniently erased from his mind the reality of what was happening. For example, if he had ONE friend at work he showed his entries to, and that friend then took it upon him/herself to "promote" Rikki to the others, Rikki could easily bury any conscious awareness of this. I'm not saying this makes him any less culpable, not at all, but it's a different level of transgression from people who who deliberately use illegal processing and lie about it, or people who deliberately falsify EXIF data on challenge entries.
Robt. |
I, too, think that there is a difference in exercising poor judgement to maintain a separation so that no one can easily accuse you of blurring the line (telling a friend which photo is yours when you know they'll go vote for you) and in actively attempting to deceive the SC as to the legality of your image. AFAIK it appears that Rikki's images were taken completely legally; legally edited and submitted. Its the poor choice of not keeping the two social structures at arms' length or not expressing to his work friends how he expressly didn't want them to alter the outcome of challenges because he valued the validity of the blind challenge. If Rikki had just never shown his image at work and yet 30 of his co-workers or friends became engrossed in voting on DPC and they never knew which image was Rikki's then we wouldn't be discussing this. The real problem here is that Rikki chose to show his image. Heck, I've been guilty of that transgression when I wanted comments or reassurance that I was submitting the better of my crappy shots. The difference is that Rikki's friends voted and it appears that Rikki appreciated the outcome and never strove to set this right before it was found out.
He doesn't seem like a bad person but I have no idea. For all I know he's sitting somewhere reading these posts on someone else's account and laughing at those who defend him but I'll give him the benefit of whatever doubt I find 'cause I think there's a plausible case for him just wanting some affirmation on challenge entries and it getting out of hand. He should have definitely stopped it some time ago and there's absolutely no excuse for letting it run from November 'til July without realizing that he was benefitting but I can see how it all could have started innocently.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:54:31 PM · #523 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Originally posted by Faye Pekas:
Originally posted by ggbudge:
Originally posted by colyla:
Especially when you look in past (Ghost Account) threads |
|
That thread proves he knew what he was doing was wrong and was beginning to worry that there might be a way to trace the ghost accounts. |
Actually my understanding from reading is that the ghost accounts started AFTER that thread. SC, please correct me if I'm wrong. |
Yes, that is the case. Given this I cannot accept that what Rikki did was a mistake. He knew ghost accounts were against the rules but perhaps believed he wouldn't be caught if his friends voted in a relatively normal pattern. He sent the images to his friends knowing they would vote on them in DPC. If he had shown them the images after voting had finished there would be no problem.
The only way he could be an innocent party is if he did not know that his friends were voting on DPC. Given that there were 30 friends voting over the course of a year I cannot believe this. The members were otherwise not active on DPC, so would not be expected to know how it all works. Without a little coaching at least some surely would have voted everyone elses images low to increase the impact of their votes. Apparently they didn't do this again pointing to Rikki's involvement. For the sake of the DPCs integrity he must be punished. Hopefully Rikki will learn from this and become a stronger person.
Rikki was a talented photographer and also very helpful to other members on the forums, as Bear said this is part of the reason it feels like such a betrayal. I think this is also why SC have imposed a 1 year suspension rather than a lifetime ban - he did also bring a lot to the community. I hope he comes back but resists the temptation to influence voting... |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:54:49 PM · #524 |
Originally posted by Lozza:
No-one has ever died from betrayal. |
julius caesar?
Message edited by author 2006-07-31 18:56:38. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 06:57:13 PM · #525 |
Originally posted by idnic:
... I wish everyone would stop and ask themselves "what details do we KNOW to be true" - the answer to that is NOTHING. We don't know about his relationships with the voters, we don't know how this started or how much he did or did not participate in their voting. The truth is we don't know jack. |
Actually, it seems that the truth is that rampant and repeated vote manipulation was proven statistically. I'd concede the degree of willfulness can only be known for sure in the heart and mind of the Cheater. However, we know he started a thread where he received detailed knowledge on how to beat the vote scrubbing system. We know that the ghost accounts started appearing after this knowledge was gained.
|
|
