|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/03/2006 04:06:30 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Kemptonreporter:
Further down the road of this topic however, but keeping in the spirit of its posting, can someone please tell me why so many photos are being DQ'ed?
Is it just me, or has someone else also noticed a plague of re-calculations over the last while?
I realise that the benefit of the doubt goes to people who may not understand the editing rules, but it's still really sad to see so much of it happening.
I hope we'll soon see the dust settle, and see deserving winning entries remaining as winning entries for the duration.
And viva to all of us who plod along week in and week out, trying to do things the right way, while we learn from (and hopefully join) the really talented winners in our midst! |
A lot of the DQs and recalculations lately have been due to the exposure of users with "ghost accounts" where they were running up their scores with these bogus accounts. A couple of them have been long time members with multiple ribbons. When the SC discovered them, they DQ'd most or all of the offending memebers' entries. Several challenges were recalculated as a result.
SC can correct me if I've misstated anything.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2006 04:18:00 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
A lot of the DQs and recalculations lately have been due to the exposure of users with "ghost accounts" where they were running up their scores with these bogus accounts. A couple of them have been long time members with multiple ribbons. When the SC discovered them, they DQ'd most or all of the offending memebers' entries. Several challenges were recalculated as a result.
SC can correct me if I've misstated anything. |
Including some of the most recent? "Soft focus" with two ribbon winners falling out? "From the Ground Up"?, etc...
I'm not ranting.
I'm just really hoping that we're gonna see the back of this thing for a long while, and get on with some good, clean fun again.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2006 04:29:00 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by Ashuuter:
You know, but I am sorry. This is as assinine as Mr. Ashcroft covering a statue in Washington because it was an ART piece which showed breasts. Give me a break here. What is art? I looked at said image and it shows NOTHING people, NOTHING ! Are we adults or are we 13-year-olds? Don't sensor my world ! I will make that determination for myself. What next? We see a nude baby lying on a blanket and it is suddenly Child Pornography? Grow up people ! It's 2006. If you have issues with nudity, just move on dot com ! I am an adult and wish to be treated as such. Enough said ! |
What you don't seem to understand is that nobody is censoring anything from anyone that doesn't *want* to be censored. You have the option of turning off the "Hide Nudes" in your preferences. The photographers themselves have the option of putting photos in the Nudes category if they wish.. (and people with a sense of curteousy tend to do so.)
What the set-up *does*.. is allow people who *don't* wish to view them *also* do so, and allows easier viewing of the website in places of employment, in places of a more conservative nature (churches, church going homes, whatever), without fear of running into too many photos that they don't wish to run into.
It isn't a quest to ban nudity. It isn't a quest to be a puritan website.. it is merely a compromise intended for *EVERYONE*'s interests at heart, and quite frankly, it's a darned good one.
If you want to view said images, you un-hide them. If you don't, you hide them. If you want to read forum threads that don't have nude photos in them, you avoid the ones that say "Caution: Nudity", (or some derivative), and avoid clicking on links that have the same flags.
Wow.. imagine that.
We can't all be people that don't care about the naked body. That's humanity. Some people care, and there will always be people that don't want to see it. We need to be respectful and curteous and give those people their space.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2006 04:33:48 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
What you don't seem to understand is that nobody is censoring anything from anyone that doesn't *want* to be censored. You have the option of turning off the "Hide Nudes" in your preferences. The photographers themselves have the option of putting photos in the Nudes category if they wish.. (and people with a sense of curteousy tend to do so.)
What the set-up *does*.. is allow people who *don't* wish to view them *also* do so, and allows easier viewing of the website in places of employment, in places of a more conservative nature (churches, church going homes, whatever), without fear of running into too many photos that they don't wish to run into.
It isn't a quest to ban nudity. It isn't a quest to be a puritan website.. it is merely a compromise intended for *EVERYONE*'s interests at heart, and quite frankly, it's a darned good one.
If you want to view said images, you un-hide them. If you don't, you hide them. If you want to read forum threads that don't have nude photos in them, you avoid the ones that say "Caution: Nudity", (or some derivative), and avoid clicking on links that have the same flags.
Wow.. imagine that.
We can't all be people that don't care about the naked body. That's humanity. Some people care, and there will always be people that don't want to see it. We need to be respectful and curteous and give those people their space. |
What a strange thing to say, for someone whose signature says "we love to hate"...
;P
|
|
|
|
09/03/2006 04:37:25 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by Kemptonreporter:
Originally posted by Artyste:
What you don't seem to understand is that nobody is censoring anything from anyone that doesn't *want* to be censored. You have the option of turning off the "Hide Nudes" in your preferences. The photographers themselves have the option of putting photos in the Nudes category if they wish.. (and people with a sense of curteousy tend to do so.)
What the set-up *does*.. is allow people who *don't* wish to view them *also* do so, and allows easier viewing of the website in places of employment, in places of a more conservative nature (churches, church going homes, whatever), without fear of running into too many photos that they don't wish to run into.
It isn't a quest to ban nudity. It isn't a quest to be a puritan website.. it is merely a compromise intended for *EVERYONE*'s interests at heart, and quite frankly, it's a darned good one.
If you want to view said images, you un-hide them. If you don't, you hide them. If you want to read forum threads that don't have nude photos in them, you avoid the ones that say "Caution: Nudity", (or some derivative), and avoid clicking on links that have the same flags.
Wow.. imagine that.
We can't all be people that don't care about the naked body. That's humanity. Some people care, and there will always be people that don't want to see it. We need to be respectful and curteous and give those people their space. |
What a strange thing to say, for someone whose signature says "we love to hate"...
;P |
That's been pointed out to me before ;)
|
|
|
|
09/03/2006 05:38:06 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Kemptonreporter:
No exclamation marks were harmed in the posting of this reply... |
LOL!
Originally posted by scarbrd:
A lot of the DQs and recalculations lately have been due to the exposure of users with "ghost accounts" where they were running up their scores with these bogus accounts. A couple of them have been long time members with multiple ribbons. When the SC discovered them, they DQ'd most or all of the offending memebers' entries. Several challenges were recalculated as a result.
SC can correct me if I've misstated anything. |
An additional factor is that we are running a lot more challenges at once -- except for the above-mentioned irregularities, I don't think there are that many more "regular DQs"-per-challenge than usual. |
|
|
|
09/04/2006 02:21:39 AM · #57 |
Originally posted by Ashuuter:
You know, but I am sorry. This is as assinine as Mr. Ashcroft covering a statue in Washington because it was an ART piece which showed breasts. Give me a break here. What is art? I looked at said image and it shows NOTHING people, NOTHING ! Are we adults or are we 13-year-olds? Don't sensor my world ! I will make that determination for myself. What next? We see a nude baby lying on a blanket and it is suddenly Child Pornography? Grow up people ! It's 2006. If you have issues with nudity, just move on dot com ! I am an adult and wish to be treated as such. Enough said ! |
Nobody (not the user) is censoring anything for you. All you have to do is go to "preferences," click/unclick a little box and you get exactly what you want.
If I want to take a picture of a tic tac, and as the photographer, put it in the nude gallery, it will get the "hidden due to content" treatment, even if nothing is shown. So, if a photog flags it as a nude, I'm not sure what you feel dpc is responsible for beyond that.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2006 02:33:32 AM · #58 |
Originally posted by karmat:
If I want to take a picture of a tic tac, and as the photographer, put it in the nude gallery, it will get the "hidden due to content" treatment, even if nothing is shown. |
Gets a LOT more views that way too :-)
|
|
|
|
09/04/2006 02:39:42 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
An additional factor is that we are running a lot more challenges at once -- except for the above-mentioned irregularities, I don't think there are that many more "regular DQs"-per-challenge than usual. |
It's probably just my perception then, more than anything else I can factually account for. It just seems that we have had a few ribbon-changing front pages over the last while.
Be that as it may, nothing shall deter me from me making my presence felt!
erm...
Or at least scoring a 6.00+...
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/13/2025 05:50:02 PM  |
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: 08/13/2025 05:50:02 PM EDT.
|
