| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/11/2007 10:10:12 PM · #26 |
| I gave you a 1. I'd have given you a 0 if I could figure out how. Next time move the frigging hands out of the way you teasing bastard. |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:11:44 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I gave you a 1. I'd have given you a 0 if I could figure out how. Next time move the frigging hands out of the way you teasing bastard. |
Hehehe
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:12:13 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I gave you a 1. I'd have given you a 0 if I could figure out how. Next time move the frigging hands out of the way you teasing bastard. |
LMAO!
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:21:23 PM · #29 |
Maybe there is a more scientific way to come up with a score. We know that most of the voter are not trolls and most of the voters are friends and family giving everyone they know 10s or there would be some really bad scores out there.
Using standard deviation, medians and means, throwing out the votes that don't make sense might be a better way.
IF POSSIBLE, I would like to have a crack at it. If I could get a hold of the data from some past challenges I would volunteer to work on an algorythm that is just, and can be somewhat easily programmed.
All I would need is a bunch of PICTURE_IDs, USER_IDs, and vote scores for a few challenges. This data can be altered to protect the identity of both the pictures and the users. (An excel spreadsheet is fine.)
I am programmer for a insurance and financial company and we always have to do things that predict losses, and validate results. Please PM me if you would like me to take a shot at it. I would love to be able to compare what I come up with to the current way and see what the effect is.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:26:27 PM · #30 |
What about just dropping the TOP 10% of the votes and the BOTTOM 10% of the votes?
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:29:06 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Greetmir:
What about just dropping the TOP 10% of the votes and the BOTTOM 10% of the votes? |
How would pushing all scores to the middle benefit anyone? |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:30:26 PM · #32 |
How about an artificial neural network? In more practical terms neural networks are non-linear statistical data modeling tools. They can be used to model complex relationships between inputs and outputs or to find patterns in data.
Let's go AI :-)
And if the system doesn't like your vote, it votes for you... hehe.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:35:43 PM · #33 |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 10:38:53 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by TonyT:
whatever |
Nah seriously... it might work (minus the voting for you part). I mean ANN's are used in financial and insurance predictions. If trained properly one could be quite effective in weeding out strange voting patterns.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:04:20 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
No, no, no... wasn't calling you pond sum, it's just my general signature...
|
Hmmmm(sp).....interesting.
Coinsicentally (sp), I have been giving thought to changing my username in recent days to "Pond Scum", or maybe even "I Can't Spell Worth A Damn Man".
Highly, intriguing (sp).
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:26:51 PM · #36 |
Yeah, this is an on-going problem and certainly a weakness of this site. Why is accountability toward someone who has offered their image out in the open for your scrutiny so wrong? Regardless of what the seemingly aloof members may infer with "Don't take it so personally or so seriously babble", I disagree and suspect many others who spend alot of time on this pursuit may feel the same. Personally I find bubble wrap alot more fun than pressing an update button. At least bubble wrap is semi-transparent and makes a cool sound. I Look at it this way, what if your mentor did not justify his or her observations and left you floundering with meaningless input? How would that help you learn or strive for excellence? Rather than casting suspicion on an idea like this and viewing it as a violation on someone's anonimity, consider the value added benefit accountability would have in exposing reckless and flippant voting patterns. This senseless voting, when left unchecked, discourages new talent. I'd say this site is fertile ground for some exceptional talent but eventually creates a bad taste in the mouths of many simply by ensuring the voting is meaningless. Does anyone really take the votes on this site seriously? Should they, or come to think of it, could they when anonymity is valued more than skill? Is the internet not enough of a mask to hide behind?
Alright,I've got my helmet on. let me have it. hehehe
|
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:35:34 PM · #37 |
I think this is a very scary idea, as a new person. Considering all the contraversy over voting philosophies, can you imagine how nerve-wracking it could be for someone who was brand new? I lurked around here for a few months before I ever joined up and voting the first time was tense anyway - I was really worried about doing it wrong! It'd be even worse if folks were chasing me around TELLING me I voted wrong! You could end up with 'voting' police even. It would really open the doors for a lot of harrassment.
- C, ES |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:37:59 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I find this to be an original and unique suggestion which simply can not be argued with. I certanly hope it is implemented post haste. |
the fact that this was posted less than 2 minutes after the OP makes me puff out my chest in pride at our little family.
snarky bitches unite!
Message edited by author 2007-01-11 23:38:11. |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:38:43 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by American_Horse:
Coinsicentally (sp), I have been giving thought to changing my username in recent days to "Pond Scum"... |
hey! back off! it's taken! |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:48:37 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
Yeah, this is an on-going problem and certainly a weakness of this site. Why is accountability toward someone who has offered their image out in the open for your scrutiny so wrong? ..... Rather than casting suspicion on an idea like this and viewing it as a violation on someone's anonimity, consider the value added benefit accountability would have in exposing reckless and flippant voting patterns. .... Does anyone really take the votes on this site seriously? Should they, or come to think of it, could they when anonymity is valued more than skill?... |
Personally I don't see a problem nor weakness in the system. Why is accountability/scrutiny wrong? Because it's accountability/scrutiny to the mob rather than the people who run the site. Added benefit? None that I can see. So you know who voted low on your photo, now what? You go bitch at them? Appeal to public sympathy to make yourself feel better? Did it help you at all, no. Do people take votes seriously? Some do. Should they? No. |
|
|
|
01/11/2007 11:58:39 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Originally posted by Greetmir:
What about just dropping the TOP 10% of the votes and the BOTTOM 10% of the votes? |
How would pushing all scores to the middle benefit anyone? |
Not really. In most cases this will increase the spread. You score would be influenced most by getting rid of what is far from your mean...
for instance, in the recent fireworks challenge:
first place scored 7.8225, last place scored 2.9323
if you got rid of the bottom 10 votes (for demonstration purposes, this is easier to do than 10%)
first place would score 7.9683 (up 0.1458), last place would score 3.0385 (up 0.1062)
(thus first gains more than last)
if you got rid of the top 10 votes
first place would score 7.7285 (down 0.0985), last place would score 2.7377 (down 0.1946)
(thus first loses less than last)
if you got rid of the top 10 and bottom 10 votes
first place would score 7.8720 (up 0.0495), last place would score 2.8382 (down 0.0941
(net effect: spread increases between these two by 0.1437) |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:04:43 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Personally I don't see a problem nor weakness in the system. Why is accountability/scrutiny wrong? Because it's accountability/scrutiny to the mob rather than the people who run the site. Added benefit? None that I can see. So you know who voted low on your photo, now what? You go bitch at them? Appeal to public sympathy to make yourself feel better? Did it help you at all, no. Do people take votes seriously? Some do. Should they? No. |
Anonimity breeds mob mentality. If accountability was not important, there would be no need for a site council to moderate the forums. If scrutiny was not important, there would not be a need for validation of winning photos. If recognition was not important, there would be no need for ribbons. |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:21:04 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
...Anonimity breeds mob mentality. |
Could it not be argued that this premise would hold true only if the ensemble of the mob all shared the same information while still remaining anonymous???
Just curious.
Ray |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:28:35 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Ivo:
...Anonimity breeds mob mentality. |
Could it not be argued that this premise would hold true only if the ensemble of the mob all shared the same information while still remaining anonymous???
Just curious.
Ray |
I guess if used in the context of the organized crime "Mob", I would agree. The element that is missing here is the "Organized" therefore, I'll use the definition that is more akin to a herd of sheep. |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:38:43 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by American_Horse:
Coinsicentally (sp), I have been giving thought to changing my username in recent days to "Pond Scum", or maybe even "I Can't Spell Worth A Damn Man". |
How about "Pondd Skum"? |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:40:53 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by asimchoudhri:
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Originally posted by Greetmir:
What about just dropping the TOP 10% of the votes and the BOTTOM 10% of the votes? |
How would pushing all scores to the middle benefit anyone? |
Not really. In most cases this will increase the spread. You score would be influenced most by getting rid of what is far from your mean...
....
if you got rid of the top 10 and bottom 10 votes
first place would score 7.8720 (up 0.0495), last place would score 2.8382 (down 0.0941
(net effect: spread increases between these two by 0.1437) |
And the benefit is? |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:42:22 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by American_Horse:
Coinsicentally (sp), I have been giving thought to changing my username in recent days to "Pond Scum", or maybe even "I Can't Spell Worth A Damn Man". |
How about "Pondd Skum"? |
Yeah, kinda got that Snoop Dogg feel to it :-)
|
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:49:32 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Originally posted by asimchoudhri:
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Originally posted by Greetmir:
What about just dropping the TOP 10% of the votes and the BOTTOM 10% of the votes? |
How would pushing all scores to the middle benefit anyone? |
Not really. In most cases this will increase the spread. You score would be influenced most by getting rid of what is far from your mean...
....
if you got rid of the top 10 and bottom 10 votes
first place would score 7.8720 (up 0.0495), last place would score 2.8382 (down 0.0941
(net effect: spread increases between these two by 0.1437) |
And the benefit is? |
benefit? that's a separate issue. my main point to address that it does not bring people to the middle as was suggested, but would rather increase the spread. whether to implement it or not, and if so why, is a separate discussion. i just wanted to throw in some stats to show that it does not bring everyone towards a mediocre middle, but does the opposite. |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 12:53:58 AM · #49 |
|
|
|
01/12/2007 01:07:04 AM · #50 |
|
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: 08/30/2025 06:36:01 PM EDT.
