We have a con artist amongst us!

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

07/09/2003 09:14:16 PM · #26

Sorry I forgot to add that if I only suspect a photo to be fraudulent then I will score it as if it is legitimate.

"And in any case, why such a lack of faith that we (Site Council) will do our jobs?"

I don't have a lack of faith, yet. And hopefully i never will.
Guess i'm just a bit emotional 'eh? Typical woman. %)
Aloha!

Canon EOS-20D

07/09/2003 09:23:28 PM · #27

Honestly, if you people are losing sleep over dpc, you need to step back and take a breather.

Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM

07/09/2003 09:26:26 PM · #28

Yes well some people just get carried away... it's called OCD.

orussell

Canon EOS Rebel T6s

07/09/2003 10:15:24 PM · #29

I wonder how many votes he's got so far. I've voted for all but that particular image, until we get a ruling. Knowing that it is suspect, it wouldn't be fair in my opinion to vote on it yet.

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

07/09/2003 10:17:30 PM · #30

Last I checked he had 6 comments... one of them my own.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

07/09/2003 10:18:46 PM · #31

Originally posted by Kali:

Last I checked he had 6 comments... one of them my own.

How do you know how many comments someone has before voting is over? I thought that wasn't known.

Added: I'm just being curious again ...

Message edited by author 2003-07-09 22:20:59.

orussell

Canon EOS Rebel T6s

Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM

07/09/2003 10:20:06 PM · #32

Originally posted by uabresch:

Originally posted by Kali:
Last I checked he had 6 comments... one of them my own.

How do you know how many comments someone has before voting is over? I thought that wasn't known.

That's what I want to know.

kavamama

Panasonic DMC-FZ10

07/09/2003 10:32:08 PM · #33

This person sent a PM in response to a comment which identified him/her. It says right on the profile page how many comments have been received. You can't read the comments until after the voting, but I guess they tally on the profile page as they are made.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

07/09/2003 10:37:51 PM · #34

Originally posted by kavamama:

But not for the entries currently being voted on. That is, on a person's profile you get the total of comment received, and the number of comments per picture (after the challenge has been voted on).

BTW, Louise, I just went to your profile and added up the comments per picture (in the table where challenge entries are listed) and the total is different than the number for comments received at the top left of your profile. Weird.

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

07/09/2003 10:41:27 PM · #35

Yeah it's weird cuz on my profile it says:

Challenges Entered: 0 Wrong. I've entered 2
Votes Cast: 474 True I suppose
Avg Vote Cast: 6.6835 Really? I sound like a meanie
Votes Received: 0 Wrong. It's 300 something
Avg Vote Received: N/A
Comments: All comment stats are correct
Made: 54
Helpful: 26
Received: 17
Forum Posts: 43
Profile Viewed: 260 times

I guess some stuff just updates more frequently than others...

Message edited by author 2003-07-09 22:42:56.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

07/09/2003 10:45:24 PM · #36

I think, Kali, that some of the stats are updated after the Sunday challenge is over, so that might explain some of the discrepancies in your profile. But the numbers still don't add up to Louise. I think though that it's time to quit, what in the world am I doing adding up comments on someone elses profile? That's the weirdest thing of all. I think I need to tell myself, "GET A LIFE!" (or get some sleep, and go take some picts tomorrow). I'm turning off the computer.

kavamama

Panasonic DMC-FZ10

07/09/2003 10:53:36 PM · #37

[quote=uabreschBTW, Louise, I just went to your profile and added up the comments per picture (in the table where challenge entries are listed) and the total is different than the number for comments received at the top left of your profile. Weird.[/quote]

Oh, yes, and weirder yet, the number of comments seems to change when photos are uploaded into the portfolio. It's all too weird. I know it will all come out in the wash when the admins have time to do their thing. Oh, and I've had comments made on a couple of photos in my portfolio that haven't been in challenges, so that would certainly present a discrepency if only the challenge comments were tallied...G'night. Geeze, Louise!

irae

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8

07/10/2003 12:00:35 AM · #38

Actually, two con artists. Aren't you paying attention?

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

07/10/2003 12:17:28 AM · #39

For the record, the entry in question has been disqualified.

-Terry

07/10/2003 12:34:42 AM · #40

Originally posted by irae:

Actually, two con artists. Aren't you paying attention?

TWO!?!?!

Mahalo nui loa, Terry!

chalcone

Canon PowerShot S45

07/10/2003 01:57:02 AM · #41

I just noticed that two of my comments disappeared from the stats. I realized later that 2 entries were taken out. What a pain in the... If those 2 suckered me into making some of my more-inspired comments, then that what can I say? What a grand waste of "cerebral" time.

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

07/10/2003 03:05:07 AM · #42

Precisely why I wanted it (now them) removed sooner rather than later.

KarenB

Canon EOS-70D

07/10/2003 09:40:17 AM · #43

Again, if the photog had followed the rules, it would not have been a waste of "cerebral" time ;)

A few times I have requested DQ's to find they are legit, and I too have voted on entries and commented only to find later they were DQ'd.

I understand the reason you were so upset. It is wrong for someone to break the rules and especially to post a photograph that is not even theirs. But, at the same time we had to go thru the process.

Cheers!

BTW: I was only quick to edit your post, Kali, because I wanted to be sure the entry and photog's names were taken out before too many people saw it. I would usually give a person a chance to edit their own post.

Happy Photo Shooting! ;)

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

07/10/2003 10:06:15 AM · #44

Originally posted by Kali:

Precisely why I wanted it (now them) removed sooner rather than later.

To be fair, we have to look into things. It IS a possiblity that this could have been done legally somehow. If it had been a photo of a print, with something physically in it that we couldn't see right away, than it COULD (not saying WOULD, but COULD) have been considered legal. Now, we would feel really stupid if we DQed photos without giving the person a chance, only to later find out it was legal.

Also, I'm not seeing this other 'con artist' in question who has been DQed in this challenge, but if you guys say so, what do I know...I'm just looking at the DQ list.

07/10/2003 01:45:30 PM · #45

Yes but if there is hard evidence (i.e. the exact same pic) then why wait for the con to respond?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/10/2003 01:46:15 PM · #46

Where's this DQ list?

wewillexplore

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

07/10/2003 01:46:35 PM · #47

Only mods can see it.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

07/10/2003 01:53:01 PM · #48

Originally posted by Kali:

Yes but if there is hard evidence (i.e. the exact same pic) then why wait for the con to respond?

We also go through a moderator vote. There are 11 of us scattered all over the world... we're not all on at the same time. And once a consensus is reached, there has to be an administrator (Drew or Langdon) around to push the DQ button. They're real guys, with real jobs and real lives. Sometimes they're just plain *not here* and we have to wait till they get back.

-Terry