| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/23/2007 03:09:37 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
... Do we really want to waste all our time hunting down the cheaters? I̢۪d rather be out taking pictures. ... |
How is any of this a burden to you? If Langdon and SC want to invest their time pursuing this, then hats off to them.
Your ability and time to "be out taking pictures" isn't impacted at all. |
By we I meant the site as a whole, including SC. It does affect me and you if our stats show we voted someone consistently higher and we get banned.
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I̢۪m saying that sometimes for perfectly okay reasons a photo is not anonymous. This should not prevent anyone from fairly voting on that image. If you vote it high or low, that is your opinion and that is what your vote should be. |
It should not, but sometimes does. If Person A gives every submission by Person B a ten, that is probably not "fair" voting. If Person A gives Person B votes at all similar to the collective vote given the same images, it probably is. |
But what if i consistently really like one photographers̢۪ style and the stats show I have voted a lot of 9's and 10's for them, and in reality I don't even know them and never talked to them? Or what if I really do like my wife's photo and she does deserve the score i give (which is true in this case). I could get banned for either of those instances! That is what I̢۪m protesting here.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:11:47 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
But what if i consistently really like one photographers̢۪ style and the stats show I have voted a lot of 9's and 10's for them, and in reality I don't even know them and never talked to them? Or what if I really do like my wife's photo and she does deserve the score i give (which is true in this case). I could get banned for either of those instances! That is what I̢۪m protesting here. |
That was addressed on page one of the administrative announcement. See my question and its response from the SC folk.
Message edited by author 2007-04-23 15:12:01.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:18:06 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
But what if i consistently really like one photographers̢۪ style and the stats show I have voted a lot of 9's and 10's for them, and in reality I don't even know them and never talked to them? Or what if I really do like my wife's photo and she does deserve the score i give (which is true in this case). I could get banned for either of those instances! That is what I̢۪m protesting here. |
Believe me, we are doing our best to distinguish between this and actual vote trading. And we understand that often those high votes are perfectly appropriate for some particular photo.
But ask yourself whether any photographer -- regardless of how much you like their style -- would really deserve a 9 or 10 on every single entry, especially if the photos finish with a variety of cumulative scores from the overall voting pool. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:22:55 PM · #79 |
..Psst...Anybody want to buy some '10's?..
*shakes head* this site is becoming a very strange place to be these days...
I know I dont seem to get the same 'buzz' these days but maybe that's just me.
Anywho, to the people who have 'sinned' and apologised - *Smack* dont do it again
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:41:26 PM · #80 |
In view of the fact that this is not vote trading or rigging and that many people will regret the absence of those affected, might it not be possible, on this occasion, to revoke these suspensions, place a large warning on the challenge voting page for a while, treat this as a shot over the bows so that no-one has an excuse if it happens again.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:45:22 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by thelobster:
In view of the fact that this is not vote trading or rigging and that many people will regret the absence of those affected, might it not be possible, on this occasion, to revoke these suspensions, place a large warning on the challenge voting page for a while, treat this as a shot over the bows so that no-one has an excuse if it happens again. |
I agree with this 100%! |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:47:42 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
But what if i consistently really like one photographers̢۪ style and the stats show I have voted a lot of 9's and 10's for them, and in reality I don't even know them and never talked to them? Or what if I really do like my wife's photo and she does deserve the score i give (which is true in this case). I could get banned for either of those instances! That is what I̢۪m protesting here. |
Believe me, we are doing our best to distinguish between this and actual vote trading. And we understand that often those high votes are perfectly appropriate for some particular photo.
But ask yourself whether any photographer -- regardless of how much you like their style -- would really deserve a 9 or 10 on every single entry, especially if the photos finish with a variety of cumulative scores from the overall voting pool. |
This applies to someone who enters a lot. What if it's someone that you really like that is more selective? There are many photographers here who don't enter every challenge. Heida and Librodo are good examples of someone who picks their spots. While I haven't given Librodo a 10 every time I have Heida. Granted I've only voted on 3 of her entries but I could see that trend continuing. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:52:55 PM · #83 |
| I apparently like Nixter's style and pictures. In 6 challenges he's had pictures in that I've voted, I've averaged 8.166666 for his shots. I can assure you I've not seen them ahead of time. I also have some ridiculously high averages for weird people like Scalvert.... I mean, how can that be? :-) |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:53:19 PM · #84 |
To those of you who mock efforts to make the site fair, I can only shake my head in amazement. Should amateur sports be played without regard to rules? After all, it's only bragging rights and egos at stake. If you don't want rules, go participate in sites where comments and feedback are the only thing, not competition.
I'm not sure that suspensions are where I'd go right off the bat, but there are ample warnings and rules that make it pretty clear that voting is supposed to be anonymous and impartial. The SC, as usual, did their job of trying to make this a fair competition.
To MAK and Colorcarnival, thanks for acknowledging what you did wasn't right and acting like adults. You didn't set out to cheat, but you accepted that what you did was unfair, and I look forward to your returning to participate with that in mind.
To anyone who'd vote their kids or spouses higher just because of who they are, I suggest that falsely pumping up someone's ego is actually doing them more harm than good.
Edited to add the following (I always manage to forget something!):
Please go read the thread explaining the situation. No one is going to get upset at anyone voting highly for someone else. Everyone has people whose images they vote highly. What's going to get you in trouble, and what is wrong, is groups of people voting each other highly, esp. if there's any evidence they know each other.
Message edited by author 2007-04-23 15:56:41.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:54:34 PM · #85 |
We all have bias. That is why scores vary here. We have subject bias, style bias, proper spelling in the title bias, political bias, proper use of technique bias, sharpness bias, size biasâ€Â¦
It̢۪s perfectly acceptable for me to automatically give a 10 to any photo of a nude woman, a cat or a flag, but it̢۪s not okay for me to automatically give a 10 to a photo my wife took? If you are going to hunt down the photographer bias voters and ban them, I think you need to start hunting down other bias voters as well.
Examples, Ansel Adams has some average and less then average photos in his portfolio, but they still hang in museums as master pieces. How many people really think all of Picaso̢۪s stuff is great? Some of it is just a few lines, I could do that! But a lot of people hang those line drawings on the wall. How many people hang up the crappy drawings their kids gave them for valentines day on the fridge or at their desk and love to look at them? It̢۪s wall worthy because it̢۪s personal to you and you think it̢۪s great partly because of the artist that made it. So if who the artist is can have a role in your judgment of art outside of DPC, why can̢۪t it have a role in DPC voting?
Obviously cheating is cheating, but in order to ban me or the others that received a ban you should have to prove that we cheated, which you can̢۪t unless we admit to it. I can honestly tell you every photo I have voted on deserves the exact score I gave it. How can anyone tell me the score I gave a photo was undeserved? If I am not allowed to score photos the way I want, why should I vote?
I̢۪m not going to argue this anymore, if DPC want̢۪s to ban me for my voting practices then I̢۪ll just start giving every photo I vote on a 10 so everyone can be happy. That way I can̢۪t be banned for giving the wrong person a 10. Or if I want to boost my wife/friend̢۪s score I̢۪ll just skip their photo while voting low on everything else.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:55:48 PM · #86 |
Thanks MAK and others for your apologies. I'm glad you didn't "troll" vote.
Recently, I raised the issue of consistent patterns of voting favoratism on another challenge site. That site has a much smaller pool of entries than dpchallenge, so the chances of influencing the rankings are much higher. To my disappointment, the majority consensus was that no one should be able to tell others how to (or how not to) vote.
In that case, without universal support, it was determined that it was more important to drop the issue rather than alienate long-time participants.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:56:37 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
... I'd also suggest that falsely pumping up someone's ego is actually doing them more harm than good. |
Kind of like giving EVERY kid on the team a trophy at the end of the season regardless if the team even won a single game? Basketball, soccer, etc...big kids too (not just the little tots, which is ok I suppose (certificates) until they're 7 or 8). |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:59:16 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by levyj413:
... I'd also suggest that falsely pumping up someone's ego is actually doing them more harm than good. |
Kind of like giving EVERY kid on the team a trophy at the end of the season regardless if the team even won a single game? Basketball, soccer, etc...big kids too (not just the little tots, which is ok I suppose (certificates) until they're 7 or 8). |
Depends on the nature of the trophy. If it's for participation, esp. at younger ages, I think it's great. But the point of team sports at that age, it seems to me, is the participation much more than who wins games.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 03:59:57 PM · #89 |
| Aside from the public's reaction - how is this any different than what Rikki did? He was well liked and apologized after being caught and said he "wasn't trying to cheat". Why is the reaction so different this time? I'm really asking, because I think I must be missing/misunderstanding something. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:01:27 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by shutterpuppy:
Righteous indignation is the cloak of a guilty conscience. |
Good one! I wonder if that is always true?
AS for being falsely accused of voting unfairly... I assume that if one gets a warning for it, one could always appeal to the council and proclaim one's innocence. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:05:12 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by MAK:
Is this the right room for an argument? |
Originally posted by Monty Python:
I've told you once |
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:05:58 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by Megatherian:
... Why is the reaction so different this time? ... |
What do you think is different in the reaction? When that happened there was an uproar of people that were ticked off initially...then in a fairly recent forum post (started by Dr. Achoo I believe) the surprise (to some of us conservatives) was the overall statement from many that it's cool if he comes back. Probably should link that thread in here so this one doesn't derail even farther. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:11:24 PM · #93 |
Regarding my post earlier.. to sttle the, ahem, numerous emails I have received..
I WAS ONLY JOKING.
Jeez.
However, to add my tuppence worth. MAK was caught doing something a teensy bit naughty, I doubt it affect any overall standings to results, but yes, he got caught, got a slapped wrist. You bad boy.
I still have the utmost respect for the guy and no, we didnt sleep together. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:17:30 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by Mr_Pants:
Originally posted by MAK:
Is this the right room for an argument? |
Originally posted by Monty Python:
I've told you once |
|
No you didn't |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:20:20 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
...
I̢۪m not going to argue this anymore, if DPC want̢۪s to ban me for my voting practices then I̢۪ll just start giving every photo I vote on a 10 so everyone can be happy. That way I can̢۪t be banned for giving the wrong person a 10. |
Daryl... that won't work either. I did that in the "Vanishing" challenge and all my votes were thrown out.
Apparently that is cheating to!
Note:
Thought I did the same thing in the "Where in the world is StDavidson" challenge, but I gave 9s as well as 10s. Shame on me for giving 9s. Apparently I was still suffering from exposure, but the votes were counted. :)
Message edited by author 2007-04-23 16:33:11.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:21:35 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
...
I̢۪m not going to argue this anymore, if DPC want̢۪s to ban me for my voting practices then I̢۪ll just start giving every photo I vote on a 10 so everyone can be happy. That way I can̢۪t be banned for giving the wrong person a 10. |
Daryl... that won't work either. I did that in the "Where in the world is StDavidson" and the "Vanishing" challenges and all my votes were thrown out.
Apparently that is cheating to! |
AHHH CRAP! |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:21:50 PM · #97 |
These issues are actually why I have kept from making any actual friends here. I want to, but I've started to recognize styles and I don't always vote them high, but at times I may, Hey there is some extreme talent here. Talent I like. However, I am always afraid if I talk to someone too long and then vote them high unknowingly, I'll get banned. So, I don't make many friends here which is so sad.
Message edited by author 2007-04-23 16:24:20. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 04:46:52 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
How many people really think all of Picaso̢۪s stuff is great?
...in order to ban me or the others that received a ban you should have to prove that we cheated, which you can̢۪t unless we admit to it. |
Not everything your wife shoots is a 10 (reference your prior statement)
Originally posted by LoudDog:
...if I want to boost my wife/friend̢۪s score I̢۪ll just skip their photo while voting low on everything else. |
That's illegal, too. You can vote on things you like or dislike all you want, but you can't give somebody a score just because of who they are regardless of the photo quality. If you didn't know which photos were your wife's, then I seriously doubt you'd still give ALL of them a 10. Heck, I wouldn't rate many of my OWN photos a 10.
Message edited by author 2007-04-23 16:47:27. |
|
|
|
04/23/2007 05:38:14 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by angelfire:
These issues are actually why I have kept from making any actual friends here. I want to, but I've started to recognize styles and I don't always vote them high, but at times I may, Hey there is some extreme talent here. Talent I like. However, I am always afraid if I talk to someone too long and then vote them high unknowingly, I'll get banned. So, I don't make many friends here which is so sad. |
It is sad. Make friends. Don't worry so much. Just don't vote on shots you've seen and know whose they are. Simple enough.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2007 06:39:39 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Originally posted by angelfire:
These issues are actually why I have kept from making any actual friends here. I want to, but I've started to recognize styles and I don't always vote them high, but at times I may, Hey there is some extreme talent here. Talent I like. However, I am always afraid if I talk to someone too long and then vote them high unknowingly, I'll get banned. So, I don't make many friends here which is so sad. |
It is sad. Make friends. Don't worry so much. Just don't vote on shots you've seen and know whose they are. Simple enough. |
Or vote objectively... if you can. No foul there either.
It's amazing to me the reactions of "I DO WHAT I WANT!". It's like a Jerry Springer episode. Thankfully, they're few. |
|
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: 08/14/2025 05:33:18 PM EDT.
