Post your bans here - DPChallenge Forums

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

04/24/2007 04:20:22 PM · #203

Reead what Roz shared below and note these facts:

1-Roz was accused, tried, convicted and punished without her knowledge or input.

2-She was convicted of "friend voting", a crime she'd never heard of.

3-She would not have committed the crime if she'd known it was a crime.

4-The specific evidence that convicted her was not identified before sentencing.

Roz suggests that this action goes against the grain of "the supposedly friendly site that i thought dpc was".

Roz further suggests that, "rules are totally necessary, but they have to be obvious".

There undoutedly are many others at DPC that share her view.

Nobody questions that catching vote cheaters as a laudable goal, but the "sweep" complete with sanctions for violators was probably not the best approach to the problem.

Originally posted by roz:

Originally posted by aerogurl:
it might be none of my business... but I would be interested in seeing what these emails from DPC exactly said.. did people get different emails or did everone get the same? did some get only warnings while others for bans?

Roz,
Our vote monitoring software has alerted us to the fact that you have been engaging in "friend voting," consistently voting abnormally high on the images of at least one other user in a manner that is not consistent with your normal voting scale. In addition, you have been receiving abnormally high votes from at least one other user. Attempts to abuse the voting system in this manner are strictly prohibited and as a result, you will be suspended from entering and voting on challenges for a period of one month, to begin with Tuesday's challenges. After that point, we welcome your continued participation at DPC with the understanding that you are to vote fairly on every image or refrain from voting on images that you feel you cannot fairly assess. In addition, you will use caution when sharing your challenge images with other DPC voters, keeping in mind that any sort of vote solicitation is strictly prohibited. Thank you for your cooperation.
DPC Site Council

this is wot i replied ........
hi ...
well thats a bummer .... and extremely upsetting ....... but if i'd known
about this 'friend voting' rule and the penalties, there's no way i'd'v
voted on other 'friends' images ...

...

i have loved my time in dpc and this sudden action i feel goes against the
grain of the supposedly friendly site that i thought dpc was ... rules are
totally necessary, but they have to be obvious ...

Canon EOS-20D

04/24/2007 04:28:02 PM · #204

Originally posted by stdavidson:

2-She was convicted of "friend voting", a crime she'd never heard of.

3-She would not have committed the crime if she'd known it was a crime.

Roz further suggests that, "rules are totally necessary, but they have to be obvious".

There undoutedly are many others at DPC that share her view.

Nobody questions that catching vote cheaters as a laudable goal, but the "sweep" complete with sanctions for violators was probably not the best approach to the problem.

So, let's come up with suggestions as to how to do it better. The rules are posted. Most folks freely admit to never reading them. Most folks admit that after having repeatedly checked a box stating that they have read the rules. Short of visiting each individual's home and having a face-to-face chat with every user about the expectations of the site, what's a good way to make sure people read the rules? Because I don't think the lack of understanding is that the voting rules are too complicated - it's just that no one bothers to read. Maybe there could be a quiz before each round of voting?

Rebecca

Nikon D80

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5- 5.6G ED DX

04/24/2007 04:32:50 PM · #205

Well, you know how some of the stock sites have little quizzes about the submission guidelines? What about something like that in order to gain voting privileges?

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

04/24/2007 04:36:50 PM · #206

Originally posted by mk:

... Maybe there could be a quiz before each round of voting?

Actually, that's not a bad idea. Not before each round of voting, but at the time of registration (might be a snafu for those just registering for DPCPrintss?). I know a couple of stock photo sites do that (quiz at registration to assess skills).

For those already registered, block the ability to vote until the quiz has been completed satisfactorily.

ETA - Rebecca was much faster! :)

Message edited by author 2007-04-24 16:37:28.

Fairfield20

04/24/2007 04:38:16 PM · #207

I've never been banned, but I have disqualified my very own
entry for spot editing in a basic edit challenge.

As far as voting is concerned, I vote however way I want to.
As it should be. Voting is so subjective.

I've given out very few ones and twos, unless I felt like there was
a blatant attempt to disregard the rules. Like a landscape
photo in a macro or portrait challenge. If it was a blurry
portrait entry in a portrait challenge, I honor
their honest attempt. I then give a 3 or 4 for their efforts.

Artifacts

04/24/2007 04:48:21 PM · #208

Originally posted by mk:

Originally posted by stdavidson:

2-She was convicted of "friend voting", a crime she'd never heard of.

3-She would not have committed the crime if she'd known it was a crime.

Roz further suggests that, "rules are totally necessary, but they have to be obvious".

There undoutedly are many others at DPC that share her view.

Nobody questions that catching vote cheaters as a laudable goal, but the "sweep" complete with sanctions for violators was probably not the best approach to the problem.

So, let's come up with suggestions as to how to do it better. The rules are posted. Most folks freely admit to never reading them. Most folks admit that after having repeatedly checked a box stating that they have read the rules. Short of visiting each individual's home and having a face-to-face chat with every user about the expectations of the site, what's a good way to make sure people read the rules? Because I don't think the lack of understanding is that the voting rules are too complicated - it's just that no one bothers to read. Maybe there could be a quiz before each round of voting?

Agreed... I have some suggestions:

1-Immediately recind the sanctions levied against the violators. Call it amnesty.

2-Create and implement a challenge system for violators to question the sanctions and see the actual evidence BEFORE sanctions are imposed.

3-Update challenge rules to CLEARLY define "friend voting" and all other manner of cheating in unambiguous ways. Currently they do not.

It has been said numerous times in this in other discussions that the rules are well known and written but that is not true. You need to have quantitative definitions, like a speed limit, so voters clearly understand when a violation has been commited and cannot reasonably deny the violation they are sanctioned for.

You can define violations in quantitative terms without giving away monitoring methods, much like you do with date tampering. Everyone knows that they must take their pictures during the challenge week. The violation is CLEARLY defined and you don't have to reveal your methods for violation detection. That is the way is should be for all cheating.

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

04/24/2007 05:10:51 PM · #209

It would be good to have an extra statement in the rules specifically addressing "friend voting". But when it says don't cast biased votes for anyone... well it seems to me that anyone with common sense will know that friend voting is indeed a biased vote. I mean... seriously. I had a friend here really early on and I knew right from the start not to vote him higher. It doesn't take a lot of intelligence.

Some people have said that they don't think it would affect things too much to do it a little bit. But the rules say don't do it, period.

And as for people who don't bother to read the rules before they do things... well, that's their problem, isn't it? I'm not opposed to a quiz or anything like that, but I do think people need to bear some responsibility for not lying when they check the box saying they read something.

I guess I'm saying that I would love for the rules to be updated to have these things be more clearly defined. More clarity is always better. So go ahead and have it specifically stated in the rules, a quiz, whatever. But why should amnesty be required for those who have done this previously? Nothing's changed except automation, and seriously, if you don't know not to cast a "biased vote" then it really does make sense that you're going to get punished.

edit: I should add... if it sounds like I am annoyed, I am. But I AM NOT annoyed at the people who have let us know that they have done it. I think those people have handled themselves and this issue quite well.

Message edited by author 2007-04-24 17:20:20.

Canon EOS-20D

04/24/2007 05:16:33 PM · #210

Originally posted by stdavidson:

3-Update challenge rules to CLEARLY define "friend voting" and all other manner of cheating in unambiguous ways. Currently they do not.

It has been said numerous times in this in other discussions that the rules are well known and written but that is not true. You need to have quantitative definitions, like a speed limit, so voters clearly understand when a violation has been commited and cannot reasonably deny the violation they are sanctioned for.

Okay, so here is the applicable portion of the voting rules.

You May Not:
- vote in a manner that suggests an intent to disrupt the voting system.
- offer or cast biased votes for any other user.
- attempt to alter the point totals for any entry in any way.

We Will:
- disqualify challenge entries from, suspend or ban anyone who abuses the voting system in any way.

Now, to me, those seem pretty clear but I understand that while I was not involved in the writing of the rules, maybe being on the SC gives me special insight. So what exactly needs to be said to make it more clear?

"It is not okay to vote only tens for your friends and family?"

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

04/24/2007 05:18:38 PM · #211

Originally posted by Rebecca:

Well, you know how some of the stock sites have little quizzes about the submission guidelines? What about something like that in order to gain voting privileges?

Can we include grammar and spelling?

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5- 5.6G ED DX

04/24/2007 05:19:24 PM · #212

Originally posted by mk:

"It is not okay to vote only tens for your friends and family?"

Then people will vote nines.

Rebecca

Nikon D80

04/24/2007 05:20:57 PM · #213

Originally posted by karmat:

Originally posted by Rebecca:
Well, you know how some of the stock sites have little quizzes about the submission guidelines? What about something like that in order to gain voting privileges?

Can we include grammar and spelling?

Well, can we? Pleeeeeease????
;-)

Artifacts

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

04/24/2007 05:29:13 PM · #214

Whoops... sorry... wrong place... never mind! :)

Message edited by author 2007-04-24 17:36:57.

wavelength

Nikon D300

04/24/2007 05:47:42 PM · #215

I'll just throw my vote in for "I read the rules" certifications.

This reminds me of Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy, where Arthur is lying in front of a bull-dozer about to knock his house down, and Mr. Prosser is yelling some gobblede-gook about the orders and plans being posted in city hall for over 6 months, all he had to do was be a conscientious citizen and go over to city hall to find this out, so it was his fault.

Originally posted by The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy:

Mr Prosser said: "You were quite entitled to make any suggestions or protests at the appropriate time you know."

"Appropriate time?" hooted Arthur. "Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a workman arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he'd come to clean the windows and he said no he'd come to demolish the house. He didn't tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me."

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine month."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a torch."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying Beware of the Leopard."

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

04/24/2007 05:52:21 PM · #216

Um except it isn't like that at all.

It's like this is Prosser's house, and when Arthur moved in he signed a form saying that he'd read any rules that were posted by Prosser (in a place he could easily find them, no less!)

wavelength

Nikon D300

04/24/2007 06:05:27 PM · #217

Originally posted by klstover:

well, I didn't say the analogy was EXACT. ;)

Just trying to lighten things up a bit.

04/24/2007 06:11:18 PM · #218

:-)

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

04/24/2007 07:00:01 PM · #219

I think it's more like a Quentin Tarantino movie.

...or Monty Python.

fotomann_forever

04/24/2007 07:08:49 PM · #220

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

I think it's more like a Quentin Tarantino movie.

...or Monty Python.

Don't forget Mel Brooks

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

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

04/24/2007 07:10:05 PM · #221

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Don't forget Mel Brooks

How could I forget him - he's cleaning my pool as we speak.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

04/24/2007 07:39:02 PM · #222

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Don't forget Mel Brooks

You're only saying that because of my Spaceballs reference in the announcement thread ;-)

~Terry

ace flyman

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

04/24/2007 07:53:54 PM · #223

What happen to common sense? Vote manipulation is wrong. Only a 3 month suspension. I know a guy who was suspended for 1yr. I donâ��t know of any contest you can manipulate votes in. If you donâ��t read the rules take your DQ or Suspension on the chin. Come on people. The SCâ��s arenâ��t paid enough for this.

MAK

Leica M Monochrom

Leica 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario Elmar-T ASPH

04/24/2007 08:42:42 PM · #224

NAIL EM UP I SAY.... NAIL SOME SENSE INTO EM!

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II