| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/02/2007 05:48:14 PM · #1 |
I for one can not take the voting seriously at DPC
as long as the status quo is maintained. I'm speaking
of the voters identity being hidden in the voting process.
Voters should be held accountable for the votes they
give out.
The entrants identity shall always remain anonymous
during the voting process. This post does not refer to them
in any way.
Another way to modify the voting structure
is a simple one. If you have an entry
in a challenge, you may not vote in that challenge.
Did Jack Nicholson have a vote for Best Actor
in a year in which he's nominated? Did Michael Jordan
have a vote for NBA Most valuable Player when he was
still playing? Of course not.
Just because DPC is less serious than the Oscars or
pro basketball, doesn't mean DPC members should totally dismiss
the idea of having credibility and integrity in the voting process.
Message edited by author 2007-05-02 17:49:27. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:49:54 PM · #2 |
well yea ... but ... errm, it's just the way it is around here :-)
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:51:11 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by Fairfield20:
Another way to modify the voting structure
is a simple one. If you have an entry
in a challenge, you may not vote in that challenge.
|
This has been raised many, many times and is not compatible with the other common complaint that there are not enough votes or comments. Someone who enters regularly would hardly ever get to vote.
How many people would be left to vote on the 500+ Free Study challenge?
Voters are held accountable by their Average Vote Cast stat on their profile. I have seen multiple instances of voters eventually called out in the forums when they have very low average vote cast stats...
Message edited by author 2007-05-02 17:52:22.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:51:18 PM · #4 |
Let's see, you are the 10,657 person to post the same "rant."
If no one could vote in the same challenge they entered, you would receive hardly any votes on your image.
As for "who" voted or how that person votes, just look at their profile. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:51:50 PM · #5 |
If people's votes were listed, I think they'd be afraid to give anything less than a 5 for fear of being called on it. Sure, they should leave comments but if everyone left the same sort of comment on a poorly shot image, pointing out it's deficiencies, some of the photographers here would get so discouraged they wouldn't want to shoot anymore.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:52:57 PM · #6 |
Imagine having a federal election where your vote wasn't secret.
Probably a bit of a stretch for comparison but I think voting is much more honest if it is private. Comments are what you learn from anyway, not the number. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:54:15 PM · #7 |
If Jack and MJ had votes, they would have simply voted for themselves. We, on the other hand, cannot vote on our own entries.
There are many people who make it a point to not vote in challenges they enter (do you do this?). However, the people who enter regularly are also the same people who vote regularly. Welcome to the wonderful world of challenges with hardly any votes.
We have "average vote given" in our profiles, and the site has several mechanisms to catch those not playing fairly.
The vast majority of the people here are playing by the rules.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:54:47 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Fairfield20:
I for one can not take the voting seriously at DPC
as long as the status quo is maintained. I'm speaking
of the voters identity being hidden in the voting process.
Voters should be held accountable for the votes they
give out.
The entrants identity shall always remain anonymous
during the voting process. This post does not refer to them
in any way.
Another way to modify the voting structure
is a simple one. If you have an entry
in a challenge, you may not vote in that challenge.
Did Jack Nicholson have a vote for Best Actor
in a year in which he's nominated? Did Michael Jordan
have a vote for NBA Most valuable Player when he was
still playing? Of course not.
Just because DPC is less serious than the Oscars or
pro basketball, doesn't mean DPC members should totally dismiss
the idea of having credibility and integrity in the voting process. |
Your basic ideas are pretty good, but whilst DPC has a quite a large number of registered users, the number of those currently active is a lot smaller (I assume), now this months freestudy has over 500 entries, and a lot of those will be voters. Now I know none of us will get as many votes during the next week as their are entrants, so by disallowing entrants to vote, I think we would be lucky to get 50 votes per image on any challenge.. and thats probably quite a high estimate.
I can see where you are coming from and I think the upcoming DPL tourny integrated into the site will prevent team-members from voting on team-mates images.
Some good points and topics to discuss. again :-)
Message edited by author 2007-05-02 17:55:46. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:55:52 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Fairfield20:
I for one can not take the voting seriously at DPC
as long as the status quo is maintained. I'm speaking
of the voters identity being hidden in the voting process.
Voters should be held accountable for the votes they
give out.
The entrants identity shall always remain anonymous
during the voting process. This post does not refer to them
in any way.
|
No offense but you're probably one of the prime reasons voting IS anonymous. Do you think I want my death wishes from you personalized and delivered directly to my inbox? I don't think so. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:58:22 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Fairfield20:
Did Jack Nicholson have a vote for Best Actor
in a year in which he's nominated? Did Michael Jordan
have a vote for NBA Most valuable Player when he was
still playing? Of course not. |
Politicians, including presidents, can vote on themselves or anyone else in the elections.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 05:59:46 PM · #11 |
| I usually only vote in the challenges that I am in. I dont have time to vote them all. I find that being able to vote brings me more down to earth about my own picture. You know - take a great shot, PP it, it's fantastic, submitt it, it's sure to ribbon. Then take a look (and I mean a long hard look that I only do when voting) at the other entries and you realise your is probably only worth about a 5 or 6 and not even close to the first 100. I appreciate being able to vote in the challenges that I enter. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:00:22 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Fairfield20:
Did Jack Nicholson have a vote for Best Actor
in a year in which he's nominated? |
He did if he was a member of the academy. He was a member of the academy if he one an award before that year. Maybe we should only let ribboners vote...
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:02:04 PM · #13 |
Dude just wants to find out who gave him the ones on his ROT entry and blast them...
LMAO |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:02:58 PM · #14 |
Could this be why you started this thread?
Originally posted by Fairfield20 from another thread:
I got a 4.98 on the Rule of Thirds challenge. 305th of 374.
Three voters actually gave me a one. And fifteen voters
gave me a three. . These voters should be shot.
and I don't mean by a camera either. I hope they all
own a DSLR and have it break into a thousand pieces soon.
This is so freaking ridiculous. I didn't vote in this challenge.
Because I had an entry in this challenge. That would be
a conflict of interest. I don't know why we still allow entrants
to vote in challenges they are entered in. |
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:03:39 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Dude just wants to find out who gave him the ones on his ROT entry and blast them...
LMAO |
Beat me be 54 seconds...
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:10:58 PM · #16 |
To the OP:
Given the rash of threads you've either started, or contributed to, lately, I can only be left with the conclusion that your "ideas" are more about your personal feelings about your own photographs and how they do here, than they are about any real effort to help the community as a whole.
You are also making some assumptions here:
1) That *all* voters are incapable of being objective when they have a shot in a challenge.
2) That *all* voters that vote low are doing so on purpose to trash a "good" photo, or in an attempt to manipulate their own score.
These assumptions are simply not true.
Yes, *some* people do one or the other, or both. However, making the changes you describe will only cause one thing... and that is people getting low scores on their precious photographs, that they have a huge emotional attachment to, going after those voters with misplaced anger, resentment, name-calling, etc.
We have things in place here for reasons. Most often very good reasons. If you can't separate your feelings for your own photography from an objective view of how the challenges and voting systems work, it is not the responsibility of the system to change for you.
It's perhaps time to take a step back, re-evaluate your participation here, and discover exactly why it is you're so frustrated and angry. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:38:26 PM · #17 |
It's a good thing that the entrants identity is
hidden during the voting process. Otherwise I would
feel the serpent of hate spitting venom at my entries
with ones and twos. Justified or not.
With friends like these who needs enemies. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:42:20 PM · #18 |
The voting works precisely because the voters and the photographers are anonymous. Sure, I could vote everyone a 1 and move myself up 1-2 spots in the ranking, but so what?
I'm not sure what you're so angry about. You obviously feel like your photo should have done better than it did. DPC votes and only that - DPC votes. Your photo didn't speak to the people voting in the way you hoped it would. This is not a structural voting problem, this is your photo not being as powerful a statement as you'd like it to have been.
I have no particular shyness about my scoring; I can defend every score I've given. But when, in one breath you say low voters should be shot, and in the next, say voting should not be anonymous, well that's just ridiculous.
If you want to improve your score, ask people, nicely, why they voted how they did. Request a critique. Listen to their advice - you don't have to take it, but their opinions are legitimate. If you can handle having your work judged and critiqued, don't submit it to a public forum designed to critique it.
(edit for spelling)
Message edited by author 2007-05-02 18:44:27. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:43:24 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Fairfield20:
It's a good thing that the entrants identity is
hidden during the voting process. Otherwise I would
feel the serpent of hate spitting venom at my entries
with ones and twos. Justified or not.
With friends like these who needs enemies. |
It's talk like this that reaffirms my belief that voting anonymity is absolutely necessary. You *really* need to chill. You need to seriously question whether anyone would intentionally vote you low just out of spite. Why is your shot so special that they feel the burning desire to hate it? Answer: It isn't. Low votes happen. They happen to all of us. Get over it. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:51:07 PM · #20 |
By the way, let the record show that I've cast a grand total
of 602 votes.
With an average of 6.27 !!!
Not exactly a low rater am I?
So if I was hateful, I would be vengeful and give out
ones and twos myself. Which based on my average vote
given I obviously never do. I'm way too classy for that sort of
nonsense.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:53:36 PM · #21 |
....hmmm, nope, that's just silly!
chilax dude, you haven't entered that many challenges and I think almost everyone here is comfortable with voter anonimity. Personal attacks on other site users is forbidden, and there would certainly be a lot more of those if we knew who were giving out 1's or even 10's. Have fun, don't get worked up.
Message edited by author 2007-05-02 18:56:13. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:54:28 PM · #22 |
Don't sweat the low stuff. 3-0-15 for your 1,2 and 3 votes? Bah! Check this out...
7-3-8 for 1,2, and 3 votes and it still earned 3rd...
|
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:54:43 PM · #23 |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:55:38 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by eamurdock:
The voting works precisely because the voters and the photographers are anonymous. |
Voters are anonymous, but I am not so sure about the photographers anymore. I tend to look at recently uploaded photos alot to see what is new out here, and more and more I see photos that definetly identify an ongoing challenge entry. No big deal really, just an observation.
Now on topic...knowing who the voters are would cause more threads like these where people just bitch and moan at each other. This seems to be the new craze around here. I love to read threads and hopefully find a spark of helpful advice, but even a thread started with helpful intentions leads to the "let's get it on" mentality. Knowing who that someone is that gave you a 1,2,or 3 would fuel this fire that is already out of control. I hate low scores as much as anyone, especially when it is an image that I truely like. But isn't that is what it is all about. |
|
|
|
05/02/2007 06:58:36 PM · #25 |
|
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: 10/14/2025 02:10:19 PM EDT.
