| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/18/2007 11:45:51 AM · #26 |
I feel that it is luck of the draw about timing of the original post too. The thread only shows up on the home page listings for the next 10 posts, and if it gets a hit in the first round, then it is up for 10 more after that. More and more people will see it and post, bumping it again. Meanwhile, the people who posted are paying attention to it, and interacting, and it snowballs from there. Interesting thread titles get more attention too.
If it does not get the first hits then it just passes off the home page unnoticed.
The sky is not blue, it's falling.
Blah Blah Blah. : )
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 12:06:03 PM · #27 |
| I have found if I don't get a response, I will repost the question in the same thread in perhaps a more warm fuzzy way. Sometimes I bump my thread 3 or 4 times, usually at different times of the day. I also find that questions posted at the beginning of a voting cycle, or when people will be checking their scores at the close of a challenge, both are good times to pose a question. I also find that the reason why the beginning of a voting period is a good time to post a question is because people take breaks from voting by checking the forums. It really is about opportunistic timing. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 12:16:43 PM · #28 |
Chris, the behaviour you have observed is something that's bugged me hugely for ages and cannot simply be explained away by user B's response somehow accidentally being missed or misunderstood.
Even when the information given is exactly the same it seems that some people are only willing to absorb/ accept/ see it if it's provided by a user they know/ respect/ see in a certain light.
I may not be an amazing photographer but I have a good understanding of many terms, techniques, concepts and, being a Trainer by trade, I'm GOOD at explaining things clearly and precisely. But I seldom bother answering that kind of post anymore because why bother when my response is ignored only for the exact same information (often presented LESS clearly) to be repeated later in the same thread and be lauded as a great saviour.
Why bother?
:D
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 12:18:17 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by DefyTime:
it has happened to me a lot too. |
That's becuase you killed TomFoolery |
Art did that...Tom never got out of the house when he torched it. But he will live on in my profile...who knows, he might still be alive somewhere hiding from Art and oneday might come back. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 12:36:33 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Chris, the behaviour you have observed is something that's bugged me hugely for ages and cannot simply be explained away by user B's response somehow accidentally being missed or misunderstood.
Even when the information given is exactly the same it seems that some people are only willing to absorb/ accept/ see it if it's provided by a user they know/ respect/ see in a certain light.
I may not be an amazing photographer but I have a good understanding of many terms, techniques, concepts and, being a Trainer by trade, I'm GOOD at explaining things clearly and precisely. But I seldom bother answering that kind of post anymore because why bother when my response is ignored only for the exact same information (often presented LESS clearly) to be repeated later in the same thread and be lauded as a great saviour.
Why bother?
:D |
I'm sorry, did you say something? :P
actually I couldn't agree more. I don't buy into the whole "only people in the buddies club win ribbons" but the response in the forums is definitely affected by the "in" crowd. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 12:45:58 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Megatherian:
but the response in the forums is definitely affected by the "in" crowd. |
Ahh yes, nice isn't it ;-) hehe ...
Ya know, I really don't take this thread seriously at all... some people post threads that last for days and then turn around and post a thread that gets not a single response. Perhaps the thread was posted at the wrong time, perhaps noone really knows the answer. Even if the poster is unpopular, I think someone in the "in-crowd" would answer if they knew the answer, unless the OP was a real ass or something.
As far as in-crowds go. There are several of those at DPC. The site is kind of segregated at times. But, the groups do interact most times sociably. Sooo, maybe it's not a site dynamic thing at all.
Message edited by author 2007-05-18 12:47:08.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 12:52:19 PM · #32 |
I tend to read more than I respond. However, if therre is a point that has'nt been made, or, if i happen to have some new information, I'll respond.
On the social side, if the posting is made by someone I know and hasn't been picked up, I'll often post in order to keep it in the upper 10 for a bit longer in order to get some more time.
Right now, I've set my list to show 30 threads and have turned off the DPL since I'm not on a team this go round. That way, I'm seeing more of what is going on and can bump a thread every once in a while.
The last reason I don't respond is that I've seen the same question aske a dozen times before and would like the OP to search the forums before posting the question. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:03:10 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by CEJ:
Observations:
User A starts a thread asking for help/advice/comments on whatever and gets little or no response from anyone.
...
So what is the dynamic operating here that basically seems to leave a percentage of the people who participate in the forums (a community function) as 'loners'? |
I believe this observation is incorrect. It is perceived, not real.
Try this... keep a log of questions asked and by whom and the answers they do (or don't) get. I'm confident that if you quantitatively record this data that you will find no relationship between who asks a given question and the quality of answers they get.
I suspect that most people, like me, answer questions based on these two factors only: 1-They have useful information to give, and 2-They have the time to give it.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:04:04 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by CEJ:
Observations:
1. User A starts a thread asking for help/advice/comments on whatever and gets little or no response from anyone. User B starts a thread asking essentially the same thing a few days later and gets dozens of useful responses. What was wrong with user A's question?
2. Somewhere in a thread:
User A, in response to the OP, "The sky is blue."
User B blah, blah, blah.
User C blah, blah, blah.
User D blah, blah, blah.
User E, in response to the OP, "The sky is blue.
User F "Wow user E, that is so insightful. I knew there was an answer."
User G (quotes user E) and adds "I agree with you. I knew someone would figure it out."
User H (quotes user E and G) "blah blah blah"
etc.
3. User A posts a pic and asks for comments/advice on how to improve and gets basically no response. User B posts a pic and asks for comments/advice on how to improve and gets dozens of responses.
So what is the dynamic operating here that basically seems to leave a percentage of the people who participate in the forums (a community function) as 'loners'?
Does this make sense (my post)? I see this regularly in the forums and have yet to figure out why some people get essentially no responses and others get numerous responses to the same questions/requests? |
There is a very simple answer to all of this. If your in the "in crowd" you get hugs/kisses/help.
If your not then to heck with you.
This site has several "clicks" if your not part of one of them, then sadly you get looked over more often then not. Sad but thats what society today is like and its what most online communities are like. Internet life is no different than real life.
MattO
Edit to add: This site is no different then any other online community. Go to FM or any other site and you will see the same thing.
Message edited by author 2007-05-18 13:05:44.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:11:54 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by MattO:
If your in the "in crowd" you get hugs/kisses/help.
If your not then to heck with you. |
Hardly. From what I've seen, newbies get more responses than anybody. It's more a question of what you're asking, when you ask it, and whether anyone can really answer the question. If a relative "unknown" posts a provocative image in the forums asking for comments, he or she will get more responses than someone who posts an "eh, whatever" snapshot. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:13:57 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Try this... keep a log of questions asked and by whom and the answers they do (or don't) get. I'm confident that if you quantitatively record this data that you will find no relationship between who asks a given question and the quality of answers they get. |
It was this exact activity that prompted me to start this thread after a few initial observations a few months back that just seemed odd to me when I made them. I even ran an experiment sort of and it only proved that there is some sort of dynamic at work in the ether. Perhaps my post does not portray what I was thinking exactly, but from the responses it seems I am not the only one who senses/d or observes/d 'something.' |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:17:06 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by MattO:
If your in the "in crowd" you get hugs/kisses/help.
If your not then to heck with you. |
Hardly. From what I've seen, newbies get more responses than anybody. It's more a question of what you're asking, when you ask it, and whether anyone can really answer the question. If a relative "unknown" posts a provocative image in the forums asking for comments, he or she will get more responses than someone who posts an "eh, whatever" snapshot. |
You have just made my point. If someone who posts a "eh, whatever" snapshot to you, it may be a wow, look what I just learned I can do. I've seen it numerous times even with established people of this community who are members of the "in crowd"
Problem is those "eh snapshots" folks are the ones who have the most to gain from the insight this site can offer, and sadly doesnt happen. Look back at the individual discussion forum and find the number of posts that the first and second and even sometimes 3rd post are by the OP bumping their thread hoping to get feedback to help them.
MattO
Example over 100 views on these photos not a single comment
Message edited by author 2007-05-18 13:19:48.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:19:24 PM · #38 |
| Wow, that is so insightful. I knew there was an answer. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:20:19 PM · #39 |
Sometimes the shots are just soo ho-hum I don't want to say anything for fear of being mean :-D
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:25:17 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Sometimes the shots are just soo ho-hum I don't want to say anything for fear of being mean :-D |
"I agree with you. I knew someone would figure it out."
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:27:19 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Sometimes the shots are just soo ho-hum I don't want to say anything for fear of being mean :-D |
but if you're aware that you don't want to be mean ... you can word your opinion/reply in such a way that it doesn't sound like a vicious attack ... it's my observation that *most* people around here appreciate an honest opinion about their work ...
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:33:58 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by pamelasue:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Sometimes the shots are just soo ho-hum I don't want to say anything for fear of being mean :-D |
but if you're aware that you don't want to be mean ... you can word your opinion/reply in such a way that it doesn't sound like a vicious attack ... it's my observation that *most* people around here appreciate an honest opinion about their work ... |
I know... but that takes so much more effort than saying "wow, that really sucks" ... With some photos there are enough good things that saying a few bad things doesn't feel bad. But then you have some photos that you can't find enough good to say about and then you feel like "man, maybe I should just not say anything" because I know that someone has put some effort in the photo and has some pride in it.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:45:43 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by pamelasue:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Sometimes the shots are just soo ho-hum I don't want to say anything for fear of being mean :-D |
but if you're aware that you don't want to be mean ... you can word your opinion/reply in such a way that it doesn't sound like a vicious attack ... it's my observation that *most* people around here appreciate an honest opinion about their work ... |
I know... but that takes so much more effort than saying "wow, that really sucks" ... With some photos there are enough good things that saying a few bad things doesn't feel bad. But then you have some photos that you can't find enough good to say about and then you feel like "man, maybe I should just not say anything" because I know that someone has put some effort in the photo and has some pride in it. |
point made ... I also try not to hurt people's feelings (IMHO it's a good policy to have!)... but try to find something that I like about each image ... I tend to comment when voting more than react in the forums ... I guess I feel that I'm pretty new to photography and don't have a lot to offer in the way of advice ... |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:54:09 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by MattO:
If your in the "in crowd" you get hugs/kisses/help. If your not then to heck with you. |
Really? What crowd am I in? I post across a wide range of threads, and I've had solid discussions with many DPCers. And I find that I get answers when I ask.
Really? I see two helpful comments in the thread. You can't just ignore thread comments.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:57:24 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Originally posted by MattO:
If your in the "in crowd" you get hugs/kisses/help. If your not then to heck with you. |
Really? What crowd am I in? I post across a wide range of threads, and I've had solid discussions with many DPCers. And I find that I get answers when I ask.
Really? I see two helpful comments in the thread. You can't just ignore thread comments. |
Look at the time on those comments and thread replies. They were made after I posted the link. I'd say your in the Team Suck crowd.
MattO
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:58:26 PM · #46 |
edit - nevermind. Matt beat me to it. :)
Message edited by author 2007-05-18 13:59:22. |
|
|
|
05/18/2007 01:58:53 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Look at the time on those comments and thread replies. They were made after I posted the link. I'd say your in the Team Suck crowd.
MattO |
But, why hadn't you responded. huh, huh? :-P
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 02:02:42 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by MattO:
Look at the time on those comments and thread replies. They were made after I posted the link. I'd say your in the Team Suck crowd.
MattO |
But, why hadn't you responded. huh, huh? :-P |
Maybe because I work 2 jobs and have already put in 60 hours in the two combined this week, first day off from both. Oh and this sinus infection isnt helping much either.
Besides the fact that I'm not a Portrait type of photographer and I dont think I could honestly give an opinion on something that I myself suck at. :-)
MattO
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 02:03:54 PM · #49 |
You weren't supposed to have GOOD excuses. That's not fun :-P Try again.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2007 02:05:10 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Look at the time on those comments and thread replies. They were made after I posted the link. I'd say your in the Team Suck crowd.
MattO |
Oops. You're right. MattO: 1, Levyj413: 0.
As for Team Suck, well, yeah, but here's a short list, off the top of my head, of people I consider DPC friends, many of whom I've had nice PM exchanges with, who aren't in team suck:
drachoo
ursula
karmat
fotomann_forever
yanko
judi
idnic
thegrandwazoo
_eug
rex
dahkota
louis
sandyp
art rolfmao (edited to add him; can't believe I omitted him, since we're teaching PS 101 together!)
Which crowd are they in? My point is that if you put yourself out there, and are friendly, and not bitter, you'll make friends. You know, like the way it works offline.
Message edited by author 2007-05-18 14:07:31.
|
|
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: 09/17/2025 11:46:09 AM EDT.
