| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/22/2008 03:09:54 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by SDW:
Who would be left to vote on the 400-600 entries in the free study challenges?
Restricting members or R-users to vote on challenges they do not enter would not (IMO) benefit the site at all.
As a R-User it would limit you to voting on just one challenge a week
As a Member if you entered the members challenge you would be limited to voting only in the open exclusive challenges
and
As a Member if you entered the members challenge and one of the exclusive open challenges then you would be limited to only one challenge to cast your vote.
At a time when participating users are looking for more votes and comments, this would do the opposite. |
As a R-User it would limit you to voting on just one challenge a week
I think most are only voting on the challenge they submitted to anyway, aren't they? Maybe you vote on all the challenges, but it sounds like most do not.
You'd still be voting on one challenge only, just not the one you submitted to.
And who's to say the rules couldn't be tweaked, to allow R members to vote on member challenges? That would make 3 challenges to vote on. Just an idea...
And simply saying it wouldn't benefit... please, tell me why you prefer to vote only in challenges that you submitted to, otherwise, you're on a different topic.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 03:14:15 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
I think it would be interesting to try at least one open challenge pair where if you enter one, you can only vote on the other. I personally think it's the fairest way to run the competition. |
I would amend that it's factually the fairest way to run a competition, and add that you have a good idea: set a time table. I would rather see it tried for a month, to get better data, and a better feel for the impact of such a change...
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 03:28:13 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Patrick_R:
I agree with you about voting on challenges I'm in to. I still vote in them I just have to completely forget about my image. Voting day one helps because I don't start caring about my score until about 50 votes because one vote can change your score so much with low voters. HOWEVER I am getting really annoyed with whoever it is that is obviously giving everyone except him/herself a score of one. Have you noticed? In most every challenge lately there have been ones on every good image. Anyways I honestly think the system is good. If we switched it to non camera voters I wouldn't get the comments on how to improve. I mean if I can't vote I may as well just wait until the challenge is over and then congratulate the winners. |
I didn't say switch to "non camera" voters...? What???
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 03:47:47 AM · #29 |
| Here's a question - why vote at all? If the suggestion is to only review the challenges you've entered to simply appreciate the entries, why vote at all on any of the challenges? Why not just look at them all? |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 04:35:02 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Here's a question - why vote at all? If the suggestion is to only review the challenges you've entered to simply appreciate the entries, why vote at all on any of the challenges? Why not just look at them all? |
Because the web-site is called DPChallenge, a place where photographers can have their images critiqued by their peers and fellows. It would be disingenuous to assume otherwise, and I would point out this: There are already restrictions, and systems in place to a.)encourage people to benefit from full membership, and thus have more features and freedoms, and b.) monitoring systems to discourage members from biased and potentially malicious conventions, that could potentially cause unwanted effects to the scoring process.
I'm only saying, why not take it a step further, to further discourage such abuse of membership? Why not apply changes to the system that it could only benefit from - in terms of fair scoring, encouraging commentary and expanding the memberships paticipation by asking them to critique photos they might not otherwise give the time of day?
And to directly answer your question: Why? Because that's what I consider myself to be here for. To be an active participant in the DPC structure. I enjoy it. If I normally only vote on challenges I participate in, objectively or not, what does that do for the community overall?
I would daresay less, than I would under a new system, where I would be encouraged to view photos beyond those I compete in. And, I might add, in a more fair, and less distracting fashion. Look at the Blurry Mess thread: arguing, debating over the rules and how they're going to vote, regardless of what the rules say yada yada... That would be eliminated, if the voting were restricted to non-participants. This is evident in countless such posts, for many challenges.
All the bluster over how the challenges are critiqued would be eliminated, or at least - wouldn't matter.
If you're only voting in one challenge anyway, why not let it be to give an unbiased, detached critique, with absolutely no strings, rather than the potential for unfair critique?
I think it's a bit extreme to ask "why vote at all" - and does a disservice to people that picked a different challenge than us.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 04:57:54 AM · #31 |
I don't see a problem with how it is currently running.
It's good that anyone can come and vote.
I'm actually after the feedback from the average person who has little photography experience. If you ever become professional these are the people who you will be marketing your work at.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:02:50 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Here's a question - why vote at all? If the suggestion is to only review the challenges you've entered to simply appreciate the entries, why vote at all on any of the challenges? Why not just look at them all? |
And one more thing: I didn't come to DPChallenge just to "win ribbons" or to "compete for ribbons", okay? I'm an enthusiast. I like expanding my horizons in this hobby, and I like to look at, critique, and comment on others works. It doesn't matter to me what the challenge is. To be otherwise, is by definition: Limited in scope.
To suggest that if you can't critique only challenges you're competing in, and that there is no reason to vote on other challenges, is akin to saying "I'm taking my ball and going home."
I can still observe, appreciate, and examine the photos in a challenge which I have a submitted an entry. Anyone who thinks this can't be done may be harboring something. Unless there is some technical detail I've overlooked.
It's not like those photos are going to dissappear any time soon, and to me - at least I don't have to concern myself as to whether or not there's any malfeasance of the voting system due to personal stakes in the ribbon entries. I mean really - who has ever heard of such a thing, in any reputable judging system that works?
All I know is this: anyone, like myself, that has legitimately scoured the voting/scoring results of several challenges - will notice some questionable scores. Alot of them, in fact. There's dozens of posts that echo this sentiment, from dozens of members, and I'll bet there are more yet who say nothing, for fear of rocking the boat.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:07:49 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
I don't see a problem with how it is currently running.
It's good that anyone can come and vote.
I'm actually after the feedback from the average person who has little photography experience. If you ever become professional these are the people who you will be marketing your work at. |
The thread is about resrticting voters to voting on other challenges, instead of the one they entered. How would that possibly change anything from a marketing perspective???
It would still be the same people voting
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:28:49 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by C_Steve_G:
You're right, this subject has been discussed several times while I've been here. I don't recall any empirical data produced by member statisticians to lend sustantive weight to your supposition. A few posts in the forums do not make an epidemic.
I'm opposed to changes that limit my participation in the site, especially changes based on generalized interpretation of human nature.
I prefer voting in all challenges, and I have confidence in my self-control to remain unbiased. I do not compare images to each other. That is the heart of the matter as I see it.
My suggestion is that anyone who doesn't have that confidence, should feel free to abstain.
To butcher a quote: The strawman ain't broke,"... painful as that may be for some." |
My suggestion is that anyone who doesn't have that confidence, should feel free to abstain.
I'm glad you're confident in the power of your suggestion, but I'm pretty certain we're talking about alot more people than yourself here. The thing is: my [our] way works better for limiting such potential "non - C_Steve_G" types, and all "non - C_Steve_G" activities.
And alas, I think most other "non - C_Steve_G" types only vote on the challenges they are entered in. Would you refute that assumption? I'm talking about the many: not the few, the proud, the "C_Steve_G" types (whom I concurr with, actually, and share the same objective scoring traits).
BTW: You're a full member, how would any of this "limit" your voting participation, since it would be incredibly hard to vote on every single entry in each challenge? Not to mention time consuming. Maybe a system could be devised that allows members with team affiliations to vote on any challenge they wish? That would be another feather in a paying members cap, and might actually be another boost to subscriptions.
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 05:43:44.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 07:16:44 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by ttreit:
I vote in the challenges I enter because it increases my learning a lot more than if I voted in challenges I hadn't put thought and effort into.
I think it would hurt the educational elements of DPC.
Yes, folks could always look at the competition, but having to score it helps analyze it and thus learn from it. |
I would think that the most to made from any educational elements would come after voting and comments have been finalized, not during.
That would give you the criteria you would need to learn from comments, scores, and the overall scope of the submissions, in a much bigger way than voting on the fly, with no such information.
I too, put forethought and effort into my compositions, but without the data gleaned from the final tally, I don't see how looking at photos in the voting phase could possibly be educational. At least, not nearly so as when the final comments/scores are in.
And what analysis is possible, before the final scores/comments are in? What is there to analyze, that is educational, before you have any data, or basis for criteria? I mean, you're just looking at pictures, and voting/commenting. You don't know the who, the what (equipment, camera, and various settings), or the general how of what the photographer did, not to mention the where, and under what conditions.
These things can all be gleaned after the final tally, however, and I would say more educational at that point - not before.
If you're saying that you learn from simply looking at pictures, with no empirical data regarding said pictures (other than how you think they look), then I'd be curious to know what you're learning, other than your wielding of the process itself.
So, what exactly are you analyzing, and then learning from? If a picture looks good to you, it looks good! If you think it's a DNMC, then that's how you score! But I would say there is more learning once the drapes have been pulled, and we can see the man behind the curtain, so to speak. There's a vast wealth of techniques and and ancillary info - but only to be gained after the winners are announced.
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 07:34:53.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 07:35:29 AM · #36 |
I know that if I dont vote in a challenge odds are I wont go back and look at images beyond the top 10 or 20 or so unless I am looking for a specific persons image. Voting in the challenge gives me an unbiased look at images (since unbiased seems to be what you have been petitioning for) where looking at the lineup afterwards I see what the placement is. And then I often miss some really cool images. But looking at an entire challenge after the fact is not the same as voting in it.
I vote in most challenges (less lately because of how busy life is). I often vote in the challenge I am in first and then the others after. If I am up at rollover I do an initial vote through pretty quick and then rack and stack afterwards. I am a biased voter. I vote what I like high. I vote what I dont like low. Sometimes good technicals count, sometimes they dont. Sometimes I am in the mood where landscapes bug me so I vote them lower. Sometimes I am in the mood for a good landscape and they get a higher vote. Sometimes I vote half way thorugh a challenge with a certain mood, come back a couple of days later to finish out the vote in a different mood. I never vote an image down because I think it could be beating mine. Odds are in the long run my one vote will not mean the difference of someone scoring higher than mine or not.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 08:05:04 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
I know that if I dont vote in a challenge odds are I wont go back and look at images beyond the top 10 or 20 or so unless I am looking for a specific persons image. Voting in the challenge gives me an unbiased look at images (since unbiased seems to be what you have been petitioning for) where looking at the lineup afterwards I see what the placement is. And then I often miss some really cool images. But looking at an entire challenge after the fact is not the same as voting in it.
I vote in most challenges (less lately because of how busy life is). I often vote in the challenge I am in first and then the others after. If I am up at rollover I do an initial vote through pretty quick and then rack and stack afterwards. I am a biased voter. I vote what I like high. I vote what I dont like low. Sometimes good technicals count, sometimes they dont. Sometimes I am in the mood where landscapes bug me so I vote them lower. Sometimes I am in the mood for a good landscape and they get a higher vote. Sometimes I vote half way thorugh a challenge with a certain mood, come back a couple of days later to finish out the vote in a different mood. I never vote an image down because I think it could be beating mine. Odds are in the long run my one vote will not mean the difference of someone scoring higher than mine or not. |
Odds are in the long run my one vote will not mean the difference of someone scoring higher than mine or not. [/quote]
Yeah, and odds are that if enough people shared your admitted voting traits, that could lead to some decidedly unfair voting practices. It isn't just you voting here, but there may be many that vote the same way, which is a tad disturbing: provided people don't want their landscape shot getting fragged by a phalanx of such voting habits.
Let me put it this way: votes are anonymous. But, most would be discouraged if they could learn that their otherwise fine photo was sent to the basement because of such personal bias against it, wouldn't they? And rightly so, because they didn't get a fair shake.
What if American Idol worked this way? What if Simon and Paula hated rhythym and blues, and just thrashed those participants everytime they got on stage, regardless of their skill, and talent for the genre? Granted - that constitutes a 2 outta 3 vote, which is extravagant by DPC standards (which are more balanced by sheer numbers), but could anyone say they would like timfythetoo being a vote, on such a panel? What about a bunch like this?
I appreciate your honesty, timfy, but I doubt that many would publicly empathize with that kind of voting pattern.
I'm not totally blind to the fact that these traits "balance themselves out" somewhat, due to the conscientious voting of more objective, open minded voters. But, in the larger scheme, isn't it better to limit personal biases as much as possible, while keeping the integrity of the scoring system the least muddied by personal bias as possible?
Maybe I'm wrong, and there aren't any problems, and they balance themselves out. But I know who I'd rather have vote on my images, and they aren't necessarily the majority of my co-entrants (is that a word? Help!) in a given challenge. I'd rather relax, vote on another fine challenge, and when the vote is over - get a nice surprise, the joy of checking the the end result. I don't mind sitting through an "incubation" period, and would eagerly await every tally to see what results. My hands would be clean of any percieved bias, and my image would be as clean of said bias.
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 08:09:28.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 08:09:54 AM · #38 |
 supernaught, IMO your logic has some large holes in it.
-The assumtion that the forums about challenge interpritations and voting patterns is just that, an assumption.
-After the challenge is over MOST people are looking forward to the next challenge, looking for ideas and whatnot.
-*I* believe that most users vote on more than one challenge per week. I know i do.
-Who says that the SC looks for malicious voting patterns? I have been told that the only person that can see a persons individual vote is Langdon
-Cheaters will always cheat. If your taking the time to vote others a 1 to improve your score, you'll do it with a fake account or something.
-If you want to take 'personal bias' out of the equation, you need to take out the 'person'
There is no flaw in the voting system, only in the voters. What you suggest, to me, is like putting a pan under a leaky roof. Sure, the floor doesn't get wet, but the roof still leaks.
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 08:11:53. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 08:27:34 AM · #39 |
When you account for the number of entries, number of users, number of votes, apply the 80 % rule, and examine the historic distribution and run equivalency testing between top scores, you will find that even if someone biased their votes, just because they had an entry in a challenge, the overall result and final assessment of the placement would be quite insignificant. I believe also that pattern voting in such a biased case would be caught by the system filter.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 08:33:42 AM · #40 |
Avg (all users): 7.5784
Avg (commenters): 8.7368
Avg (camera): 7.5707
Avg (no camera): 9.0000
SandyP's stat's, not mine (unfortunately). I would get rid of the Avg (camera) stat, and add Avg (participant in challenge) Avg (non participant in challenge). Would be very interesting. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 08:35:39 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
When you account for the number of entries, number of users, number of votes, apply the 80 % rule, and examine the historic distribution and run equivalency testing between top scores, you will find that even if someone biased their votes, just because they had an entry in a challenge, the overall result and final assessment of the placement would be quite insignificant. I believe also that pattern voting in such a biased case would be caught by the system filter. |
See, now, you're trying to inject facts into an argument. Troublemaker ;-)
I'm with  Melethia; I really enjoy voting on challenges I entered because I am much more likely to appreciate what went into getting the shot. Looking at the other entries afterwards does not make me think as hard as voting and/or commenting. And if I really like what someone else did, why should they have to forego my high vote just because I have a shot in the same challenge? My average vote given is almost always considerably higher than my vote received.
And on the flip side, I *want* people who entered to vote on my entry, because I know they have at least one recent experience with the subject or technique required. I get my fair share of low votes on images I know (and most voters agree) are better than average, but I prefer to assume those are people who just don't like it, not people who are trying to better their own chances at a ribbon. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 08:48:10 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by cloudsme:
Avg (all users): 7.5784
Avg (commenters): 8.7368
Avg (camera): 7.5707
Avg (no camera): 9.0000
SandyP's stat's, not mine (unfortunately). I would get rid of the Avg (camera) stat, and add Avg (participant in challenge) Avg (non participant in challenge). Would be very interesting. |
IMHO, this is the best idea yet. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 09:06:41 AM · #43 |
| I would personally like to see a change in the 20% vote rule. This I think can have an effect on the out come. I say if you vote on a challenge vote on all the entries. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 09:28:46 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
[
Instead of echoing my sentiments, or disagreeing with them, maybe someone could posit an argument for the current system? |
I prefer that the participants vote in each contest they enter. And vote for the *ENTIRE* group of entrants. I prefer being rated by the most active members on DPC. They tend to be the best photographers overall and I'd like to have the benefit of their judgment and possible comments on my entry. If you look at the number of votes in any given contest you'll find that many times there are less votes per entrant than number of entrants in the challenge. I believe this pitiful figure would only go down, and dramatically if your idea was instituted.
I seldom see any problems with arguments about scoring directed toward individual members because voting is anonymous. I personally have no problem voting on the same challenge I enter. I can easily rate the images I view without worrying about what mine is going to score. Even if I subconsciously rate them with bias, my one vote will have a minuscule affect on the scores. Even if I voted a 1 on each entry, which, by the way would invalidate my votes. Take a gander at my average vote given on my profile page. My average will have *NO* negative effect on voting. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 09:59:04 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
To suggest that if you can't critique only challenges you're competing in, and that there is no reason to vote on other challenges, is akin to saying "I'm taking my ball and going home." |
I generally only have time to vote one challenge a week, maybe two. I prefer to vote those I've entered. If that's removed, I will view those I've entered and not vote. I'll take my damn ball and go home. :-) |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 10:10:30 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Originally posted by SDW:
Who would be left to vote on the 400-600 entries in the free study challenges?
Restricting members or R-users to vote on challenges they do not enter would not (IMO) benefit the site at all.
As a R-User it would limit you to voting on just one challenge a week
As a Member if you entered the members challenge you would be limited to voting only in the open exclusive challenges
and
As a Member if you entered the members challenge and one of the exclusive open challenges then you would be limited to only one challenge to cast your vote.
At a time when participating users are looking for more votes and comments, this would do the opposite. |
As a R-User it would limit you to voting on just one challenge a week
I think most are only voting on the challenge they submitted to anyway, aren't they? Maybe you vote on all the challenges, but it sounds like most do not.
You'd still be voting on one challenge only, just not the one you submitted to.
And who's to say the rules couldn't be tweaked, to allow R members to vote on member challenges? That would make 3 challenges to vote on. Just an idea...
And simply saying it wouldn't benefit... please, tell me why you prefer to vote only in challenges that you submitted to, otherwise, you're on a different topic. |
As far as the rules being tweaked to allow R-users to vote in members challenge, I don't think that will happen (but it could) since that is a membership feature.
It's not that I prefer to vote only in the challenges that I submit too, it's that I prefer not to be told I can't. I also vote in challenge I'm not participating in.
I have of 17k votes cast and can honestly say I do not base my votes on my photograph. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 10:13:30 AM · #47 |
The math just doesn't support a change. With 200 voters in most challenges giving a 1 instead of a 10 lowers someone's average less than 0.05 points. Is that big enough to effect the rankings - yes, bit enough to effect who gets first place - sometimes, but only if I happen to lower the first place image and don't lower the second place image. If I down rate all of the top images (assuming I can figure out how the final votes will come out) I don't really change any rankings. Yes my image may move up a bit in the ranking. But unless I have that outstanding image I might go from number 75 to number 73. And that only happens if I down rate the images near my average - something hard to guess at when I voting, especially when I think I have a better image than do the rest of the voters.
To accomplice anything I really have to give quite a number of low scores. In which case I very much suspect that the SC would catch and sanitize my votes out of the count. While I have no inside knowledge of the sanitizing process I think in my hands I would be looking first closely at the number of low scores. A disproportionate number of low scores - say 20 ones and twos at the extreme and my votes don't count. Second I would look at how well the votes correlate with the final scores. Any kind of negative correlation and your votes are suspect. In particular any pattern of low votes among the higher placed images is reason for suspicion.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 10:37:08 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by Frankie_Lv:
I would personally like to see a change in the 20% vote rule. This I think can have an effect on the out come. I say if you vote on a challenge vote on all the entries. |
I agree in principle, but practically speaking not everyone has time to vote on every entry. And faced with 600+ images (which has happened) even getting to 20% can be a daunting effort. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 10:44:35 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by MaryO:
See, now, you're trying to inject facts into an argument. Troublemaker ;-)
|
Wow...I get that comment so much at work....must be true! :)
Originally posted by MaryO:
And on the flip side, I *want* people who entered to vote on my entry, because I know they have at least one recent experience with the subject or technique required. |
Totally agree. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 10:46:55 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Education/enlightenment requires no voting - sorry! |
No need to be sorry. In my opinion you are wrong about education and voting. I believe how well you score in the challenges is directly related to your voting and commenting. Especially commenting, but certainly rating the image 1 - 10 requires some rational process which you gradually learn. This will help you isolate the various elements of a pleasing "DPC friendly" image and make one yourself. Winning at DPC is certainly not an art contest. It's a popularity contest and bright, clear, well composed, eye candy has a tendency to do very well here. But I believe originality is probably the number one element. If you hit the technicals on the head and the voters here haven't seen your concept you stand a good chance of a ribbon. But I'm certainly not going to try and convince you. I only hope you stick around and become a member. I hope to re-initiate this conversation again in about a year. I bet your opinions will have changed. |
|
