| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/22/2008 10:49:42 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
[q
I think most are only voting on the challenge they submitted to anyway, aren't they? |
Don't you know????? |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 10:59:34 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
I'm only saying, why not take it a step further, to further discourage such abuse of membership? |
After reading this statement I can understand some of the cynical posts I see from time to time in the forums about new members coming in and criticizing the various systems at DPC.
Why not just settle down for a few months and then come back enlighten us with your revelations about DPC. I doubt that even a person of your refined character and superior intellect could grasp the entirety of DPCs nuances in merely a month.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 11:14:15 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by supernaught:
[q
I think most are only voting on the challenge they submitted to anyway, aren't they? |
Don't you know????? |
Actually, I usually vote on the challenges that have less entries, whether I'm in it or not. On dial-up, that is about the only way I can get the 20%. :/
What I would really like to figure out is how to get more people voting and commenting, period.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 11:22:21 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
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.
I appreciate your honesty, timfy, but I doubt that many would publicly empathize with that kind of voting pattern. |
Maybe someone can point me to a system that I can follow that will allow me to vote totally unbiased. But who created that system and what kind of bias is there? Maybe we need to find one unbiased person and just have them vote on the images. That way we wouldnt have to worry about people voting my kid shot low because they are sick of kid shots. But you know if a large group of people are voting the same way then the masses are speaking. Is that unfair? No - its part of the game.
To score high at DPC you need to appeal to the masses - biases and all. At different times in the life of DPC certain images or editing techniques were scored higher. And then that phase went by the wayside and people started voting them lower which ended up weeding those styles out. Thats the way it is. Many images that scored high a couple of years back wouldnt now. Peoples tastes change. The masses sway. Biases change.
And then it comes down to why you are here. What do you want out of this site? If its about a great score and ribbons then you need to learn how to play the game. You need to learn how to create an image that will override the biases that people have. You need to learn how to appeal to the masses - not try to figure out how to strongarm them into voting a certain way or follow a certain criteria. You need to give them what they want. A low vote means you didnt accomplish that.
If you are here just to learn then the game is different. Scores and votes dont matter in the same way. If you want to learn you need to be voting and commenting on as many images as possible. You need to see what is out there, what people are doing, what people are creating, both during and after the challenge.
So why are you here  supernaught? Are you here to get high scores and ribbons? Are you here to learn in your craft? Are you here to strongarm people into voting a certain way? I know I am biased in my voting patterns. I could quote my previous post. What is your bias? Do you believe that your average vote cast of 4.8 is a truly unbiased interpretation of the images in these challenges? Or is it influenced by something else?
And if anyone cares to know the vote I gave them on their image in any challenge I am more than willing to share that and the reason behind it.
Hello - my name is Tim Toole. I have opinions and tastes that are reflected in my votes given. I am biased. I am not a robot. Though I do seem to be a ribbon machine as of late. ;)
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 11:32:32 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
Though I do seem to be a ribbon machine as of late. ;) |
You just had to throw that in there didn't you Tim....:) |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 11:33:25 AM · #56 |
| Also - I want as many votes and views as I can possibly get. Preventing people from voting because they entered into that challenge probably strengthens the impact of the biases that you rail against. The more votes the less impact a biased voter has. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 03:31:57 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
I appreciate your honesty, timfy, but I doubt that many would publicly empathize with that kind of voting pattern. |
Maybe someone can point me to a system that I can follow that will allow me to vote totally unbiased. But who created that system and what kind of bias is there? Maybe we need to find one unbiased person and just have them vote on the images.
And then that phase went by the wayside and people started voting them lower which ended up weeding those styles out. Thats the way it is. Many images that scored high a couple of years back wouldnt now. Peoples tastes change. The masses sway. Biases change.
You need to learn how to create an image that will override the biases that people have. You need to learn how to appeal to the masses - not try to figure out how to strongarm them into voting a certain way or follow a certain criteria. You need to give them what they want. A low vote means you didnt accomplish that.
I know I am biased in my voting patterns. I could quote my previous post. What is your bias? Do you believe that your average vote cast of 4.8 is a truly unbiased interpretation of the images in these challenges? Or is it influenced by something else?
And if anyone cares to know the vote I gave them on their image in any challenge I am more than willing to share that and the reason behind it.
Hello - my name is Tim Toole. I have opinions and tastes that are reflected in my votes given. I am biased. I am not a robot. Though I do seem to be a ribbon machine as of late. ;) [/quote]
So, to be clear - I'm a robot who's trying to strongarm people into voting a certain way because I have a different viewpoint as to how the scoring system might be tweaked to allow for less nuanced and more objective scoring.
Interesting. I didn't know I had that mafioso thing happening! (strong arm??) Wait... bring in the gimp!!! Get the boys, we're taking over!!!
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
Maybe someone can point me to a system that I can follow that will allow me to vote totally unbiased. But who created that system and what kind of bias is there? Maybe we need to find one unbiased person and just have them vote on the images. |
Well, for starters: how about every known contest involving a disparate, impartial, select group of individuals with no award interest in a given challenge or competition? Is that supposed to be a serious inquiry? Look at any such contest - you won't find one where the the pasrticipants vote on each other for an award/trophy/prize/recognition.
I used this example in another thread: The pop-rock band U2 has a gamillion fans. I don't like their music. Does that mean if I were judging them, impartially, that I should give them a bad review, or: can I critique the band as a functioning whole, realize they are great musicians who skillfully use their talents to produce well executed music? That makes me a robot?? Wow, I didn't know impartiality was so bad. I mean, I seem to know that I don't buy their CD'S, and seem to know that their music doesn't fit my tastes, but dang - seems like machinima to say they "suck" because of that, when they clearly do not.
Your comments would be more interesting if the actually stuck to the thread topic - if you disagree with my viewpoint, that's good, and that's why I posted this topic. But you still haven't demonstrated where it's wrong, on it's own merits. It's simply a more fair means of scoring. Break it down: What is wrong with the concept, other than  timfythetoo likes being able to score other people's challenges against his own, since that's all you needed to say to posit your opinion here?
And suggesting that people should be encouraged by "the masses" to enter mainstream photography only, if they want some ribbon recognition is, at best, diminishing the possibilities of DPC'ers that have different ideas. Unless you think sticking to a prescribed, amorphous mainstream bias is somehow good for the internets number one digital photography contest site?
Originally posted by fir3bird:
After reading this statement I can understand some of the cynical posts I see from time to time in the forums about new members coming in and criticizing the various systems at DPC.
Why not just settle down for a few months and then come back enlighten us with your revelations about DPC. I doubt that even a person of your refined character and superior intellect could grasp the entirety of DPCs nuances in merely a month. |
And suggesting new members can't articulate adult, coherent critism on this site, as if they were just born and have no cognitive skills whatsoever, is plain wrong. I doubt DPC would try to discourage this. It doesn't take a month to simply review posts, scores, and results to see that there is an attitude of "We like the way things are!! Change bad!!!!"
I'd hazard this guess, based on my refined character and superior intellect (neither of which was necessary to formulate any of my simple observations) that DPC is more interested in increasing it's membership, rather than trying to run them off because they have different ideas to contribute.
Digital photography is an ever evolving medium, and if DPS weren't willing to make changes to increase demand, and prosperity of their product - they wouldn't have made the changes they have over the years. It's only a matter of time before someone thinks of a different way to make another such website, and one that might knock DPC of it's current throne. I'd hate to see that happen.
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
And if anyone cares to know the vote I gave them on their image in any challenge I am more than willing to share that and the reason behind it. |
And when you share that reason behind your vote vote, do you mention things like Sorry, I just didn't like landscapes today? Because that would be honest, considering you're own description of your voting traits earlier. Please, insert a link to any post where you commented honestly, reflecting on how you say you apply scores. That would give you: credibility.
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
Do you believe that your average vote cast of 4.8 is a truly unbiased interpretation of the images in these challenges? Or is it influenced by something else? |
Yes, I believe that my median score of 4.8 is mathematically representative of my average vote over two challenges, which in turn is right about center on a scale of 1 - 10, and patently indictive of unbiased.
I hope you didn't post that to suggest bias of some sort? That Blurry Mess challenge was a difficult one to score, and there's even a thread regarding this, with alot of posts.
I know, people with different ideas can be so awful, but hey - that's the idea of a forum.
The sad thing is, if anyone really wanted to refute me, all you have to say is: "Supernaught, you are taking DPChallenge too seriously. This is an entertainment medium, where we vote for fun on other photographers submissions. Along the way we learn alot from exchanginging ideas and seeing vistas we might never see in real life. Since the only prize is a ribbon, and not a material reward, we don't think the site needs to be restructured. So, c'mon in, relax, and enjoy the great photography and people."
How could I possibly argue with that??? Problem is, there may be too many, like myself, that take it too seriously. But in the end, that's my problem. I just thought it would be a good discussion, to get a feel for DPCers feelings on the subject.
But many seem more interested in veiled name calling, (present company notwithstanding) and some weird cat and mouse debate with lots of gotcha! moments.
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 16:24:46.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 04:16:22 PM · #58 |
Must say that in the short time you have been here reading your posts is always entertaining. Lets see if I can respond more closely to your original post.
Originally posted by supernaught:
It's stricken me as odd, in my short time on DPC that the voting system seems skewed to biased scoring by it's very nature: Having people vote/score submissions in competition with their own.
Is this a reasonable means of getting an objective, unbiased "review" of one's entry? |
This is art. Is objective and unbiased even possible? What one man loves another man hates. Watch the POsthumous thread and see how it plays out there. What DPC gives is a format in which people go head to head trying to win with an image that has the most instant impact. Recognition comes in forms beyond ribbons - though ribbons are the most evident. Comments - before an after voting - will more often bring a better review of yoru entry. You cant please everyone all the time. Who are you trying to please. posthumous, e301, nixter and many others get and give amazing feedback and are rarely seen near the top. I just dont see this as a problem.
Originally posted by supernaught:
We've all seen the posts that contain obvious, and calculated representations of how some on DPC might potentially score submissions to further their own ends, or at best limit their opinion of what "meets criteria", and perhaps score accordingly. And so, perhaps, leverage their scoring habits to coincide with these sometimes "single-minded" (to put it politely) opinions. |
Any radical methods of trying to tamper with scores is routed out by admins. Interpretation of challenge criteria though is an individual decision - no real way to make a mandatory interpretation of the theme. Out of the box entries tend to get hit hard if they are too out. Take the EP challenge right now. Many people have a certain and specific idea of what an EP is. Some are more loose with their interpretation. People will vote on what their idea of meeting the challenge is. Isnt necessarily single minded. It is their take. No matter how lax I feel I am with the interpretation of the EP, an entry of a shoe in a shoe store will get a low vote from me.
Originally posted by supernaught:
I would submit, that if challenge participants had no "dog in the hunt", as they say, that there would me more freedom and comfort associated with voting objectively, where we have no such "niggling" personal attachments to a given challenge. |
Couple of points here - some made before. In the monthly FS of 600 entries, if noone who entered can vote - who will? And most people I know and chat with at DPC (and from what I understand is alot - thanks  melethia) feel very comfortable and fair in their voting habits. Fair doesnt stand for unbiased as far as likes and dislikes, but fair against how their score is doing.
Originally posted by supernaught:
It would create less vitriol in the forums, regarding how challenges are to be scored. And I think it might encourage more genuine explorations of the submissions, if voting exclusively on a seperate challenge. Conversely, it might even allow for more commentary on the submissions, since many are apprehensive about posting comments on same-challenge submissions due to rebuke, or the potential of putting their name with their entry, due to the given response. |
Their sure is frustration sometimes in the threads as to how images are being scored. But that also tends to come from people who may have stepped away from the traditional viewpoint of the theme. Again - many people are very strict to their interpretation of a theme. I personally dont see that as a problem. In their vote it is their voice being heard. Not sure how voting in a challenge you are not in would encourage more genuine explorations of the submissions. Just because I am not in a challenge doesnt make me want to spend more time voting or commenting. In fact I am more likely to comment in challenges I am in. As for the rebuking of comments in challenges I feel that is a sad situation in any challenge - if you are in it or not. I dont think it leans heavier one way or the other.
Originally posted by supernaught:
I'm personally swearing off from voting on same-challenge entries, as some others have done. It just makes no sense, and is incongruous with the concept of non-partisan judge/panel/peer review. I can't think of another instance where the current DPC format is emulated, in any known challenge/contest/competition. |
I know several people who have made that choice. And if you know that voting ina challenge that you have an entry in is not right for you then well done for making that choice. I would hazard to guess that for the majority of the people on this site it is not an issue. I participate in three other photo challenge sites and they are all set up in a similar fashion. In fact they are often smaller challenges with smaller turnouts both in entries and voters. If the photographers who entered didnt vote there would be no votes to count.That would be fun huh? Only one site that I play on doesnt have the photographer vote - but then none of the users vote. The competition is judged rather than have user votes. If you wuold like to know where these sites are give me a shout. I dont normally give them any advertisement in these threads. DPC is my primary home.
Originally posted by supernaught:
I'm certain this has been mentioned before, but I hope new discussion about this might renew some interest, since there are always new DPC members. |
But then I could be totally wrong. However from the responses I have read so far from other users makes me think I am not.
And I shall quote myself to finish this off -
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
Also - I want as many votes and views as I can possibly get. Preventing people from voting because they entered into that challenge probably strengthens the impact of the biases that you rail against. The more votes the less impact a biased voter has. |
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 04:34:27 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by timfythetwo:
Must say that in the short time you have been here reading your posts is always entertaining. Lets see if I can respond more closely to your original post. |
Thank you - many people aren't sure how to deal with my satirical nature. I never intend to harm, or defame in my posts.
I also thank you for posting a singularly cogent, articulate and well thought out addition to this thread. That's all I'm ever really looking for. You represented yourself, and DPChallenge very well. That took some of your time, and I appreciate it!
Oftentimes, the thread gets askew, and the original post forgotten. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 04:48:22 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
I appreciate your honesty, timfy, but I doubt that many would publicly empathize with that kind of voting pattern. |
There you're wrong. You may not realize it, but voters' "habits" have been discussed time and again. The ultimate consensus is that, inside the rules, all voting styles are acceptable, or, every vote cast within the rules is the right vote, or, each image got exactly the score and votes it deserved simply because it was voted on. One voter's reasoning doesn't have to appeal to you, and your opinion of it has no impact on how users are allowed to vote. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:03:04 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by supernaught:
I appreciate your honesty, timfy, but I doubt that many would publicly empathize with that kind of voting pattern. |
There you're wrong. You may not realize it, but voters' "habits" have been discussed time and again. The ultimate consensus is that, inside the rules, all voting styles are acceptable, or, every vote cast within the rules is the right vote, or, each image got exactly the score and votes it deserved simply because it was voted on. One voter's reasoning doesn't have to appeal to you, and your opinion of it has no impact on how users are allowed to vote. |
So let me get this straight in my monkey-brain: I don't have to find someone else's voting pattern appealing to me?? Wow... you just saved me a ton of heartache and potentially found a cure for appealius impactitus!!
Bottle it - you are now a wealthy, wealthy person...
(yeah, I know. I'm a grating buffoon...)
I would amend that timfythetwo already articulated that sentiment, Louis, as well as others on the thread. I was merely trying to inject some humor into my response, and my sense of tact is often absent. If you have any issues with that comment, I apologize. I meant no ill will.
I was responding to the portion of your statement that says "your opinion of it has no impact on how users are allowed to vote."
That sentence is a tad insulting to my sensibilities (or lack thereof), and I responded with what I consider to be a parrying remark. All in good fun, from my standpoint.
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 17:29:50.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:12:37 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Ok, then what are you suggesting, supernaught? |
How about doing something like I do... I turn my scores off ... that way I have no way of knowing what a bunch of *&*^^%$)&^%$% scorers have managed to misunderstand my image.
Ray |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:13:50 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Thank you - many people aren't sure how to deal with my satirical nature. I never intend to harm, or defame in my posts. |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Thanks for stating the blatantly obvious - I didn't know that! So let me get this straight in my monkey-brain: I don't have to find someone else's voting pattern appealing to me?? Wow... you just saved me a ton of heartache and potentially found a cure for appealius impactitus!!
Bottle it - you are now a wealthy, wealthy person...
(yeah, I know. I'm a grating buffoon...) |
You sure dont make it easy for anyone. I really didnt think Louis stated anything that deserved a response like that.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:15:36 PM · #64 |
| Wow, a lot of suppressed anger in this thread. Satirical nature?? More like antagonistic nature. Seems like the truth hurts:)) |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:19:18 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Thanks for stating the blatantly obvious - I didn't know that! So let me get this straight in my monkey-brain: I don't have to find someone else's voting pattern appealing to me?? Wow... you just saved me a ton of heartache and potentially found a cure for appealius impactitus!!
Bottle it - you are now a wealthy, wealthy person...
(yeah, I know. I'm a grating buffoon...) |
I would tend to agree that this was a bit harsh.
Ray
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 17:35:48. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:37:12 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by levyj413:
Ok, then what are you suggesting, supernaught? |
How about doing something like I do... I turn my scores off ... that way I have no way of knowing what a bunch of *&*^^%$)&^%$% scorers have managed to misunderstand my image.
Ray |
You can turn the scores off? How?
Originally posted by RayEthier:
There might be some that would agree with a portion of your comment... :O) |
I would amend this to read: There might be many that would agree with said portion...
Sadly, I have a great deal of impertinent comments - I have a hard time containing myself. I'll learn.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:48:56 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Wow, a lot of suppressed anger in this thread. Satirical nature?? More like antagonistic nature. Seems like the truth hurts:)) |
There isn't any anger. The whole thing was a setup for appealius impactitus.
If I were being antagonistic, I would have posited something that required a response. He insinuated that I had no scruples regarding the impact of my opinion, or that I have an advanced presumption thereof. I don't. So I parried (warded off, deflected) with anecdotal sarcasm. I didn't "antagonize" anyone.
BTW: Originally posted by SteveJ:
Seems like the truth hurts:)) |
What's this truth you're speaking of, not to mention calling me antagonistic,and suggesting anger where there was none, if not to try and enflame ill sentiment on this post? Sorry, I won't be responding to any baiting. Good try, 'tho!
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 17:57:47.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:54:20 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Wow, a lot of suppressed anger in this thread. Satirical nature?? More like antagonistic nature. Seems like the truth hurts:)) |
There isn't any anger. The whole thing was a setup for appealius impactitus.
If I were being antagonistic, I would have posited something that required a response. He insinuated that I had no scruples regarding the impact of my opinion, or that I have an advanced presumption thereof. I don't. So I parried (warded off, deflected) with anecdotal sarcasm. I didn't "antagonize" anyone. |
Okay:) But you weren't stricken...that is with illness or a disease. You were struck:) It hit you, recognition...as opposed to hit you like a brickbat.
A brickbat: A tool used by brickmakers during 18th, 19th and 20th century in the brick making business in the UK. A brickbat was used to compact the clay into a mould so that it was a uniform clay brick before being fired in the kilns:))
Message edited by author 2008-03-22 17:54:59. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 05:59:58 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Why not just settle down for a few months and then come back enlighten us with your revelations about DPC. |
Originally posted by Louis:
You may not realize it, but voters' "habits" have been discussed time and again. |
Both right! I began to respond to supernaught's post last night, but couldn't figure out a succinct way to say the above.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 06:01:20 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Originally posted by supernaught:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Wow, a lot of suppressed anger in this thread. Satirical nature?? More like antagonistic nature. Seems like the truth hurts:)) |
There isn't any anger. The whole thing was a setup for appealius impactitus.
If I were being antagonistic, I would have posited something that required a response. He insinuated that I had no scruples regarding the impact of my opinion, or that I have an advanced presumption thereof. I don't. So I parried (warded off, deflected) with anecdotal sarcasm. I didn't "antagonize" anyone. |
Okay:) But you weren't stricken...that is with illness or a disease. You were struck:) It hit you, recognition...as opposed to hit you like a brickbat.
A brickbat: A tool used by brickmakers during 18th, 19th and 20th century in the brick making business in the UK. A brickbat was used to compact the clay into a mould so that it was a uniform clay brick before being fired in the kilns:)) |
I have no idea what you just said - but for some reason, I've learned something about brickbats...
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 06:04:39 PM · #71 |
| Good:)) You learn something every day on DPC. It is a learning site:) |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 06:05:55 PM · #72 |
| To turn off scores (which is my semi-permanent setting), go to Preferences and there's a nice little check box that says Show scores or some such folly. Uncheck it. Scores are off. You'll still see your entry if you have one on the home page, but with no scores. You'll still see comments received if you go to your profile page, and on the left, click on "Comments Received". Those of us who are non-competitive (me) tend to live with scores off. Makes DPC a much nicer place to visit. |
|
|
|
03/22/2008 06:09:25 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Good:)) You learn something every day on DPC. It is a learning site:) |
Now this, looks handy... it's a bat - with a brick on it!! Holy Crap...
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 06:12:05 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
To turn off scores (which is my semi-permanent setting), go to Preferences and there's a nice little check box that says Show scores or some such folly. Uncheck it. Scores are off. You'll still see your entry if you have one on the home page, but with no scores. You'll still see comments received if you go to your profile page, and on the left, click on "Comments Received". Those of us who are non-competitive (me) tend to live with scores off. Makes DPC a much nicer place to visit. |
Thank you miss melethia!
|
|
|
|
03/22/2008 06:14:19 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by supernaught:
Yes, I believe that my median score of 4.8 is mathematically representative of my average vote over two challenges, which in turn is right about center on a scale of 1 - 10, and patently indictive of unbiased.
|
Isn't 5.5 the middle point between 1 and 10? |
|
