| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/30/2008 01:33:58 PM · #226 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I did, and you keep saying that you think that the current rule(s) are being violated. |
Originally posted by hopper:
(I'll concede that this may be an opinion rather than absolute fact) |
|
|
|
|
03/30/2008 01:45:17 PM · #227 |
Originally posted by hopper:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I'll restate Gordon's question: What rule(s) do you feel are being broken? |
Originally posted by hopper:
You may not: vote in a manner that suggests an intent to disrupt the voting system |
|
As a hypothetical example (maybe), if someone routinely votes the top 5 finishers <3 and the brown ribbons 10 in challenges he enters, but reverses that order in challenges he doesn't, I would consider it an intent to disrupt the voting system (among other names), which is against the rule Hopper quoted. If that opinion makes me a troll according to fir3bird or my disapproval of such behavior makes me biased according to undieyatch, then so be it. Call it a character flaw, but I expect better from those I hold in high regard. I would expect the better photographers to have higher standards, as Gordon suggested, but that's not what the above pattern looks like to me.
Message edited by author 2008-03-30 13:46:06. |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 02:09:30 PM · #228 |
| Do the majority of voters have a rather equally spread and weighted voting pattern? Do those that tend to score lower vote higher? Just curious - has very little to do with the discussion at hand. |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 02:21:18 PM · #229 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Do the majority of voters have a rather equally spread and weighted voting pattern? Do those that tend to score lower vote higher? Just curious - has very little to do with the discussion at hand. |
One interesting analysis that could be performed would be to normalise voting scores, just to see what effect it would have had on the results of a few previous challenges. Normalising voting responses basically removes the personal strategies of using the voting scale (e.g. some people will use the extremes more, whereas others will use a smaller band). I'm not suggesting that this is used to calculate challenge results, but it would be interesting to see how voting results change when transposed to a relative scale rather than absolute. Sorry, way off topic I know...
N
|
|
|
|
03/30/2008 03:25:41 PM · #230 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Do the majority of voters have a rather equally spread and weighted voting pattern? Do those that tend to score lower vote higher? Just curious - has very little to do with the discussion at hand. |
Or does it? Is there wholescale voter fraud being perpetrated? Has the sky fallen? Do I type needlessly into a vacuum? :-) |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 04:11:49 PM · #231 |
I don't use my photo as a 'standard' to vote above or below. It just isn't possible to see my photo objectively. I pretend I never entered the challenge and vote on the other photos... measuring up against my favorites! I learn so much here, and there are amazing photographers who deserve ribbons! Maybe one day, people will love my work too... I'm ONLY one vote, and though I make a difference, it's a rather small percentage... so, I know the people here will speak for what's best!
|
|
|
|
03/30/2008 04:23:46 PM · #232 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Do the majority of voters have a rather equally spread and weighted voting pattern? Do those that tend to score lower vote higher? Just curious - has very little to do with the discussion at hand. |
Or does it? Is there wholescale voter fraud being perpetrated? Has the sky fallen? Do I type needlessly into a vacuum? :-) |
hypothetically |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 08:26:55 PM · #233 |
| Quick Question. Do you start out at five with every photo and go up or down based on your Opinion of the photo? I feel 5 is the starting point. The middle ground and based on many factors vote up or down from there. You might ask what if a photo makes you not react either in favor or not then 5 it is. Seems fair to me. I don't compare it to my own. BTW when they start giving away money or prizes then I will worry about who won bragging rights. |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 09:12:39 PM · #234 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
Quick Question. Do you start out at five with every photo... |
For my part, no. I look at the photo. If it's interesting, I look at it for a long time. Then I compare it to photos I can associate, for any number of reasons. I may ponder it, look at the presentation (title, border), possibly make an adjustment, etc.
I collect the best (the most important, to my sense) first. These are the ones I can't afford to neglect, especially if I only vote on a percentage of entries. And I follow the same order when commenting. If the picture is hideous, obscene or offensive for no other discernible reason than to corrupt a good thing or person, boom, that's a low vote, and one end of the scale is established. If it's a great image, something rare I'd never expect in this context, here, boom, the other end of the scale is set.
Of course, that rare gem of a photo does not appear in every or every other challenge, ergo its spot remains reserved, and the highest rated shot in a challenge may fetch a 9, an 8 or, if there's nothing I can sink my teeth into, a 7, even a six, depending on the challenge. Point is, high marks are for photos fit to be studied. I can't, in good conscience award a 10 to a photograph that would look great next to one published on Magnum and then assign the same or similar value to postcard for sale in the corner gift shop.
My own entry has nothing to do with this. I vote and comment more than I enter, in any case.
Message edited by author 2008-03-30 21:25:03. |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 10:02:12 PM · #235 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Point is, high marks are for photos fit to be studied. |
Ah, in a similar vein, I give 7s to photos that I like and want to say something about. Then I will bump them up as needed. Unlike you, however, I find a photo that I love in almost every challenge. :)
That's why I'm easy... |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 10:09:02 PM · #236 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hopper:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I'll restate Gordon's question: What rule(s) do you feel are being broken? |
Originally posted by hopper:
You may not: vote in a manner that suggests an intent to disrupt the voting system |
|
As a hypothetical example (maybe), if someone routinely votes the top 5 finishers <3 and the brown ribbons 10 in challenges he enters, but reverses that order in challenges he doesn't, I would consider it an intent to disrupt the voting system (among other names), which is against the rule Hopper quoted. If that opinion makes me a troll according to fir3bird or my disapproval of such behavior makes me biased according to undieyatch, then so be it. Call it a character flaw, but I expect better from those I hold in high regard. I would expect the better photographers to have higher standards, as Gordon suggested, but that's not what the above pattern looks like to me. |
I would like to clarify my position. Which I stated early in this thread.
In sum I agree with the idea that the secret ballot voting may allow for covert & unscrupulous voting behavior as scalvert characterized.
I suggested based upon his statement that the results of the secret ballot be opened for all to view.
I don't know if this could be accomplished, but if it could the problem he has defined might be obvious to anyone who cares to consider the issue and not just a select few who are privileged.
I will say it again as I said it before - There must be a method for member transparency of others votes. This would be my suggestion to consider for a solution. Opened ballots would leave no sanctuary, no shroud, no excuses.
scalvert's disapproval of lack of "higher standards" by these voting practices is shared by me, however I do not blame for his bias nor will not be responsible for it as he has implied. His own statement in regard to alleged offenders "I find that absolutely appalling, and it lowers my personal opinion of such people." is self evident. I would not share scalvert's well meaning recommendations for a solution either. In my opinion they are weak and were demolished by many, notably posthumous.
Lastly, my opinion is that the voters, if and when they vote, their vote should be determined with their own resources, acquired knowledge and experience.
Message edited by author 2008-03-30 22:29:48. |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 10:51:51 PM · #237 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
...Unlike you, however, I find a photo that I love in almost every challenge. :)
That's why I'm easy... |
No, no. I find those too. I may not vote them high though, just because I like 'em.
But yes, you're easy.
|
|
|
|
03/30/2008 10:54:01 PM · #238 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Point is, high marks are for photos fit to be studied. |
Ah, in a similar vein, I give 7s to photos that I like and want to say something about. Then I will bump them up as needed. Unlike you, however, I find a photo that I love in almost every challenge. :)
That's why I'm easy... |
Like Sunday morning. |
|
|
|
03/30/2008 11:09:25 PM · #239 |
Originally posted by undieyatch:
...I do not blame for his bias nor will not be responsible for it as he has implied. His own statement in regard to alleged offenders "I find that absolutely appalling, and it lowers my personal opinion of such people." is self evident. |
You would continue to think highly of those who knowingly vote down the competition when they enter?
Originally posted by undieyatch:
I would not share scalvert's well meaning recommendations for a solution either. In my opinion they are weak and were demolished by many, notably posthumous. |
Um... I didn't recommended any solutions. I only expressed disappointment at shady voting patterns. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 12:26:36 AM · #240 |
I would like DPC to introduce something like this on everyones profile page between the "Entries" and "Portfolio" section.
[thumb]663942[/thumb]
ETA: Forgot to state ONLY VISIBLE to the user. No other user would be able to view another's vote breakdown. And if a user did not want to see their vote breakdown they could disable it in their Preferences section.
Message edited by author 2008-03-31 00:50:09. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 12:35:25 AM · #241 |
Anywhere I have ever been where there is such a process of "publicly transparent voting", the end result has been a "social normalizing" of the voting process, where those whose opinions do not coincide with the majority end up marginalized, and sometimes persecuted. There are many places that use such approaches as "karma points", where the closer your votes align with the final results the more they are worth in the next voting phase, and the more you deviate from the norm the less your vote counts for.
I find this appalling. I'd strenuously resist any such process, to the point of leaving the site if any such thing (transparency or karma) were instituted. I'm not interested in being put in the position of justifying my opinions, and I'm not interested in seeing others put in that position. I have no particular objection to SC having the power to examine the voting patterns and weed out obvious transgressors. I take it on faith that they have accurate tools to do this and that the results are being correctly analyzed.
That being the case, I'm not sure why this thread even exists, but I find it profoundly depressing.
R. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 12:37:38 AM · #242 |
Originally posted by SDW:
I would like DPC to introduce something like this on everyones profile page between the "Entries" and "Portfolio" section.
[thumb]663942[/thumb] |
... and for those who don't vote 100%? Stats only cover those that they voted on?
Just because someone's average is more than some arbitrary deviation from average does not make their voting wrong, just more than some arbitrary deviation from average so why have the stat at all.
Message edited by author 2008-03-31 00:43:20. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 12:46:58 AM · #243 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by SDW:
I would like DPC to introduce something like this on everyones profile page between the "Entries" and "Portfolio" section.
[thumb]663942[/thumb] |
... and for those who don't vote 100%? Stats only cover those that they voted on? |
I just edited my post, I forgot to add that it should be visible to the user only.
If you didn't enter a challenge but you voted then under the column "Your Avg" would be ~ and "Deviation" would be ~.
If the challenge had 250 entries and you voted on 100 of them then your percentage would be 40%.
If you commented on 50 entries then your percentage would be 20%
Your avg vote given would be for the entries you voted on. Along with "Low Score, Median Score, and Highest Score.
Message edited by author 2008-03-31 00:50:19. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 12:54:14 AM · #244 |
 Bear_Music speaks wisely and for me. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 03:31:52 AM · #245 |
Yah I wondered about the voting system too.
I just don't vote in the challenges that I enter because I think the average vote I give out is higher than some/most peoples', and since I can't vote on my own image, it would give the others an advantage over me. I don't think my method should be realistically enforced though because then there probably wouldn't be enough people to vote in the challenges.
But for people who give out low scores, I think it's fine as long as it's consistent. I mean, if evreyone gets low scores, it doesn't really matter. Unless you just REALLY want high scores instead of just winning a challenge.
What I'm hearing for the first time are these "inverse" voters. High scores for sucky images and low ones for good ones on purpose? that's just pathetic. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 04:34:16 AM · #246 |
| Personally I vote every challenge out of 10, ie. I try and ignore my score and vote the images according to their own merit |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 05:31:20 AM · #247 |
My stats:
Votes Cast: 82,759
Avg Vote Cast: 5.2665
Votes Received: 44,635
Avg Vote Received: 5.5448
Over the past 2 years, I have found that the overall quality of images (IMO) has dropped substantially. Many of the shining stars of the past have gone on to greener pastures, wider markets, etc. There are so many newbies (yes, I was one once too)and what they might see as "oh wow," I've seen a zillion times and although technically good, I find repetitive and not at all artful or interesting. I don't vote on nearly as many challenges as I used to because I found myself giving such low scores. I rarely give much above a 7 these days, although in free study, I can usually find what I believe are worthy of 10's. I'm not complaining, it's just how I see it. I don't enter like I used to either. If I do, I score others' work according to the value of what I see in each individual image, not what my score is at the moment.
What I like most is the cameraderie of the great friends I've made here. I participate in the side challenges too - which keeps my eyes open and my creativity flowing. OH... sorry, I got off topic. ;~)
Message edited by author 2008-03-31 05:34:54. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 05:39:19 AM · #248 |
Originally posted by tnun:
Bear_Music speaks wisely and for me. |
for me too |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 09:32:54 AM · #249 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Gordon:
I'm not the one saying that the only reason anyone ever takes a picture is for mass appeal though. |
Nor have you offered a reason for taking photos for a purpose OTHER than having people look at them. |
I think this expresses what I'm trying to say better than I can. This is why I like taking pictures. Having people view them is secondary - not missing, just not the only or even the most important point. |
|
|
|
03/31/2008 09:56:24 AM · #250 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Gordon:
I'm not the one saying that the only reason anyone ever takes a picture is for mass appeal though. |
Nor have you offered a reason for taking photos for a purpose OTHER than having people look at them. |
I think this expresses what I'm trying to say better than I can. This is why I like taking pictures. Having people view them is secondary - not missing, just not the only or even the most important point. |
I would far rather appeal to an educated few than to the masses. What matters to me is WHO likes my work not how many. A cult following is nothing to dismiss and I would take greater pride in having that than huge popular appeal. Shooting to the likes of the average viewer is a good way to cheapen your vision...if you have one at all.
To make a musical analogy, I would rather cultivate Thelonius Monks audience than Britney Spears.
Message edited by author 2008-03-31 11:10:01. |
|
