|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/17/2009 11:09:57 AM · #201 |
one thing I think people are not realising :-
Lets say all the people that give 1, 2 and 3s make a comment on why.
Lets then say that for your next challenge entry you take on board all these comments and change your technique and style etc to make these people happy and increase their vote.
Who is to say that the people who voted 5,6,7+ on your previous entry will like your new technique and style?? These previous higher voters on your images could now vote lower, and nothing in reality would change!
You can not please all of the people all of the time, and those that try are just chasing their tails!
To prove my point there are 69 votes of 1, 2, or 3 on the current 9 ribbon winning shots on the front page!
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 11:27:02 AM · #202 |
Originally posted by ubique:
Originally posted by yanko:
... So in the end she is like you ... |
Crikey! That's a chilling thought.
Not quite alike though; I don't care how anyone else votes, nor why, nor when ... I don't even care if they vote at all. I don't care if they comment, I don't care what they comment on, and I don't care why they comment (or why not). None of that is my business at all.
I only got into this tangle with PhotoInterest because she was challenging low voters (in an earlier thread) for comments to explain those low scores. I offered to provide her with comments to explain the low scores I'd given to her own recent entries (four consecutive 3 votes) and, predictably, she declined.
Most people who say they want justification for low scores are not looking for help at all; they are merely flailing. |
LOL...oh yes, you made that offer for me to have some of your illustrious comments in return for me not posting any further. I declined that offer as I didn't feel the need to be "shut up" with your generous offer.
But, you failed to mention that part! :) |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 11:40:05 AM · #203 |
Why would someone give an entry a vote of 1?
What about a vote of 10?
My guess would be there is no consistency to our answers.
Some basic guidance while voting would be helpful.
Shouldn't give Mrs Brown a 1 just because we don't like strawberry jam.
 PhotoInterest previous post
Say for instance, Voter X is at a state fair, judging jams. Voter X, loves peaches. He/she really doesn't like strawberry, blueberry or apple. He/she can "tolerate" cherry and rhubarb as mediocre tastes. So, when Voter X comes to judge jams, He/she decides that peach jams are going to be given the highest score of excellent from him. Anything strawbery, blueberry or apple, no matter how fantastic a jam they are, is going to be marked as "poor/lousy". Cherry and Rhubarb jams are going to be given mediocre scores because he/she can tolerate those.
Given that Voter X has a high preference for Peaches and a toleration for Strawberry and Rhubarb jams, those are going to be considered top scores of fair to excellent and everything else, no matter how well done they are, are going to receive the "lousy/poor" stamp from him/her.
So, Mrs. Brown who has been a master at jam making for 60 years and has prepared the most delicious and well made blueberry-strawberry jam, will have her jam called "lousy/poor" and her score knocked down by Voter X simply because he/she is biased by his/her dislike for strawberries and blueberries. However, by contrast Mrs. Johnson and Mrs. Smith are beginners. Their jams are watery and over sugared but, their score is raised by Voter X in this competition simply because their jams were made from Peaches and Voter X LOVES peaches. Mrs. Johnson and Mrs. Smith walk away from this competition, thinking that they must be great jam makers because their scores were close to Mrs. Brown's score. Meanwhile, Mrs. Brown is looking at her jam and her score from Voter X and wondering why Voter X gave her such a low score. She sees no reason why it should have been that low and doesn't understand why her Master Jam has scored near the likes of jams from Mrs. Johnson and Mrs Smith.
Wouldn't it be nice for Mrs. Brown to know that her jam was great but, that Voter X scored it lower simply because he/she doesn't like anything stawberry or blueberry? At least then, she can put it into some perspective and go on making great jams!!! :) |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 11:40:33 AM · #204 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Oh, and visit my profile page so my little flag counter thingie gets more hits. |
Ok, I visited, but I don't see a Texas flag showing up. The app must be broken.
Message edited by author 2009-02-17 11:40:49. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 11:46:44 AM · #205 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by yospiff:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
the question will still be "why" and "what about it doesn't interest people?", won't it? How does one learn then? Everyone talks about "learning" from these challenges and comments but, how does one learn then if one can only "assume" that it's not the quality of your image...but, rather it simply doesn't "interest" people? What about the new member who comes in here with a horribly focused shot, over-exposed, under-exposed, terrible angle etc. and keeps scoring in the 1 to 3 ranges with their shots? Should they continue to assume that it's not their photography...it's just that they haven't photographed something that interests the voters and goes on to try differing subjects with the same poor quality? :) |
A valid flipside to the argument. I feel very much on the fence here. I agree with Photointerest on the desire and need for the feedback, but I also understand how some other folks such as  Ubique do not see a reason to spend time on entries that don't catch their interest. I guess it depends on one's personal philosophy and why they are here participating on this site.
Myself, I think I'm just a glutton for punishment. |
It might help if you looked at receiving comments as a form of transaction between two parties, the photographer and the viewer. You can't expect the viewer to give you something for nothing. You have to first offer something to the viewer, in this case making your photo interesting in some way. If you fail to do that you shouldn't expect anything in return. It's really that simple. |
Most of the time, when I don't give a comment on a shot, it's because I really don't have one to give that may be constructive or helpful as opposed to being because I feel that the photographer has to somehow "earn" something or, enough respect with their shot to get a comment from me. I very much respect the idea that people have taken the time and tried to take and enter a photo into a challenge, whether I love it or not. Yes, there are some that are blatantly "in your face...I shot anything and entered it" type shots (ie: a black box, or a word written on paper and very poorly photographed at that) but, those are fewer rather than many, thankfully. For the most part, most entries have had some thought, time or effort put into them. As someone else has pointed out in this thread too, how does one decipher whose photos are just toying and whose photos are rough because they are beginners and are trying to still learn photography?
I looked at that idea for a moment about "earning" a comment and I had to wonder how anyone can judge what has been "earned"??? To whose criteria are they attempting to "earn" a comment? And, what qualifications or levels of expertise would they need to achieve in order to "earn" that comment?
As an additional point, I see photographer's works who are low scoring in certain challenges with very few comments during challenge and yet, post challenge, all of a sudden there are quite a number more comments added with praises added. However, those ranking a bit above and those a bit below that position have nothing added post challenge. Is that suggestive of the idea that once a participant's ID is known, it has "earned" the right to have comments by virtue of WHO photographed it? |
I didn't use the word earned I said interest, there's a difference so lets stick with the wording I used. Speaking of interest, I noticed that you focused on low scoring challenge entries, which btw (no offense) you have your share of. In addition almost all of the photos you've uploaded to this site was for challenges. Don't you know that there are countless non-challenge photos without any comments whatsoever? It seems to me the cause you chose was made at least in part to personal interest. Now there's nothing wrong with that except of course it makes you just as guilty as the people you're arguing against (ex Ubique). |
Yes, it's easy to sit back and look at someone's portfolio during a discussion, pull out bits and pieces of it and assume that you know WHY they are saying the things that they are saying or where they are coming from.
Your assumption is that I am "championining" this topic because I don't like my low scores. Your assumption is totally wrong.
I've said it a page or so ago to someone else who has gone through my portfolio in order to pick bits and pieces that they felt fit their particular argument (I see no need to bring up a name here), by going into my portfolio and pulling out points or pieces from it to make a statement about me, or my work, you are making this personal. I have not done that to anyone else in here. I didn't feel it necessary. How mature is that? And, given that one can't debate points without having to go into someone's portfolio to make their point, I'd say that the rest of this entire discussion now consists of immature, hidden, personal attacks rather than discussion.
It seems to me that this thread has now become the project of those who are "championing" the ability to be able to vote 1 to 3 scores without explanation and any further discussion or points made on this topic by anyone who has a differing view from the main group of non-comment supporters, will simply be subject to their portfolios being dissected. One can say that I shouldn't take this personally but, when posters find the need to go into my personal portfolio to make their points, they have made it personal and it shows me the line of thinking and the mindset of those who would do so.
Ubique...you win! You have nothing to fear. You and I are NOT alike in ANY way. Thank the heavens! That IS a frightening thought!
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 12:10:14 PM · #206 |
Originally posted by wdamman:
Why would someone give an entry a vote of 1?
What about a vote of 10?
My guess would be there is no consistency to our answers.
Some basic guidance while voting would be helpful.
Shouldn't give Mrs Brown a 1 just because we don't like strawberry jam.
PhotoInterest previous post
Say for instance, Voter X is at a state fair, judging jams. Voter X, loves peaches. He/she really doesn't like strawberry, blueberry or apple. He/she can "tolerate" cherry and rhubarb as mediocre tastes. So, when Voter X comes to judge jams, He/she decides that peach jams are going to be given the highest score of excellent from him. Anything strawbery, blueberry or apple, no matter how fantastic a jam they are, is going to be marked as "poor/lousy". Cherry and Rhubarb jams are going to be given mediocre scores because he/she can tolerate those.
Given that Voter X has a high preference for Peaches and a toleration for Strawberry and Rhubarb jams, those are going to be considered top scores of fair to excellent and everything else, no matter how well done they are, are going to receive the "lousy/poor" stamp from him/her.
So, Mrs. Brown who has been a master at jam making for 60 years and has prepared the most delicious and well made blueberry-strawberry jam, will have her jam called "lousy/poor" and her score knocked down by Voter X simply because he/she is biased by his/her dislike for strawberries and blueberries. However, by contrast Mrs. Johnson and Mrs. Smith are beginners. Their jams are watery and over sugared but, their score is raised by Voter X in this competition simply because their jams were made from Peaches and Voter X LOVES peaches. Mrs. Johnson and Mrs. Smith walk away from this competition, thinking that they must be great jam makers because their scores were close to Mrs. Brown's score. Meanwhile, Mrs. Brown is looking at her jam and her score from Voter X and wondering why Voter X gave her such a low score. She sees no reason why it should have been that low and doesn't understand why her Master Jam has scored near the likes of jams from Mrs. Johnson and Mrs Smith.
Wouldn't it be nice for Mrs. Brown to know that her jam was great but, that Voter X scored it lower simply because he/she doesn't like anything stawberry or blueberry? At least then, she can put it into some perspective and go on making great jams!!! :) |
Let me take my stab an argument. The great thing about DPC is that is an amalgamation of different viewpoints, these viewpoints come out in the voting. A photo has no intrinsic worth. It is a unique arrangment of dots on paper or pixels on a screen, nothing more, no emotion. Whenever someone views a photograph, they bring their own bias and feelings with them when they view the photo. A photo has worth because some people think it is important, not the other way around. In the analogy at hand Mrs. Brown is an master jam maker because over her 60 years of making jam people for the most part love her jam. If voter X does not like the jam, who cares, bacuse Mrs. Baker knows she can make good jam. By definition, the photos that win challenges have, on average, the highest number of high votes, and these high votes "overpower" the low votes. Who cares why the votes were low.
If I find myself gettting worked up about I score, I just remember the separation of what I think of a particular photo, and what the masses think. If I think highly of a certain photo then good, I am happy. If it gets slammed in voting then so be it, maybe this one doesn't appeal to the masses. Trying to get people to change their preferences would be against the whole idea of doing challenges. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 12:22:43 PM · #207 |
FWIW, one comment from Ubique is worth more than 100 stupid explanations why someone gave you a 1.
If you or anyone looks at the 10 last place finishers in EVERY challenge you will see each entry has a string of 1's a mile long. Whether they recieved 4 comments or 12, there are at least two or three (5-6-7), which will tell them the exact or general reasons why they scored low. EVERY Challenge I have ever entered there was always one comment or two, that explained the thinking of the general population and why scoring went the way it did, good and bad.
I'm not sure why people require a litanous, sledgehammer of negative comments to figure out which end is up. You have to be pretty thick not to be able to figure it out for yourself (after a comment or two)and enough people give out 1's for reasons that shouldn't even make the slightest difference to the photographer in the first place.
Maybe they're sick of waterdrops...they hate cats...they hate cigarettes...guns, tilts, noise, etc...they're trolling.
Who know...who cares? I'd prefer NOT hearing what they have to say, at all.
Message edited by author 2009-02-17 12:27:39. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 12:22:44 PM · #208 |
Originally posted by Five_Seat:
... If I find myself gettting worked up about I score, I just remember the separation of what I think of a particular photo, and what the masses think. If I think highly of a certain photo then good, I am happy. If it gets slammed in voting then so be it, maybe this one doesn't appeal to the masses. Trying to get people to change their preferences would be against the whole idea of doing challenges. |
I like the way you think! :-) Well said. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 01:21:35 PM · #209 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by yospiff:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
the question will still be "why" and "what about it doesn't interest people?", won't it? How does one learn then? Everyone talks about "learning" from these challenges and comments but, how does one learn then if one can only "assume" that it's not the quality of your image...but, rather it simply doesn't "interest" people? What about the new member who comes in here with a horribly focused shot, over-exposed, under-exposed, terrible angle etc. and keeps scoring in the 1 to 3 ranges with their shots? Should they continue to assume that it's not their photography...it's just that they haven't photographed something that interests the voters and goes on to try differing subjects with the same poor quality? :) |
A valid flipside to the argument. I feel very much on the fence here. I agree with  Photointerest on the desire and need for the feedback, but I also understand how some other folks such as Ubique do not see a reason to spend time on entries that don't catch their interest. I guess it depends on one's personal philosophy and why they are here participating on this site.
Myself, I think I'm just a glutton for punishment. |
It might help if you looked at receiving comments as a form of transaction between two parties, the photographer and the viewer. You can't expect the viewer to give you something for nothing. You have to first offer something to the viewer, in this case making your photo interesting in some way. If you fail to do that you shouldn't expect anything in return. It's really that simple. |
Most of the time, when I don't give a comment on a shot, it's because I really don't have one to give that may be constructive or helpful as opposed to being because I feel that the photographer has to somehow "earn" something or, enough respect with their shot to get a comment from me. I very much respect the idea that people have taken the time and tried to take and enter a photo into a challenge, whether I love it or not. Yes, there are some that are blatantly "in your face...I shot anything and entered it" type shots (ie: a black box, or a word written on paper and very poorly photographed at that) but, those are fewer rather than many, thankfully. For the most part, most entries have had some thought, time or effort put into them. As someone else has pointed out in this thread too, how does one decipher whose photos are just toying and whose photos are rough because they are beginners and are trying to still learn photography?
I looked at that idea for a moment about "earning" a comment and I had to wonder how anyone can judge what has been "earned"??? To whose criteria are they attempting to "earn" a comment? And, what qualifications or levels of expertise would they need to achieve in order to "earn" that comment?
As an additional point, I see photographer's works who are low scoring in certain challenges with very few comments during challenge and yet, post challenge, all of a sudden there are quite a number more comments added with praises added. However, those ranking a bit above and those a bit below that position have nothing added post challenge. Is that suggestive of the idea that once a participant's ID is known, it has "earned" the right to have comments by virtue of WHO photographed it? |
I didn't use the word earned I said interest, there's a difference so lets stick with the wording I used. Speaking of interest, I noticed that you focused on low scoring challenge entries, which btw (no offense) you have your share of. In addition almost all of the photos you've uploaded to this site was for challenges. Don't you know that there are countless non-challenge photos without any comments whatsoever? It seems to me the cause you chose was made at least in part to personal interest. Now there's nothing wrong with that except of course it makes you just as guilty as the people you're arguing against (ex Ubique). |
Yes, it's easy to sit back and look at someone's portfolio during a discussion, pull out bits and pieces of it and assume that you know WHY they are saying the things that they are saying or where they are coming from.
Your assumption is that I am "championining" this topic because I don't like my low scores. Your assumption is totally wrong.
I've said it a page or so ago to someone else who has gone through my portfolio in order to pick bits and pieces that they felt fit their particular argument (I see no need to bring up a name here), by going into my portfolio and pulling out points or pieces from it to make a statement about me, or my work, you are making this personal. I have not done that to anyone else in here. I didn't feel it necessary. How mature is that? And, given that one can't debate points without having to go into someone's portfolio to make their point, I'd say that the rest of this entire discussion now consists of immature, hidden, personal attacks rather than discussion. |
So first you confuse my using of the word "interest" with the word "earned" and now you're accusing me of a personal attack? Please. I said two things:
1) You would stand to benefit from an increase in comments on low scoring entries and...
2) I said it appears to me that your decision to fight for this cause so strongly was made AT LEAST IN PART by 1.
Number 1 is merely a statement of fact. Number 2 is a guess on my part as to why you're focused on low scoring challenge entries and not other types of photos such as non-challenge photos, which you have few of and therefore wouldn't benefit from seeing an increase in comments on them.
Now could it just be a coincidence that you're focused on just the things that could benefit you and are not focused on the things that wouldn't stand to benefit? Perhaps, but it's not a personally attack to suggest that part of your motivation here is driven by personal interest. There are many causes to fight for, you chose this one and I wondered why. No different if I went on for days and days fighting for more challenges that required multiple ribbons in order to enter. I'm quite sure some, if not most people would assume my motivations were at least in part (if not in whole) driven by my own interest and I wouldn't be offended regardless of whether it was true or not.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 01:59:00 PM · #210 |
| Since no one deserves a 1, 2, or 3 I suggest we just grey out the buttons so they don't work. Or perhaps we should vote on a scale of 4-13? By that measure my last photo got a 7.5! Woohoo! |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:01:35 PM · #211 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by yospiff:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
the question will still be "why" and "what about it doesn't interest people?", won't it? How does one learn then? Everyone talks about "learning" from these challenges and comments but, how does one learn then if one can only "assume" that it's not the quality of your image...but, rather it simply doesn't "interest" people? What about the new member who comes in here with a horribly focused shot, over-exposed, under-exposed, terrible angle etc. and keeps scoring in the 1 to 3 ranges with their shots? Should they continue to assume that it's not their photography...it's just that they haven't photographed something that interests the voters and goes on to try differing subjects with the same poor quality? :) |
A valid flipside to the argument. I feel very much on the fence here. I agree with Photointerest on the desire and need for the feedback, but I also understand how some other folks such as Ubique do not see a reason to spend time on entries that don't catch their interest. I guess it depends on one's personal philosophy and why they are here participating on this site.
Myself, I think I'm just a glutton for punishment. |
It might help if you looked at receiving comments as a form of transaction between two parties, the photographer and the viewer. You can't expect the viewer to give you something for nothing. You have to first offer something to the viewer, in this case making your photo interesting in some way. If you fail to do that you shouldn't expect anything in return. It's really that simple. |
Most of the time, when I don't give a comment on a shot, it's because I really don't have one to give that may be constructive or helpful as opposed to being because I feel that the photographer has to somehow "earn" something or, enough respect with their shot to get a comment from me. I very much respect the idea that people have taken the time and tried to take and enter a photo into a challenge, whether I love it or not. Yes, there are some that are blatantly "in your face...I shot anything and entered it" type shots (ie: a black box, or a word written on paper and very poorly photographed at that) but, those are fewer rather than many, thankfully. For the most part, most entries have had some thought, time or effort put into them. As someone else has pointed out in this thread too, how does one decipher whose photos are just toying and whose photos are rough because they are beginners and are trying to still learn photography?
I looked at that idea for a moment about "earning" a comment and I had to wonder how anyone can judge what has been "earned"??? To whose criteria are they attempting to "earn" a comment? And, what qualifications or levels of expertise would they need to achieve in order to "earn" that comment?
As an additional point, I see photographer's works who are low scoring in certain challenges with very few comments during challenge and yet, post challenge, all of a sudden there are quite a number more comments added with praises added. However, those ranking a bit above and those a bit below that position have nothing added post challenge. Is that suggestive of the idea that once a participant's ID is known, it has "earned" the right to have comments by virtue of WHO photographed it? |
I didn't use the word earned I said interest, there's a difference so lets stick with the wording I used. Speaking of interest, I noticed that you focused on low scoring challenge entries, which btw (no offense) you have your share of. In addition almost all of the photos you've uploaded to this site was for challenges. Don't you know that there are countless non-challenge photos without any comments whatsoever? It seems to me the cause you chose was made at least in part to personal interest. Now there's nothing wrong with that except of course it makes you just as guilty as the people you're arguing against (ex Ubique). |
Yes, it's easy to sit back and look at someone's portfolio during a discussion, pull out bits and pieces of it and assume that you know WHY they are saying the things that they are saying or where they are coming from.
Your assumption is that I am "championining" this topic because I don't like my low scores. Your assumption is totally wrong.
I've said it a page or so ago to someone else who has gone through my portfolio in order to pick bits and pieces that they felt fit their particular argument (I see no need to bring up a name here), by going into my portfolio and pulling out points or pieces from it to make a statement about me, or my work, you are making this personal. I have not done that to anyone else in here. I didn't feel it necessary. How mature is that? And, given that one can't debate points without having to go into someone's portfolio to make their point, I'd say that the rest of this entire discussion now consists of immature, hidden, personal attacks rather than discussion. |
So first you confuse my using of the word "interest" with the word "earned" and now you're accusing me of a personal attack? Please. I said two things:
1) You would stand to benefit from an increase in comments on low scoring entries and...
2) I said it appears to me that your decision to fight for this cause so strongly was made AT LEAST IN PART by 1.
Number 1 is merely a statement of fact. Number 2 is a guess on my part as to why you're focused on low scoring challenge entries and not other types of photos such as non-challenge photos, which you have few of and therefore wouldn't benefit from seeing an increase in comments on them.
Now could it just be a coincidence that you're focused on just the things that could benefit you and are not focused on the things that wouldn't stand to benefit? Perhaps, but it's not a personally attack to suggest that part of your motivation here is driven by personal interest. There are many causes to fight for, you chose this one and I wondered why. No different if I went on for days and days fighting for more challenges that required multiple ribbons in order to enter. I'm quite sure some, if not most people would assume my motivations were at least in part (if not in whole) driven by my own interest and I wouldn't be offended regardless of whether it was true or not. |
Please show me where I have said that I have no interest in comments on shots that are NOT entered into challenges. I'd like to see where I have stated that. That is your assumption because I have been answering to the topic that the OP has referred to and not gotten into the other areas because it was not the topic of conversation/discussion.
Secondly, again, you are assuming that you know my motivations or reasonings for my opinion on this particular thread, correlated of course, by your own assumptions after having gone through my portfolio and creating your own personal reasoning. You are wrong.
Thirdly, this is NOT the only thread that I have participated in. So, unless you wish to search every thread that I have participated in over the past couple of years to see what I have taken stances on, which, by the way, included opposing a stance someone else had taken against K10DGuy right to post HIS comments, you have NO idea on what else I have taken stances on.
Fourth, in using the above example of K10DGuy and those who were attacking his style of commenting, that was NOT of ANY benefit to ME! That was what I felt was right. So, my opinions/stances will vary in causes and reasonings that often will have no benefit to me, personally whatsoever.
Perhaps, putting 1 and 1 together comes to 3 for you but, that doesn't make it correct.
Lastly, I may argue the same of you, if that is the case. I may say that your argument against it is also fitting or of personal benefit to you. I wouldn't make such an assumption because I don't presume to know your reasonings behind your stance by my own, personal assumptions.
I suggest that while you may disagree with or dislike my opinion, you have no right to decide what my motivations or reasonings are based upon your own personal assumptions. That's all that they are and they are wrong.
Message edited by author 2009-02-17 14:08:49. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:13:09 PM · #212 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
It seems to me that this thread has now become the project of those who are "championing" the ability to be able to vote 1 to 3 scores without explanation and any further discussion or points made on this topic by anyone who has a differing view from the main group of non-comment supporters, will simply be subject to their portfolios being dissected. One can say that I shouldn't take this personally but, when posters find the need to go into my personal portfolio to make their points, they have made it personal and it shows me the line of thinking and the mindset of those who would do so. |
We're not "championing" anything. That comments are not required of anybody, at any time, is the status quo at this site, and we are trying to explain why this is so. Various attempts have been made in the past to *require* comments, or at least *urge* them, on low votes, and it has not worked. Some of us are trying to explain various reasons *why* it is not a good idea. And some of you are simply choosing not to listen, not to accept these arguments, to *champion* the lost cause of requiring comments on low votes. That's all fine and well, but it's ridiculous to take it personally. As in, "He went into my *personal* portfolio..." as if that's somehow a *bad* thing to do? That is a *public* portfolio; if you want it to be personal, then for Pete's sake HIDE it will ya?
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Ubique... You and I are NOT alike in ANY way. Thank the heavens! That IS a frightening thought! |
Amen to that. I'd lose a lot of respect for him if he were...
R.
Message edited by author 2009-02-17 14:13:28.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:19:09 PM · #213 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
It seems to me that this thread has now become the project of those who are "championing" the ability to be able to vote 1 to 3 scores without explanation and any further discussion or points made on this topic by anyone who has a differing view from the main group of non-comment supporters, will simply be subject to their portfolios being dissected. One can say that I shouldn't take this personally but, when posters find the need to go into my personal portfolio to make their points, they have made it personal and it shows me the line of thinking and the mindset of those who would do so. |
We're not "championing" anything. That comments are not required of anybody, at any time, is the status quo at this site, and we are trying to explain why this is so. Various attempts have been made in the past to *require* comments, or at least *urge* them, on low votes, and it has not worked. Some of us are trying to explain various reasons *why* it is not a good idea. And some of you are simply choosing not to listen, not to accept these arguments, to *champion* the lost cause of requiring comments on low votes. That's all fine and well, but it's ridiculous to take it personally. As in, "He went into my *personal* portfolio..." as if that's somehow a *bad* thing to do? That is a *public* portfolio; if you want it to be personal, then for Pete's sake HIDE it will ya?
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Ubique... You and I are NOT alike in ANY way. Thank the heavens! That IS a frightening thought! |
Amen to that. I'd lose a lot of respect for him if he were...
R. |
Well, Robert, very sadly that last very unneeded portion of your comment about losing respect for Ubique if he were like me, says quite a bit in and of itself. There is no need to respond to anything else within your post here. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:21:46 PM · #214 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Well, Robert, very sadly that last very unneeded portion of your comment about losing respect for Ubique if he were like me, says quite a bit in and of itself. There is no need to respond to anything else within your post here. |
Good.
R.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:28:31 PM · #215 |
| Ok, I was going to stay out of this for awhile, because it seems to be getting quite personal. But dainmcgowan made an interesting point. Let's skip the 2s & 3s for a second and look just at the 1s. For the top 9 photos on the front page, they received a combined total of 12 ones. A 1 is the lowest rank you can possibly receive--there no one below you. I find it hard to believe, given the number of bad photos you can find in a given challenge, that these 9 were among the worst that you can get. Since I don't get it, and assuming the votes were real--not someone just trying to up their own score, I would like to know what made it so awful--and it's not even my picture. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:30:26 PM · #216 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Well, Robert, very sadly that last very unneeded portion of your comment about losing respect for Ubique if he were like me, says quite a bit in and of itself. There is no need to respond to anything else within your post here. |
Good.
R. |
It's sad that you find that statement "good". |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:32:19 PM · #217 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Ok, I was going to stay out of this for awhile, because it seems to be getting quite personal. But dainmcgowan made an interesting point. Let's skip the 2s & 3s for a second and look just at the 1s. For the top 9 photos on the front page, they received a combined total of 12 ones. A 1 is the lowest rank you can possibly receive--there no one below you. I find it hard to believe, given the number of bad photos you can find in a given challenge, that these 9 were among the worst that you can get. Since I don't get it, and assuming the votes were real--not someone just trying to up their own score, I would like to know what made it so awful--and it's not even my picture. |
Thank you Wendy! That's my point also. :) |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:46:12 PM · #218 |
Originally posted by bcenu:
Genuine mid to high scoring entrants are frustrated by others who, in every challenge it seems, burst their bubbles by throwing in a 1 or 2 vote without explanation. My suggestion is that the DPC site make it mandatory to leave a comment if you wish to give a 1 or 2 vote. In other words you cannot leave the low vote without filling in the comment box before moving on to the next entry. This may deter the people wishing to boost their own score or from just being mean and not caring about the challenge submissions at all. On the other hand, if you are giving a 1 or 2 vote because the picture is of a low standard tell the person why, after all, we are all here to better ourselves as photographers, aren't we? |
Bold added by me--
This is not a quarrel with the OP, merely a personal observation. I'm really not that distraught at a 1,2 or 3 vote. I mean, DPC is a fun place to interact with people, get criticism, give and receive kudos, etc. At the challenge level, it's a GAME! I like to bitch about the "troll" voters occasionally. But IMO, as silly as 1 votes are when given to front page images, who cares? I've received plenty of 9's and 10's on images that IMO, 'sucked'. If someone gave me a 1,2, or 3, then I guess I really didn't connect with them. I agree with Robert's post somewhere above--I'd rather know why someone gave me a 5 or 6 instead of a 7-10. Why couldn't my image kick the voter off the middle territory?
Bottom line for me--Use whatever method you want and vote your conscience; you won't burst my bubble. :)
He's a cute kid--but how could I seriously expect this to receive anything more than a 5?
And this one... 3/9's and 3/10's. Did the voters have their displays turned on?
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:47:06 PM · #219 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
:) |
Rose, I've thought of a solution for you. Each challenge, PM to me the ID of your entry on the last day of voting. I'll go back to it and add a comment to explain why I had given it a 3 when I voted. Can't ask fairer than that. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:52:04 PM · #220 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
It's sad that you find that statement "good". |
What's sad is that you apparently think it's acceptable to dis Ubique, then turn around and act all put-upon when someone uses your exact words against you, basically. IMO of course.
R.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:55:39 PM · #221 |
Originally posted by ubique:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
:) |
Rose, I've thought of a solution for you. Each challenge, PM to me the ID of your entry on the last day of voting. I'll go back to it and add a comment to explain why I had given it a 3 when I voted. Can't ask fairer than that. |
First of all, it's not "Rose" but, sure....I'll pm you with my entries from here on out. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 02:56:55 PM · #222 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by ubique:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
:) |
Rose, I've thought of a solution for you. Each challenge, PM to me the ID of your entry on the last day of voting. I'll go back to it and add a comment to explain why I had given it a 3 when I voted. Can't ask fairer than that. |
First of all, it's not "Rose" but, sure....I'll pm you with my entries from here on out. |
Freudian slip??? :P |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 03:01:43 PM · #223 |
Originally posted by ubique:
Originally posted by yanko:
... So in the end she is like you ... |
Crikey! That's a chilling thought.
Not quite alike though; I don't care how anyone else votes, nor why, nor when ... I don't even care if they vote at all. I don't care if they comment, I don't care what they comment on, and I don't care why they comment (or why not). None of that is my business at all.
I only got into this tangle with PhotoInterest because she was challenging low voters (in an earlier thread) for comments to explain those low scores. I offered to provide her with comments to explain the low scores I'd given to her own recent entries (four consecutive 3 votes) and, predictably, she declined.
Most people who say they want justification for low scores are not looking for help at all; they are merely flailing. |
Quoting Bear_Music from above:
What's sad is that you apparently think it's acceptable to dis Ubique, then turn around and act all put-upon when someone uses your exact words against you, basically. IMO of course.
R.
Robert, take a look above there at the post that Ubique made about me. That's where that started. So, if you want to call out someone, perhaps, you should start by looking at the true source of it. :)
I'm sure that Ubique can hold his own so, why the need to step in for him? Do you not think that he's capable of making his own comments and needs guards to do it for him? I'm one woman. LOL
Message edited by author 2009-02-17 15:04:52. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 03:06:39 PM · #224 |
| This isn't in rant yet? Someone drop in a few obscenities and get things moving. |
|
|
|
02/17/2009 03:12:20 PM · #225 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Ok, I was going to stay out of this for awhile, because it seems to be getting quite personal. But dainmcgowan made an interesting point. Let's skip the 2s & 3s for a second and look just at the 1s. For the top 9 photos on the front page, they received a combined total of 12 ones. A 1 is the lowest rank you can possibly receive--there no one below you. I find it hard to believe, given the number of bad photos you can find in a given challenge, that these 9 were among the worst that you can get. Since I don't get it, and assuming the votes were real--not someone just trying to up their own score, I would like to know what made it so awful--and it's not even my picture. |
I'm curious too, but we have no inalienable RIGHT to know or to demand of the voter that he tell us. If he chooses to, great, if not, that's his perogative.
If it ever becomes required to leave a comment on every vote that's when I leave DPC. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 10:23:03 AM  |
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: 08/03/2025 10:23:03 AM EDT.
|
