| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/19/2009 01:23:23 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by LydiaToo:
I would like to see comments being required for 1-2 and for 9-10. |
A 1 says it could not be any worse, a 10 says it is a good as it could possibly be. Very little is that bad or that perfect. I think more often than not, 1's and 10's are used as punishment and reward for whatever aspect the voter thinks deserved it. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:29:03 PM · #27 |
The site already does a good job of filtering out trolls. I think a much simpler solution is just accepting that there are people out there that like to give out low votes.
If my image gets a 5.5 instead of the 6 that I think it deserves its not because of the people who gave it a 1. Its because of the people who gave it a 5. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:41:12 PM · #28 |
Is this still going on?
It's unreasonable to ask for mandatory comments of ANY nature. All you then get are nonsense 'comments' by pissed off people.
If you think that people, when told that their vote REQUIRES a comment, are going to then take the time to leave you a lovely, detailed, constructive comment, you're on glue. Not good glue either.
There is absolutely no benefit to forcing people to do something. If I leave a low vote on a photo, it's generally because I simply don't like it. What's the purpose of forcing me to say "I don't like it", a few dozen times? I've given you a low vote. Doesn't that intrinsically suggest that I didn't like it?
As for you Lutchenko, I'd love to know your secret into hacking the voter database so that you can 'track' voting. lol. I suspect all you're doing is following the whiny 'what's your score?' threads and then making assumptions based on what people are posting in there. That's hardly accurate. I'm sure that SC and Langdon have better methods to determine how many, and with what frequency, people really are just 'crashing through with 1 votes'. I'm pretty sure you'd find that it's fewer and farther between than you'd like to fancy your detective work as having discovered.
Now, the people that speed vote 4s and 5s, those are people that could really use a spanking! |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:45:14 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
... As for you Lutchenko, I'd love to know your secret into hacking the voter database so that you can 'track' voting. lol. I suspect all you're doing is following the whiny 'what's your score?' threads and then making assumptions based on what people are posting in there. That's hardly accurate. I'm sure that SC and Langdon have better methods to determine how many, and with what frequency, people really are just 'crashing through with 1 votes'. I'm pretty sure you'd find that it's fewer and farther between than you'd like to fancy your detective work as having discovered. ... |
Go here...open profiles of newest and observe. Can be interesting at times. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:47:57 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
... As for you Lutchenko, I'd love to know your secret into hacking the voter database so that you can 'track' voting. lol. I suspect all you're doing is following the whiny 'what's your score?' threads and then making assumptions based on what people are posting in there. That's hardly accurate. I'm sure that SC and Langdon have better methods to determine how many, and with what frequency, people really are just 'crashing through with 1 votes'. I'm pretty sure you'd find that it's fewer and farther between than you'd like to fancy your detective work as having discovered. ... |
Go here...open profiles of newest and observe. Can be interesting at times. |
Oh, sure, interesting. 2 out of the entire first page have low voting averages, one has a rather large one, most haven't voted on anything, and one seems to be a spammer.
THE SKY IS FALLING!
ETA: If 'tracking' new registered users and applying their habits to be indicative of DPC voting as a whole is where you get your kicks, then it's not 1 voters that have the problems.
Message edited by author 2009-08-19 13:50:02. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:53:40 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
... As for you Lutchenko, I'd love to know your secret into hacking the voter database so that you can 'track' voting. lol. I suspect all you're doing is following the whiny 'what's your score?' threads and then making assumptions based on what people are posting in there. That's hardly accurate. I'm sure that SC and Langdon have better methods to determine how many, and with what frequency, people really are just 'crashing through with 1 votes'. I'm pretty sure you'd find that it's fewer and farther between than you'd like to fancy your detective work as having discovered. ... |
Go here...open profiles of newest and observe. Can be interesting at times. |
Oh, sure, interesting. 2 out of the entire first page have low voting averages, one has a rather large one, most haven't voted on anything, and one seems to be a spammer.
THE SKY IS FALLING!
ETA: If 'tracking' new registered users and applying their habits to be indicative of DPC voting as a whole is where you get your kicks, then it's not 1 voters that have the problems. |
The situation is that I received a vote of 1, I then looked to see who was online.
I happened to find a user who was in the middle of voting and was able to track exactly what they were voting to the extent that out of 33 votes they voted 1 32 times and 10 once... tell me that isn't troll voting |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:57:51 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
The situation is that I received a vote of 1, I then looked to see who was online. I happened to find a user who was in the middle of voting and was able to track exactly what they were voting to the extent that out of 33 votes they voted 1 32 times and 10 once... tell me that isn't troll voting |
I believe you, but the process sounds exhausting! |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:59:07 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by citymars:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
The situation is that I received a vote of 1, I then looked to see who was online. I happened to find a user who was in the middle of voting and was able to track exactly what they were voting to the extent that out of 33 votes they voted 1 32 times and 10 once... tell me that isn't troll voting |
I believe you, but the process sounds exhausting! |
It was a quiet day lol |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 01:59:26 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
... As for you Lutchenko, I'd love to know your secret into hacking the voter database so that you can 'track' voting. lol. I suspect all you're doing is following the whiny 'what's your score?' threads and then making assumptions based on what people are posting in there. That's hardly accurate. I'm sure that SC and Langdon have better methods to determine how many, and with what frequency, people really are just 'crashing through with 1 votes'. I'm pretty sure you'd find that it's fewer and farther between than you'd like to fancy your detective work as having discovered. ... |
Go here...open profiles of newest and observe. Can be interesting at times. |
Oh, sure, interesting. 2 out of the entire first page have low voting averages, one has a rather large one, most haven't voted on anything, and one seems to be a spammer.
THE SKY IS FALLING!
ETA: If 'tracking' new registered users and applying their habits to be indicative of DPC voting as a whole is where you get your kicks, then it's not 1 voters that have the problems. |
The situation is that I received a vote of 1, I then looked to see who was online.
I happened to find a user who was in the middle of voting and was able to track exactly what they were voting to the extent that out of 33 votes they voted 1 32 times and 10 once... tell me that isn't troll voting |
That would be a situation that would require a PM sent to SC, methinks, and I'm not saying that it doesn't ever happen, but it's hardly a trend or the norm. From your post, it sounded like you knew how to 'track' more than just one anomalitic voter. As for putting something in place that would be annoying to more than just your rogue troll, it's hardly worth the effort don't you think? I mean, they already have the scrubber in place that would just wipe out that voters scores in the end ANY way, so it's only the mood of the Obsessive Compulsive update buttoners that suffers, and really, I have no sympathy for that :D |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 02:05:52 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
That would be a situation that would require a PM sent to SC, methinks, and I'm not saying that it doesn't ever happen, but it's hardly a trend or the norm. From your post, it sounded like you knew how to 'track' more than just one anomalitic voter. As for putting something in place that would be annoying to more than just your rogue troll, it's hardly worth the effort don't you think? I mean, they already have the scrubber in place that would just wipe out that voters scores in the end ANY way, so it's only the mood of the Obsessive Compulsive update buttoners that suffers, and really, I have no sympathy for that :D |
I have tracked more than just the one and whilst the one I mentioned did have the votes scrubbed another one didn't
The upshot is that as members, we are of course at liberty to debate this subject irrespective of whether anything will come of it or not |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 02:12:17 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
That would be a situation that would require a PM sent to SC, methinks, and I'm not saying that it doesn't ever happen, but it's hardly a trend or the norm. From your post, it sounded like you knew how to 'track' more than just one anomalitic voter. As for putting something in place that would be annoying to more than just your rogue troll, it's hardly worth the effort don't you think? I mean, they already have the scrubber in place that would just wipe out that voters scores in the end ANY way, so it's only the mood of the Obsessive Compulsive update buttoners that suffers, and really, I have no sympathy for that :D |
I have tracked more than just the one and whilst the one I mentioned did have the votes scrubbed another one didn't
The upshot is that as members, we are of course at liberty to debate this subject irrespective of whether anything will come of it or not |
Mmm. sure. Debate. Have at it then. lol. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 02:24:42 PM · #37 |
| This has probably been mentioned before, but don't you think if it was required to comment when someone voted a 1, then they would just vote a 2. If it was required for a 1-2, then they would vote a 3, and so on. Just my thoughts. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 02:27:25 PM · #38 |
.
Message edited by author 2009-08-19 14:28:04. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 03:51:20 PM · #39 |
| Hey Art!! Cue the dead horse.... |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 03:52:38 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Bosborne:
Hey Art!! Cue the dead horse.... |
check the first page, he torched that sucker! |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 04:05:26 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by scottieham:
This has probably been mentioned before, but don't you think if it was required to comment when someone voted a 1, then they would just vote a 2. If it was required for a 1-2, then they would vote a 3, and so on. Just my thoughts. |
Works for me! let's require comments for 5s and under, the we'd average 7.5! |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 04:23:44 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by scottieham:
This has probably been mentioned before, but don't you think if it was required to comment when someone voted a 1, then they would just vote a 2. If it was required for a 1-2, then they would vote a 3, and so on. Just my thoughts. |
Works for me! let's require comments for 5s and under, the we'd average 7.5! |
And people would eventually just bitch that their photo, SO DESERVING OF A 9, was only an 8.2 |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 04:30:17 PM · #43 |
 K10DGuy, i'd like a subscription to your newsletter. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 04:31:24 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Steef:
K10DGuy, i'd like a subscription to your newsletter. |
heck, so would I! I didn't even know I had one :D
ETA: Also, you lost the mcbeef! I loved the mcbeef.
Message edited by author 2009-08-19 16:32:01. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 04:46:49 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by Steef:
K10DGuy, i'd like a subscription to your newsletter. |
heck, so would I! I didn't even know I had one :D
ETA: Also, you lost the mcbeef! I loved the mcbeef. |
hahahahahaha yeah, i usually only use the mcbeef addition to my name when sites already have a steef. when i noticed just steef was available here, i went for the change. it's still there on flickr though, so you know, you can head that way if you miss it too much ;) |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 05:11:02 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Steef:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by Steef:
K10DGuy, i'd like a subscription to your newsletter. |
heck, so would I! I didn't even know I had one :D
ETA: Also, you lost the mcbeef! I loved the mcbeef. |
hahahahahaha yeah, i usually only use the mcbeef addition to my name when sites already have a steef. when i noticed just steef was available here, i went for the change. it's still there on flickr though, so you know, you can head that way if you miss it too much ;) |
Smmooooottthhh. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 06:26:55 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Is this still going on?
It's unreasonable to ask for mandatory comments of ANY nature. All you then get are nonsense 'comments' by pissed off people.
If you think that people, when told that their vote REQUIRES a comment, are going to then take the time to leave you a lovely, detailed, constructive comment, you're on glue. Not good glue either. |
While I agree with you and believe that you are most likely right, do you actually know this for certain, or are you just speculating? That's why it's called an "experiment" you try it and if you don't like the results, then you know it failed and you move on...at least then you actually KNOW that it didn't work.
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
There is absolutely no benefit to forcing people to do something. If I leave a low vote on a photo, it's generally because I simply don't like it. What's the purpose of forcing me to say "I don't like it", a few dozen times? I've given you a low vote. Doesn't that intrinsically suggest that I didn't like it? |
Yes, a low score does imply that you don't like the photo, but WHY don't you like it? Is there anyone on this site who isn't here to learn and improve their skills? Probably a few, but definitely not the majority. If a picture is so bad that it warrants a 1, 2, or 3, then it shouldn't be difficult to give one reason why you don't like it: "It looks like a snapshot" "Not in focus" "Doesn't meet the challenge" "I don't like frogs"...whatever. We're not calling for a detailed break down as to every little thing wrong with it, but if everyone that gives it a low score adds one minor dislike, then by the end of a challenge, it should have painted a pretty clear and accurate picture as to why it didn't do well. This is concrete data that someone can use and learn from to become a better photographer instead of looking at a 4.xx with all positive comments and saying, "Welp, that didn't work out." Not all of us are as gifted and talented as you, nor are we so secure in our abilities. Maybe you could actually direct some of your knowledge and help out others. If it is such an inconvenience for you to add a 5 word comment as to why you don't like it, then it's quite clear where you stand on helping other people, and further conversation about the topic with you would be a complete waste of time.
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Now, the people that speed vote 4s and 5s, those are people that could really use a spanking! |
How do you know that they're speed voting? Maybe they just think it's OK. They've given you a vote of 4 or 5. Doesn't that intrinsically suggest that they didn't like it?
What else should they do? Heaven forbid they stop and consider why they don't like it. Maybe even leave a little comment why. I'm shocked that you don't see the similarity between your example and mine.
- Alex
|
|
|
|
08/19/2009 06:38:24 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Alex_Europa:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Is this still going on?
It's unreasonable to ask for mandatory comments of ANY nature. All you then get are nonsense 'comments' by pissed off people.
If you think that people, when told that their vote REQUIRES a comment, are going to then take the time to leave you a lovely, detailed, constructive comment, you're on glue. Not good glue either. |
While I agree with you and believe that you are most likely right, do you actually know this for certain, or are you just speculating? That's why it's called an "experiment" you try it and if you don't like the results, then you know it failed and you move on...at least then you actually KNOW that it didn't work.
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
There is absolutely no benefit to forcing people to do something. If I leave a low vote on a photo, it's generally because I simply don't like it. What's the purpose of forcing me to say "I don't like it", a few dozen times? I've given you a low vote. Doesn't that intrinsically suggest that I didn't like it? |
Yes, a low score does imply that you don't like the photo, but WHY don't you like it? Is there anyone on this site who isn't here to learn and improve their skills? Probably a few, but definitely not the majority. If a picture is so bad that it warrants a 1, 2, or 3, then it shouldn't be difficult to give one reason why you don't like it: "It looks like a snapshot" "Not in focus" "Doesn't meet the challenge" "I don't like frogs"...whatever. We're not calling for a detailed break down as to every little thing wrong with it, but if everyone that gives it a low score adds one minor dislike, then by the end of a challenge, it should have painted a pretty clear and accurate picture as to why it didn't do well. This is concrete data that someone can use and learn from to become a better photographer instead of looking at a 4.xx with all positive comments and saying, "Welp, that didn't work out." Not all of us are as gifted and talented as you, nor are we so secure in our abilities. Maybe you could actually direct some of your knowledge and help out others. If it is such an inconvenience for you to add a 5 word comment as to why you don't like it, then it's quite clear where you stand on helping other people, and further conversation about the topic with you would be a complete waste of time.
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Now, the people that speed vote 4s and 5s, those are people that could really use a spanking! |
How do you know that they're speed voting? Maybe they just think it's OK. They've given you a vote of 4 or 5. Doesn't that intrinsically suggest that they didn't like it?
What else should they do? Heaven forbid they stop and consider why they don't like it. Maybe even leave a little comment why. I'm shocked that you don't see the similarity between your example and mine.
- Alex |
1. Well, as many other threads over the last little while have confirmed, an experiment to get people to try and leave comments on lower votes failed miserably, so yes, it has been tried. Also, it's just part of the human condition. You force people to do something, they will either do it poorly, or they will rebel.
2. 99.99999999% of the time, I don't like something for completely subjective reasons. That 0.000000001% of objectivity? I'll leave a comment. My telling you that I don't like water drops on flowers isn't going to make you a better photographer when you win a ribbon because you put water drops on a flower.
3. This was a tongue-in-cheek response based on a few admissions from site users in various threads I've read since I joined.
Message edited by author 2009-08-19 18:38:54. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 07:05:04 PM · #49 |
arrrggghhh I have tried to ignore this thread mainly because its old hat however will add my twopence worth...
This is predominately an annonymous voting website, voters (if they wish) can leave a comment giving their name during voting or as a baghead. If you force low voters to comment you then remove the anonymity and thus change the dynamics of the site. For the most part by submitting an image to a challenge all you will gain is an average vote, if its low you know it wasn't a well received image and if its a high vote then generally it was liked.
That alone would give you a decent idea as to how dpc voters received your image. Comments during a challenge tend to be vague and don't offer much in the way of critique. If you request a critique from the critique club then you will receive a more in depth comment on your submission allbeit from an individual so, if you want critical comment from several people I'd suggest you start a new thread in this.
Look at the ribbon winers, most will have a sprinkling of 1, 2 & 3 votes. The phrase "you can please all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time" springs to mind. Use the challenges to display what you have learnt rather than to receive critique on your shortcomings.
Message edited by author 2009-08-19 19:06:15. |
|
|
|
08/19/2009 07:10:52 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
1. Well, as many other threads over the last little while have confirmed, an experiment to get people to try and leave comments on lower votes failed miserably, so yes, it has been tried. Also, it's just part of the human condition. You force people to do something, they will either do it poorly, or they will rebel. |
No, it has never been made mandatory for people to leave comments for low scores. Yes, a pop-up window SUGGESTING that it would be courteous to leave a comment was implemented for a short time, but there is a very profound difference between the two solutions. The fact that DPC has tried something once before tells me that this has been a reoccurring theme. While it's great that they tried to fix the problem, it seems crazy to me that they just gave up after one idea failed and allowed the problem to persist. "Welp, that didn't work...oh well, we tried."
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
2. 99.99999999% of the time, I don't like something for completely subjective reasons. That 0.000000001% of objectivity? I'll leave a comment. My telling you that I don't like water drops on flowers isn't going to make you a better photographer when you win a ribbon because you put water drops on a flower. |
Not if they ribboned, no, but last time I checked, only 3 people end up on the front page...that leaves a ton of other people that MIGHT benefit from your opinion, however subjective it may be. Simply put, if YOU feel that way, then maybe other people who didn't comment feel that way too. This is what I was trying to convey with my "painting a picture" comment. One subjective comment by itself doesn't mean much, but 10-40 together could potentially give the photographer some direction. If nothing else, it gives them a REASON (whether or not they agree) as to why it failed.
- Alex
|
|
