DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> About SC Intervention......
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 139, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/22/2009 10:08:12 AM · #26
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by AJSullivan:

It seems that its something that can easily be misinterpreted. It also seems to be something you have to dig to find and its not apparent on the surface.

Biased voting is pretty easy to spot by its very nature.


As easy to spot as ghost accounts?
09/22/2009 10:09:34 AM · #27
If you say so. I bet its going on a lot more then gets recognized, just some people are idiots about it. I mean when you have a thread where people start posting thier scores, its very easy to get an idea of what the average score for a challenge is looking like, which then means you don't need to vote a 10 to sway anything, if you just vote above the average scores you will make an impact.

There is nothing I love more than vigorous debate about things I really don't care too much about haha.

09/22/2009 10:13:42 AM · #28
lol Was thinking that one myself.

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by AJSullivan:

It seems that its something that can easily be misinterpreted. It also seems to be something you have to dig to find and its not apparent on the surface.

Biased voting is pretty easy to spot by its very nature.


As easy to spot as ghost accounts?
09/22/2009 10:16:45 AM · #29
Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Biased voting is pretty easy to spot by its very nature.

As easy to spot as ghost accounts?

Easier
09/22/2009 10:19:58 AM · #30
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Biased voting is pretty easy to spot by its very nature.

As easy to spot as ghost accounts?

Easier


Good thing I don't vote anymore!
09/22/2009 10:28:31 AM · #31
Originally posted by LoudDog:

Good thing I don't vote anymore!

I just peeked at your average and agree wholeheartedly. ;-)
09/22/2009 10:31:12 AM · #32
Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Biased voting is pretty easy to spot by its very nature.

As easy to spot as ghost accounts?

Easier


Good thing I don't vote anymore!


I just peeked at your average... trust me, no one could accuse you of spiking the scores. :O)

Ray
09/22/2009 10:50:53 AM · #33
Maybe I voted low on all images and just didn't vote on the images of my friends? :)

Or maybe my bias was a hatred bias? I voted low on images of people I didn't like?
09/22/2009 10:52:08 AM · #34
Thats against the rules! I decided to actually read them for a change haha.
09/22/2009 10:53:25 AM · #35
I didn't mean for discourse to close on the announcement thread, but merely wanted the discussion to continue elsewhere (thanks Jeb!) as the original purpose of the thread had been met.
09/22/2009 11:02:48 AM · #36
Originally posted by LoudDog:

Maybe I voted low on all images and just didn't vote on the images of my friends? :)

Nah, you're fine. Our records show that you don't have any friends. ;-D
09/22/2009 11:02:55 AM · #37
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Good thing I don't vote anymore!

I just peeked at your average and agree wholeheartedly. ;-)


4.69 is a pretty average, ummm, average.
09/22/2009 11:19:15 AM · #38
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Maybe I voted low on all images and just didn't vote on the images of my friends? :)

Nah, you're fine. Our records show that you don't have any friends. ;-D


In typical SC fashion, investigate and attack the person and not the argument! :)
09/22/2009 11:28:42 AM · #39
Originally posted by scalvert:

It's only considered "buddy voting" if your history demonstrate an unmistakable pattern of voting a person's entries up (and/or everyone else's down) just because you know who entered it.


How do you determine that someone knows another person? I personally know only one person on this site. I don't think he has entered a challenge in about a year. So eliminating him, what's to keep you from thinking I'm voting for a buddy if I happen to give the same person a 10 on a couple of challenges? I did give a fair number of 10's when I voted a lot. I've been thinking of voting again in the exclusive challenges to keep up my rating skills but wonder if I shouldn't just stop giving 10's just in case I might give someone two or three in a short time without realizing they belong to the same person. A 10 for one and ones for everyone else won't happen from me because a 1 from me is rare. I heard the word percentages bandied about in the ban/unban threads. I'm wondering if we should take a close look at our statistical favorites and see if we're gonna have problems because our taste in photos makes us somebodies buddy?
09/22/2009 11:35:27 AM · #40
Originally posted by FireBird:

I'm wondering if we should take a close look at our statistical favorites and see if we're gonna have problems because our taste in photos makes us somebodies buddy?

Even if you like a particular subject or style, it's extremely unlikely that honest votes would ever be flagged as buddy voting. You would have to know which photos were entered to show a suspicious pattern.
09/22/2009 11:39:56 AM · #41
I don't know if that makes sense. If someone here has a pretty indicative style, and it happens to be what I find to be "perfect" and vote the images a 10 time after time, then it will look like im playing off of the photographer and not the image, but that image is right up my alley.

I don't see how one can differentiate between an honest vote and a bunk vote, outside of someone doing something wehre they vote 5 across the board and and then a single 10 vote for thier "friend".
09/22/2009 11:41:37 AM · #42
fwiw if you go to your profile > view your favorites > manage favorites > view statistcally favorite photographers

you'll get a list of your highest rated photogs based on the votes you've given them, and how many votes you've given to acheive that average.

the highest average on my list ( with multiple votes given ) is 7.667...


09/22/2009 11:45:32 AM · #43
Originally posted by AJSullivan:

I don't see how one can differentiate between an honest vote and a bunk vote, outside of someone doing something wehre they vote 5 across the board and and then a single 10 vote for thier "friend".

You'd be amazed at how many people are that stupid, but we do have other tools, too.
09/22/2009 11:46:51 AM · #44
My statistically favorite photographer has received and average of 7.8649 from me over 37 (!) challenges. Apparently I give him a lot of 8s, 9s, and 10s. I do not see his work before a challenge, but I have been known to correctly guess which shot is his in a challenge. I correctly guess a lot of artists in challenges. You play here long enough and you will recognize styles. Is it "friend" voting? Nope. I don't know for sure who did what, but I do know what I like. :-)
09/22/2009 11:47:10 AM · #45
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by FireBird:

I'm wondering if we should take a close look at our statistical favorites and see if we're gonna have problems because our taste in photos makes us somebodies buddy?

Even if you like a particular subject or style, it's extremely unlikely that honest votes would ever be flagged as buddy voting. You would have to know which photos were entered to show a suspicious pattern.


I kinda thought that I'd get this reply. But it suddenly prompted another thought in this old drafty cranium: What if someone became everyone's buddy by always entering a photo with a family member or some other artifact that positively identifies the photographer to the voters?
09/22/2009 11:48:58 AM · #46
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by AJSullivan:

I don't see how one can differentiate between an honest vote and a bunk vote, outside of someone doing something wehre they vote 5 across the board and and then a single 10 vote for thier "friend".

You'd be amazed at how many people are that stupid, but we do have other tools, too.


Do tell. What other ways does one go about finding this out?
09/22/2009 11:51:07 AM · #47
Originally posted by FireBird:

What if someone became everyone's buddy by always entering a photo with a family member or some other artifact that positively identifies the photographer to the voters?

It wouldn't make much difference. Plenty of photographers (good and bad) already have recognizable styles, locations and models without issue.
09/22/2009 11:51:37 AM · #48
Originally posted by rugman1969:

I was in no way able to state my case to anyone but SC, which, in my opinion, because some member(s) of SC had already wrongfully drawn the wrong conclusions about me, saw a chance to shut me up for good because of my views and expressions of things. I feel this is a problem that needs to be fixed. Had I been able to defend myself in a forum where other members would have had a chance to get involved beforehand, this ban may never have taken place. The reason I was given for being banned from this site was for having duplicate accounts. In no way was this true, as currently proven. I believe the ban came as a result of my political views and the fact that I called attention to another members̢۪ photo, who is a site favorite, and I think because I was questioning a possible dq for it was the main reason for my ban, because with minimal investigative work, it was too easily proven that the two accounts were in no way duplicates of one person.


Let's see, you get caught in a lie and blame it on a conspiracy... Yup, you exist all right, and you really are a Republican.

Unless of course you're an incognito Clinton.
09/22/2009 11:52:39 AM · #49
Can you give us an exact number of how many people on this site you are calling stupid, I am currious to know.

Originally posted by scalvert:

You'd be amazed at how many people are that stupid, but we do have other tools, too.
09/22/2009 11:54:18 AM · #50
Originally posted by Bugzeye:

Can you give us an exact number of how many people on this site you are calling stupid, I am currious to know.

Originally posted by scalvert:

You'd be amazed at how many people are that stupid, but we do have other tools, too.

Simple, the number is now zero (0), as they've already been caught and booted. :-)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 07:02:47 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/27/2025 07:02:47 PM EDT.