| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/04/2004 01:52:35 PM · #26 |
| I don't mind voting on 20, 30, 40% or even 100 if time allow me to do so.. what p*** me off is users who enter challenges and their vote cast never moves ???? a bit one side if you ask me... |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 01:55:10 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by orussell:
With the increased number of entries the administrators should implement a 20% voting quota for all users. Each voter should be given a 20% random selection of entries to vote on only. Thumbnails for the other 80% should not be visible to voters until he/she has voted. |
I am astonished that this has a level of support. People are already disturbed by "drive-by" voting and getting "5's" for great photos. If this is implemented, I will have to give 80 people "5's" if I really want to see the other 320 entries in a 400 entry challenge. You have to be kidding me.
Please give this some serious consideration prior to moving forward.
|
|
|
|
03/04/2004 01:55:18 PM · #28 |
I think we should keep things as they are but adopt my previous suggestion IF folk are concerned about possible bias. If so, we have a threshold number of votes each image needs to obtain to be ranked (that's worked out statistically) and then those photos falling below this threshold are flaged during voting. personally if I saw such a photo towards to end of voting and I hadn't managed to vote on all, I would go and give their vote a boost (that is the NUMBER of votes they get - might vote high or low as normal). Once over the threshold they then get ranked in the final tally. Those photos not making the threshold don't get ranked but do get displayed in a separate category.
In my opinion, I think most photos DO already get sufficient votes to be statitstically representative of those who have an opinion about them - just look at any random sample including the lowest ranking - and thus we probably don't need to do any of this!
Like others, I want to see all the thumnails to get a feel for the field and have the fredom to cast my vote where I think fit. |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 03:43:15 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by DJLuba:
Originally posted by orussell:
With the increased number of entries the administrators should implement a 20% voting quota for all users. Each voter should be given a 20% random selection of entries to vote on only. Thumbnails for the other 80% should not be visible to voters until he/she has voted. |
I am astonished that this has a level of support. People are already disturbed by "drive-by" voting and getting "5's" for great photos. If this is implemented, I will have to give 80 people "5's" if I really want to see the other 320 entries in a 400 entry challenge. You have to be kidding me.
Please give this some serious consideration prior to moving forward. |
Why give them a 5 to see the others? Vote them as you would have if you "LIKED" their thumbnail... all photos deserve a vote I think and I also think they All deserve to be looked at full screen. |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 03:47:41 PM · #30 |
It seems that that the threads of this week are focused on changing the voting system for a variety of reasons: everything from entries that get ratings of one to the dearth of comments being made during voting. There seems to be a strong assumption that we learn a lot from the voting comments we get. I like the informality of those comments. There are those that encourage me when I submit an entry that I wish had never seen the light of day. And there are those comments that tickle my ego when I get a hot shot. And yes, there are those that set me straight technically. But I have come to accept that I am not going to get a blow by blow account of my problems and prescriptions to remedy them from the voting process. But that's ok.
Yesterday there was a thread that addressed "getting a rating of one," by Cathrine. Along the way, Pitsaman responded by sharing his "Tea Time" submission as an example of a shot that only got a 5.7. What interested me most though was what was in the Photographer's Comment: his steps for setting up the shot were written as well as a detailed listing of his camera settings. I studied that listing for some time comparing it to what I do and what he did to achieve a very, very good image. I then went on to read the Critic Club's comments to get their take on the image. I then incorporated some of these camera settings into my most recent efforts with satisfying results.
My point is simple: I learned more in the time spent reading that thread than I learned from a whole year of voting comments. I am happy with just a rating. I am excited receiving a few brief comments and constructive criticisms every now and then. I am thrilled when I complimentary comments. I am ecstatic when I get visited by a Critique Club Member. I take to heart everything they point out. But in all honesty, I have used up my $25.00 membership dues in lessons learned in the threads and the personal help I get from individual members and not just from the voting comments. The true value of this site lies in the nature of its members not in the number of its comments. This sight, and the way it has operated, has drawn many, many new, talented and interesting participants. It must be doing something very right. Why change it? Instead of throwing out the baby with the bath water, focus on one small item of change not wholesale revisions.
By the way, this coming from a guy still using a dial up modem. Now if you'll excuse me I have 100 more "Silence" Challenges to rate! |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 03:48:26 PM · #31 |
| I'm not wild about the threshold method either. Not being like the greats on this site, if it weren't for low votes I wouldn't have many. |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 03:50:49 PM · #32 |
I don't use the thumbs until after I have voted and don't think it would be too difficult to remove that option until after you have voted. I'd also like to see votes of (say) 1 & 10 require a backup comment but that would probably just lower the top scores and increase the lower scores (I guess I just answered my own suggestion).
I'm still on a very steep learning curve and would happily trade points for comments. |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 06:03:46 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by andywightman:
Like others, I want to see all the thumnails to get a feel for the field and have the fredom to cast my vote where I think fit. |
I can understand trying to get a feel for the field. And I'm not intending to dispute andywightman's statement. I just quoted him because he seemed to state the case well for those who feel that way. But I don't understand why someone would want to vote on some images and not on others. Can someone who uses this method please explain how they decide which images to vote on. |
|
|
|
03/04/2004 08:59:05 PM · #34 |
Yanno, this tempest in a teapot is really just another whiny rant I think. So, I made it clear that I go through and cast votes where I see fit. So what? We all have different likes and dislikes. I'm on a dialup modem, and I almost NEVER pick the winning photos in a challenge. I like what I like, others like what they like. If I really hate (which has happened more than once) a winning photo and I didn't vote on it, and I really liked a photo that was in the bottom 50%, how is that wrong? It's my opinion, and only one of how many thousand on this site? Obviously, I don't have a huge handle on what is really popular in a photograph any more than most others do. The way the system is setup works well, I think. I cannot really effectively go through and pick only the thumbs I like as a new random one pops up. This means that I usually do vote on what comes up, but once in a while, I forgo voting on something that I personally just don't like - particularly if it is technically a good photograph. This system has worked well for this site for a while it seems to me, so why should we want to change it?
|
|
|
|
03/04/2004 09:03:02 PM · #35 |
| I like voting on all and give at least 20% comments if I have the time during the week. |
|
|
|
03/05/2004 08:16:03 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by faidoi:
I like voting on all and give at least 20% comments if I have the time during the week. |
I "like" to vote on all and I do most of the time(I have no self restraint)but I really don't put enough thought into voting when there are so many to vote on; I'm as guilty as anyone when it comes to the amount of time I put into looking at each image. If there were a vote quota, I'd look at the entries more closely and have more time to make comments. Is that such a bad thing? Another plus I see in looking more closely at fewer images would be the learning aspect; studying images closely challenges you to figure out how images were made. Call me crazy.
|
|
|
|
03/05/2004 09:01:53 AM · #37 |
| I don't think you're crazy, but perhaps exceptional. For most voters I doubt the 20% quota would result in more time spent on each photo. More likely they would spend the same amount of time on each but look at a smaller number. They would feel that it is ok to stop when they got to 20%. |
|
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: 09/04/2025 01:26:06 PM EDT.
