| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/29/2004 08:04:50 PM · #1 |
I don't mean to whine, (as I almost gave up on my X-Ray picture after being told the picture would be crappy, not being too thrilled about it myself, and being busy with exams. So my red ribbon is a great surprise!) but it was doing about a 5.5 after 100 votes + comments about its validity. I submitted proof as soon as the challenge began, and when it got validated (100 votes later), it rose to 6.6. I'm pretty sure I would have had about 7.0 if it were validated from the start. I'm not complaining about the validation time as I understand that this website isn't a business. Although I would suggest a pre-validation method during the submitting week. This would encourage out-of-the-ordinary camera techniques which otherwise get downvoted.
What do you think?
Message edited by author 2004-04-29 20:05:49. |
|
|
|
04/29/2004 08:08:40 PM · #2 |
Even though in the rules, on the DQ request page, and in multiple forum threads we and others have repeatedly stated that voters should vote as if each image is legal, I agree that people still do this.
On the other hand, pre-validation can also have a negative effect.
I don't have an easy answer, but am open to suggestions/comments.
|
|
|
|
04/29/2004 08:17:05 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by KarenB:
On the other hand, pre-validation can also have a negative effect.
|
Usually when I see a shot that is validated within 1 day of the challenge I try to exam it for myself.
I believe that sometimes seeing this validation so soon may change my scoring on the pictures. Up of down you will have to guess. |
|
|
|
04/29/2004 08:18:25 PM · #4 |
Interesting thoughts as I have just received my first dq -- making me an expert on my opinion ;) My score had fallen since getting validated.
I think a pre-validation request might be a bit like the Critique Club - easy to ask for so we get a backlog of request. I see this as potentially more work for the Admins/SC without little payback. Scenario could go the 150 (or about 1/2 of open challenges) request pre-validation, contest begins and members post DQ request, now who gets priority for the precious Admin and SC time?
Labuda, I do recall voting on your shot after the "validated" note was posted and thought that it would help your score as it was hard to figure out how I could have done it.
Message edited by author 2004-04-29 20:19:40. |
|
|
|
04/29/2004 09:22:58 PM · #5 |
| Maybe some of the Site Council members were "busy with exams" too. |
|
|
|
04/29/2004 09:51:53 PM · #6 |
| How about grouping the Validated shots so it would be easier for one to change their vote if they had given a wrong score "by mistake"? |
|
|
|
04/29/2004 10:10:01 PM · #7 |
If the validation stamp is effective at raising the vote, then applying one at the beginning gives that photographer an unfair advantage from the outset. Everyone would want to submit their photo ahead of time to get that precious stamp. Guess how well that will work ....
Therefore, the "pre-validation" process is really a "pre-submit" process. If someone requests a DQ, then we have the validation immediately available, and don't have to wait for a response from the photographer. But if no-one requests a DQ, then it shouldn't get a validation stamp.
If the voters are voting as instructed, this system will work fine. If not, I suggest you try and convince them to vote correctly, rather than changing the site procedures. |
|
|
|
04/30/2004 02:35:05 AM · #8 |
My score started at 5.9 for the first day and has now risen steadily to 6.9. I don't have an admin stamp so I think it's just one of those things which happens.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2004 02:37:06 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If the validation stamp is effective at raising the vote, then applying one at the beginning gives that photographer an unfair advantage from the outset. Everyone would want to submit their photo ahead of time to get that precious stamp. Guess how well that will work ....
Therefore, the "pre-validation" process is really a "pre-submit" process. If someone requests a DQ, then we have the validation immediately available, and don't have to wait for a response from the photographer. But if no-one requests a DQ, then it shouldn't get a validation stamp.
If the voters are voting as instructed, this system will work fine. If not, I suggest you try and convince them to vote correctly, rather than changing the site procedures. |
Sorry to say, but I think this counterargument is a bit weak and almost suggesting that Labuda wants to misuse the site for his benefit.
All Labuda is asking is an extention of a possibility which already exists. Each person has already the possibility to request validation of his own submission and a validation mark is being put up as result.
The strange thing is that it is only possible once the voting has started. It would be logical and convenient to already have that possibility at submission time, nothing wrong with that.
Whether it influences votes positively or negatively can't be controlled in any way. If it does influence the votes, why would it be more fair to wait a few days into the challenge than doing that right from the start ?
|
|
|
|
04/30/2004 02:37:37 AM · #10 |
| Can I borrow a couple of spare tenths? My score is going nowhere ... |
|
|
|
04/30/2004 02:45:42 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by willem:
Whether it influences votes positively or negatively can't be controlled in any way. If it does influence the votes, why would it be more fair to wait a few days into the challenge than doing that right from the start ? |
I am sure that for many voters, having that stamp on there implies that there's something special, but nevertheless legally-achieved, about the photo, and that this provides a subconscious boost to their evaluation. It's not fair for some photographers to ask for that, when in fact, no one at all may request a DQ for any reason during the challenge.
If we put that stamp on without a DQ request, we are prejudicing the voting solely at the request of the photographer, and can therefore expect that every photographer will submit their photo with a request for a validation stamp. I'm not interested in either the idea or the work it would make (for me, especially!).
Again, if no one suspects a photo enough to request a DQ, why should that photo have a validation notation on it -- especially since that erroneously implies that someone else DID request a DQ? |
|
|
|
04/30/2004 02:52:19 AM · #12 |
Disregarding the last few weeks, I agree with GeneralE. With the posting of the newest set of rules, hopefully the members will try to fit their submisssions to them rather than the other way around. As much of a cynic as I am, I still believe in, "Innocent until proven guilty".
(edit for spelling)
Message edited by author 2004-04-30 02:53:04.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2004 02:53:12 AM · #13 |
| The suggestion being offered here could put an unreasonable burden on the SC. Having to validate a lot of entries when no one thinks they are illegal is a waste of their time. If people got the idea that having the admin stamp would improve their score the SC would be swamped with requests, perhaps many on last minute submissions. |
|
|
|
04/30/2004 10:11:11 AM · #14 |
Coolhar, GeneralE,
you both are forgetting the possibility to request and admin note exists already !!
Underneath my entry it says
"Do you feel that your submission might receive some disqualification requests?
If so, you can Request an Admin Note for your image"
The debate is only about the timing of such a request. Should it be possible before voting starts or only during ?
|
|
|
|
04/30/2004 10:20:52 AM · #15 |
I'm not forgetting that, it's just what I'm describing. What I'm saying is we're probably not going to actually post the note on the photo unless a DQ request comes is. If no one submits DQ request, the apparently no one considers is illegal, so it doesn't need a note. The pre-submission process is designed to save time and as a convenience for photographers who may not be available to submit walidation during the voting.
If voters vote down photos and request a DQ, then THEY are violating site guidelines and procedures. I think it makes more sense to educate people into becoming better-quality voters than to change the system. |
|
|
|
04/30/2004 12:28:30 PM · #16 |
I haven't forgotten about the current method. And I also know why it was put in -- to accomodate entrants who would be unable to comply with a request to submit their file in a timely fashion (such as traveling away from their computer). To attempt to use it for an advantage in scores is an abuse of the system. If many people do that it will only bog things down for the ones who need to use it for the intended purpose.
|
|
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: 08/29/2025 07:14:23 PM EDT.
