| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/21/2012 05:31:01 PM · #1 |
to remedy the apparent lack of constructive criticism on low votes, i would suggest a new rule for consideration.
if you are the person who made a challenge suggestion that was implemented, you must comment on every image entered.
the carrot is a 10% increase in your final score if you comment on 100% of images. so a scores of 5 gets boosted to 5.5.
the stick is that your score goes down by the percentage of the images you did not comment on. if your score is a 5 at the end of voting, and you comment on 80% of the images, your final adjusted score will be 5 - (0.2 x 5) = 4.
all comments must be at least 30 characters in length and only 10% of them can be identical (an easy thing to write a subroutine to check), so as to avoid cut and pasting the same comment for each entry.
thoughts or modifications?
-m |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:33:38 PM · #2 |
| Might be fun to have an honour system for commenting but wrong to mess with scores. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:33:38 PM · #3 |
| So, basically you don't want anyone suggesting challenges? ROFL! I don't think this one will fly. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:34:54 PM · #4 |
Good way to discourage challenge suggestions.
Oops, Kelli got there first. Great minds think alike. ;)
Message edited by author 2012-05-21 17:36:27. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:36:52 PM · #5 |
| I like it! After all, the simplest solutions are often the best solutions. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:37:50 PM · #6 |
I do think that people that give ones or 2's need to comment
|
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:38:26 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by bvy:
I like it! After all, the simplest solutions are often the best solutions. |
What's simple about changing the scoring system? |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:39:22 PM · #8 |
Why not just have a lottery of whoever's entered in each challenge, results to be announced when challenge rolls over to voting. Winner (loser?) of the lottery is required to comment 100% on the entries, and non-compliance = DQ from that challenge, whilst compliance = 25% score bump. At least that'd keep the challenge suggestions coming :-)
|
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:45:07 PM · #9 |
| While I like the out of the box thinking, tampering with scores is something that simply doesn't fly here at DPC. There will still be low voters with no comments in this system, no matter how you slice it. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:48:09 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I do think that people that give ones or 2's need to comment |
"I felt this photo deserved a (1 or 2)"
Requirement met. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:52:51 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by JuliBoc:
Originally posted by bvy:
I like it! After all, the simplest solutions are often the best solutions. |
What's simple about changing the scoring system? |
Oh, dear. My sarcasm was too subtle. I'm losing my touch. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 05:59:10 PM · #12 |
| A vote is more than a comment. It's a statement. That's why I like this site :) |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 06:04:09 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I do think that people that give ones or 2's need to comment |
"I felt this photo deserved a (1 or 2)"
Requirement met. |
It would help people to improve if you say...its out of focus, mad subject matter....It would just be nice if a person leaving a low score would explain why so the photog could improve.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2012 06:04:10 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I do think that people that give ones or 2's need to comment |
"I felt this photo deserved a (1 or 2)"
Requirement met. |
Meh............. meets the requirements and does have some small value.
Ray |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 06:31:18 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by JuliBoc:
Originally posted by bvy:
I like it! After all, the simplest solutions are often the best solutions. |
What's simple about changing the scoring system? |
Oh, dear. My sarcasm was too subtle. I'm losing my touch. |
I thought there was a -10% penalty for sarcasm. or subtlety. or simpletude. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 06:42:32 PM · #16 |
âThe last temptation is the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason.â
T.S. Eliot
"Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness."
Martin Luther King, Jr. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 06:47:17 PM · #17 |
ok ok... i made this up sort of tongue in cheek... but with all the talk here about this sight being to help people improve their skills, there does seem to be a preponderance (sp?) of voting or low-balling without giving any reason why.
i'm not one of those complaining, just raising (again) the issue. there are some GREAT people here who do comment a lot. i usually comment when i see something that keeps a good photo (5) from being great (6+), but i should probably comment more, too.
-m |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 07:13:41 PM · #18 |
| Comments made and helpful comments are already tracked and viewable on the profile page. It would be nice to see these built into a Karma rating that was visible in the forums below username, camera and lenses. Any comment could be worth a point. If the recipient rated it a comment as helpful, it could be worth 2. We could have levels with quirky names like pinhole, point-and-shoot, dslr, etc. Call them whatever, but a lot of forums use karma ratings to encourage positive participation. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 07:35:57 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by JuliBoc:
Originally posted by bvy:
I like it! After all, the simplest solutions are often the best solutions. |
What's simple about changing the scoring system? |
Oh, dear. My sarcasm was too subtle. I'm losing my touch. |
Oh, sorry, I'm not usually dense about sarcasm. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 07:42:41 PM · #20 |
One might qvetch if only the average vote were given without the score distribution.
Negative participation - low votes, lack of comments - surely is part of the spice? |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 08:34:28 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by tnun:
qvetch |
Minimum 10 percent deduction for translation services. |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 08:57:31 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
to remedy the apparent lack of constructive criticism on low votes, i would suggest a new rule for consideration.
if you are the person who made a challenge suggestion that was implemented, you must comment on every image entered.
the carrot is a 10% increase in your final score if you comment on 100% of images. so a scores of 5 gets boosted to 5.5.
the stick is that your score goes down by the percentage of the images you did not comment on. if your score is a 5 at the end of voting, and you comment on 80% of the images, your final adjusted score will be 5 - (0.2 x 5) = 4.
all comments must be at least 30 characters in length and only 10% of them can be identical (an easy thing to write a subroutine to check), so as to avoid cut and pasting the same comment for each entry.
thoughts or modifications?
-m |
Why do people come up these convoluted schemes? This place is for competing with your photography, not your social skills. I'm not here to comment on every single picture that is entered into a competition. If that's your thing, great, but don't force anyone else to follow your example.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2012 09:01:53 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
ok ok... i made this up sort of tongue in cheek... but with all the talk here about this sight being to help people improve their skills, there does seem to be a preponderance (sp?) of voting or low-balling without giving any reason why.
i'm not one of those complaining, just raising (again) the issue. there are some GREAT people here who do comment a lot. i usually comment when i see something that keeps a good photo (5) from being great (6+), but i should probably comment more, too.
-m |
This site is for competition. If you want real constructive critique, go to photosig.com.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2012 09:04:36 PM · #24 |
|
|
|
05/21/2012 09:17:18 PM · #25 |
| obviously touched a raw nerve with some people. SORRY i even brougt it up! |
|
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: 08/02/2025 02:56:52 PM EDT.
