| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/16/2005 11:40:11 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Reality is probably in the middle somewhere, for sure, but I'd offer the observation that there's nothing but the diligence of SC and our programmers to keep the above scenario from happening right NOW. If I want to enlist all my friends to join DPC and vote in each open challenge I enter so I can get high scores from them, I can do it. Presumably SC will eventually see through this when they realize that I always get 10's from the same 50 people, whose voting average otherwise is in the low 4's, but my point is that THIS is already being policed. |
I wish I could be as confident about that as you seem to be. I think it is going on right now but I don't know to what extent. (Remember the vote-for-my-dog threads.) And I don't think SC has the capability to monitor voting patterns, I believe that rests only with the two admins.
Originally posted by bear_music:
So the issue being discussed here is to what extent do occasional breaches of anonymity to the membership at large, through the forums affect the scoring? That's a whole other kettle of fish.
Robt. |
We'll never be able to know to what extent the occasional breaches (forum postings and exchanges of PMs) affect scoring. But we can discuss ways to try to discourage them, and to encourage more respect for the role anonymity plays in the challenges. The best idea I have come up with is the threat that people will vote your entry down if they think you have breached anonymity. Some people don't like that idea, even saying that it is contrary to the spirit of the rules. I wish we could come up with something better. But in the mean time I hate to see even minor breaches condoned, or dismissed as not very important. I fear that treating them so will allow them to grow in frequency and seriousness.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 11:48:57 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Reality is probably in the middle somewhere, for sure, but I'd offer the observation that there's nothing but the diligence of SC and our programmers to keep the above scenario from happening right NOW. If I want to enlist all my friends to join DPC and vote in each open challenge I enter so I can get high scores from them, I can do it. Presumably SC will eventually see through this when they realize that I always get 10's from the same 50 people, whose voting average otherwise is in the low 4's, but my point is that THIS is already being policed. |
I wish I could be as confident about that as you seem to be. I think it is going on right now but I don't know to what extent. (Remember the vote-for-my-dog threads.) And I don't think SC has the capability to monitor voting patterns, I believe that rests only with the two admins.
Originally posted by bear_music:
So the issue being discussed here is to what extent do occasional breaches of anonymity to the membership at large, through the forums affect the scoring? That's a whole other kettle of fish.
Robt. |
We'll never be able to know to what extent the occasional breaches (forum postings and exchanges of PMs) affect scoring. But we can discuss ways to try to discourage them, and to encourage more respect for the role anonymity plays in the challenges. The best idea I have come up with is the threat that people will vote your entry down if they think you have breached anonymity. Some people don't like that idea, even saying that it is contrary to the spirit of the rules. I wish we could come up with something better. But in the mean time I hate to see even minor breaches condoned, or dismissed as not very important. I fear that treating them so will allow them to grow in frequency and seriousness. |
As to your first point, in my original post to this sub-thread a little ways back, I made reference to SC and our programmers as being our current line of defense against that, so I'm in agreement with you there.
Regarding your second point, I'd only observe that you're proposing a "solution" to a "problem" that you yourself say we will never know the extent of. The trouble is, all potential solutions voiced (that I am aware of) involve bringing a certain level of "Big Brotherism" or "vigilante action" into play. Using your suggestion of threats to "vote down" images the anonymity of which have been breached, you'd agree with me that for this to be effective it has to be into practice, right?
So let's suppose that you took a shot of something in particular, doesn't matter what, and let's further suppose that someone other than you takes a very similar image and posts it up for discussion while the challenge is being voted on. If your suggestion is put into effect, don't you think that in this case YOU might suffer unfair backlash from something you had absolutely nothing to do with?
In my opinion, and yes it's ONLY my opinion, breached anonymity is not a major problem and there's no need to take steps such as these to "police" it. Obviously we don't agree on that.
Robt. |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 12:47:36 AM · #78 |
I read this thread and I can not help injecting my view. I repeat, the number of members who read forums is such an insignificant number that voting effects are too minor to be a factor.
There is also a drawback to posting a thread to follow the voting results. Note that the majority of posted votes are mainly 5.8 down with few above 6. The high scores are not posting, as they know better. I recall seeing one old thread after many pages. This one had a couple of 6.4 and 6.5 and many questioned whether these would be the winner like in a challenge wherein the highest was going to be a 6.6. When the challenge ended the 6.6 down were all below top 10.
Many strange things happen and it is best to await the end result. Before you frustrate yourself by assuming phantom enemies consider doing something else and allow the dust to settle but there is danger in exposing your score and then suffer the fluctuation and suspect foul play if it goes down. Of course, if it goes up it is not an issue.
I have made it a point to personally use a 5 to 10 scoring system. You can see this in my stats. My reasoning is simple: if I give you a 5 you will win nothing with it so why go lower? If I give you a 6 I slightly help your cause but still you will win nothing. With a 7 you get an extra boost and it gets stronger approaching a 10. It is understood that if you are at 5.2 after a couple of hundred votes even my 9 or 10 will not get you into the winner's circle. Some other people share this system but it is not being advocated as the best. This is only my system to which I have evolved.
If your score is at 6.8 and I give you a 6, I will lower your score. If you are at 7.3 and I give you a 7 I will also lower your score.
I do detect that many voters vote low and this is reflected in their stats. However, this is not a complaint but merely to show that there are many voting philosophies. Once all is compiled then a true score emerges which takes into its belly all of the different systems. Personally, I either have a winner or not. I am not interested in scores with 6.5 or under because I know that I have failed to produce a winner, so I move to the next entry instead of pondering what went wrong. Oftentimes I like my entry but then I realize that the voting block is what makes the image.
My advise is to wait for at least 100 votes to get a sense of where your image is going and save yourselves the frustration in tracking fluctuations that pray upon your emotions and find demons to blame. |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 12:49:55 AM · #79 |
I usually wait until the 150th vote since the influx of new memberships. I tried 100 before but the votes still kept on swinging.
I agree. Wait and there is a point where each individual score "levels" out.
Just my two cents. |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 01:38:33 AM · #80 |
Firstly, I'm very new here - this is only my 3rd post on the forums and the Camouflage challenge is only my third entry. I learned about DP Challenge from another photography site, and after visiting, watching and reading the site for some weeks I decided to take the plunge and join up, although I haven't taken the definite step of becoming a paid up member just yet, I'm pretty certain I will do that soon.
I've read through many of the comments here on voting and just wanted to add, as someone who has worked with scoring systems in the market research environment, that where a scoring scale is provided, it is there to be used - the whole scale. The voting screen shows 1 as bad and 10 as good. To my mind that puts 5 as neither good nor bad - in other words - average. When I score challenges I try to bear that in mind. Is an image purely average - i.e. anyone with a basic knowledge of photography and a half decent camera could take it, or has some additional element been added which makes it above average. Or, towards the negative side of the scale has the image got flaws, does it not meet the challenge topic, or perhaps the photographer not taken care in composition/exposure.
Yes, high scores are encouraging - but if we want to improve our photography, and surely that is the aim of most of us, then fair scoring and commenting are essential and not any form of tit for tat voting system.
Sorry to ramble on and good luck to everyone in the challenge. May we learn from it whatever our final scores.
And yes, my score too has dropped a bit from the start of voting - and sits comfortably around the 'average' point! |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:26:29 PM · #81 |
It's getting worse every hour, I tell ya.
Votes: 163
Views: 224
Avg Vote: 5.6503
Comments: 5 |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:44:47 PM · #82 |
| My score has dropped a full half point in the last 24 hours most of it in six hours yesterday afternoon, and I think I know why. It is because of self indulgent voters like myself. If I am going to not vote on all the entries in a challenge, I like to vote on the ones that really grab my attention in the thumbnails, so I cherry-pick my favorites giving them nice fat scores. Then, if I have the time I score the rest, but it isn't as much fun scoring the 2-4 crowd as it is the 7-9 crowd. So it may not be a conspiracy or some nasty cadre of low scoring neanderthals, just the folks who didn't much care for my shot getting around to voting on it. |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:47:44 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Come on people...how about a few comments?
Also...please look closely at the photos. I nearly missed a few hidden subjects.... |
Remember when?
Well for what its worth:
Stats: You have rated 168 of 168 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 167 images (99%) in this challenge.
I can't find the other one, honest.
A few are trite, some are contrite, and hopefully there's some that are helpful.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:50:55 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by Jammur:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Come on people...how about a few comments?
Also...please look closely at the photos. I nearly missed a few hidden subjects.... |
Remember when?
Well for what its worth:
Stats: You have rated 168 of 168 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 167 images (99%) in this challenge.
I can't find the other one, honest.
A few are trite, some are contrite, and hopefully there's some that are helpful. |
Great job, Jammur. I appreciate your comment.
The other one would be your own ? I would assume... |
|
|
|
11/18/2005 06:59:54 AM · #85 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
Originally posted by Jammur:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Come on people...how about a few comments?
Also...please look closely at the photos. I nearly missed a few hidden subjects.... |
Remember when?
Well for what its worth:
Stats: You have rated 168 of 168 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 167 images (99%) in this challenge.
I can't find the other one, honest.
A few are trite, some are contrite, and hopefully there's some that are helpful. |
Great job, Jammur. I appreciate your comment.
The other one would be your own ? I would assume... |
If you voted 168/168, then you shouldn't have an entry in the challenge. Must have missed a comment on somebody. Got mine though...thank you for the comment. |
|
|
|
11/18/2005 10:01:09 AM · #86 |
I rated 138 images higher than my score received...
|
|
|
|
11/18/2005 10:06:15 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
I rated 138 images higher than my score received... |
Silly Caucasian girl.....
(Sorry, just came from the movie quote thread.)
|
|
|
|
11/18/2005 10:21:24 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by Jammur:
Originally posted by Marjo:
I rated 138 images higher than my score received... |
Silly Caucasian girl.....
(Sorry, just came from the movie quote thread.) |
It truly is a .....sword. |
|
|
|
11/19/2005 05:05:41 PM · #89 |
| Looks like voting has sloooowwwed down. What scoring range will win this challenge? |
|
|
|
11/19/2005 05:16:10 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Looks like voting has sloooowwwed down. What scoring range will win this challenge? |
Don't know, but mine went down the drain... |
|
|
|
11/20/2005 05:11:59 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Looks like voting has sloooowwwed down. What scoring range will win this challenge? |
Don't know either...under 7? |
|
|
|
11/21/2005 06:37:53 PM · #92 |
Let's not forget Camo...especially since this is my best ever....but can he stay over 6????
Votes: 286
Views: 400
Avg Vote: 6.1224
Comments: 21
Favorites: 2
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 11/21/05 06:30 pm
|
|
|
|
11/21/2005 06:49:10 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by Jammur:
Stats: You have rated 168 of 168 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 167 images (99%) in this challenge.
I can't find the other one, honest.
|
Could be mine ;)
Message edited by author 2005-11-21 18:49:52. |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 12:48:53 PM · #94 |
Come on people... I need some 10s !!!
|
|
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: 08/03/2025 05:39:01 AM EDT.
