Unfair voting practices - DPChallenge Forums

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

03/08/2006 07:11:50 PM · #1

Not that I'm complaing about the score. I actually expected it to do much worse and am on record in the forums as saying I expected to score below 5 before voting had started.

rex

Canon PowerShot SD780

03/08/2006 07:15:00 PM · #2

My guess would be that you got a lot of "DNMC" votes. To me it is a stretch.

Gunnsi

Sony DSLR-A550

Sony 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 (E-mount)

03/08/2006 07:22:25 PM · #3

I have seen jumps like this in my score! It was not validated or anything like that, just score in the morning are usually better than at night.
We humans are also so easily brainwashed that just a small statement that makes you look again at a picture could easily get you to give "1" more.

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

It says in the rules that if you think a photo may be invalid, you should vote as if it was valid, but request a DQ. So why is it that this photo, which started out scoring around 4.59, suddenly saw the score going up quite rapidly after it had been validated?

Not that I'm complaing about the score. I actually expected it to do much worse and am on record in the forums as saying I expected to score below 5 before voting had started.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

03/08/2006 07:24:12 PM · #4

Originally posted by rex:

My guess would be that you got a lot of "DNMC" votes. To me it is a stretch.

That doesn't explain why it went up so much after being validated. And I certainly didn't get any "DNMC" comments.

As I said, I'm not worried about the score - it did better than I expected. I'm just worried that other people are suffering the same fate because people can't work out how a result was achieved legally.

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/08/2006 07:37:04 PM · #5

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

...I'm just worried that other people are suffering the same fate because people can't work out how a result was achieved legally.

Well, likely so. Voters sway and are being swayed by all kinds of wafts.

Message edited by author 2006-03-08 19:37:24.

03/08/2006 07:41:15 PM · #6

Did you ever stop to think that maybe having an image stamped with the "Image has been validated" (or whatever the exact wording is) might make people go "wow, something cool must have happened here for this to get validated"? Maybe they look at it longer to figure out what it was. End result is you get higher votes with the validation "stamp" on it. Prior to being validated the "wow" factor wasn't there and people just gave it a ho-hum vote and kept on going.

Personally I'm not saying that it's a ho-hum image, I haven't looked at it. Just voicing an opinion on what can happen with the validation msg being applied.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

03/08/2006 07:56:53 PM · #7

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Interesting point. I didn't think of that. But I wonder if it would have scored higher still if I'd asked for validation before voting started, rather than suffer two days of low scores in the beginning.

03/08/2006 07:58:51 PM · #8

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

Originally posted by glad2badad:
Did you ever stop to think that maybe having an image stamped with the "Image has been validated" (or whatever the exact wording is) might make people go "wow, something cool must have happened here for this to get validated"? Maybe they look at it longer to figure out what it was. End result is you get higher votes with the validation "stamp" on it. Prior to being validated the "wow" factor wasn't there and people just gave it a ho-hum vote and kept on going.

Interesting point. I didn't think of that. But I wonder if it would have scored higher still if I'd asked for validation before voting started, rather than suffer two days of low scores in the beginning.

Personally, I don't think so. Nothing against your image (I did look since last post...it's a cool shot), but I really do believe that validation stamp makes a challenge entry "special" in the eyes of the voters. Maybe if the validation stamp had showed up the first day??? ;^)

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

03/08/2006 08:12:58 PM · #9

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Maybe if the validation stamp had showed up the first day??? ;^)

That's what I was trying to say.

Marjo

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

03/08/2006 08:16:09 PM · #10

Just my humble opinion and you probably won't like it...
I didn't vote on this challenge. If I did, I would have given you a 4. Whether or not it was validated doesn't matter to me. It looks like a poor job of cutting and pasting to me and/or very manipulated and over-processed. The fact that you got over 5 reinforces that I'm in the minority, though, so you can disregard my opinion. I do like the composition. :)

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

03/08/2006 08:32:34 PM · #11

Originally posted by Marjo:

No complaints - you're entitled to your opinion. I wasn't expecting to score over 5. I know that a lot of dpc members don't like this kind of processing.

Initially the halo was unintentional, but when I saw it, I just felt it fitted what the photo was trying to do, and chose to exaggerate it. That's why, if you look at my processing steps, you will see that I resized before doing any other editing.

hotpasta

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/08/2006 08:46:05 PM · #12

I gave this a 7. My entry for that challeneg started at 7's and went down to 4.8's for a day or so and finished at 5.5. In the square crop, my entry started at 6's and went down to 5.7's and has been around 6.2 for a couple of days. I think things really fluctuate after people see all the entries, they might go back and rescore. I know occasionally I do.

I gave it a 7, not because it conveyed comfort so much, but because I liked the style of the shot.

Hang in there, you are doing well.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

03/08/2006 09:17:19 PM · #13

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

Originally posted by glad2badad:
Maybe if the validation stamp had showed up the first day??? ;^)

That's what I was trying to say.

No, you're missing my point, and I'm probably not explaining it correctly.

You weren't scoring low in the beginning because people thought the image wasn't valid. You were getting an accurate reading.

When the validation msg went up then people became curious, looked, perhaps wondered about the validation reason - therefore spent more time and interest and voted it higher. The image became more "special" because of the validation msg.

This is all obviously speculation...

pawdrix

Nikon D700

03/08/2006 09:20:42 PM · #14

.

Message edited by author 2006-03-08 21:23:08.

03/08/2006 09:22:01 PM · #15

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Should we get all our photos validated before someone else ask for it then? :p

03/08/2006 09:23:16 PM · #16

Originally posted by crayon:

Thought has crossed my mind...certainly could use a little boost here recently. ;^)

03/08/2006 09:34:01 PM · #17

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by glad2badad:
Did you ever stop to think that maybe having an image stamped with the "Image has been validated" (or whatever the exact wording is) might make people go "wow, something cool must have happened here for this to get validated"?

Should we get all our photos validated before someone else ask for it then? :p

Thought has crossed my mind...certainly could use a little boost here recently. ;^)

The SC would murder us for the extra load, lol!

Cam

Sony DSC-F717

03/08/2006 09:42:41 PM · #18

I have had several photos valided. Some have gone up, some have gone down. I really think this is just a normal voting spike.

I dont believe the "this photo has been valided" has much if anything to do with voting habits.

Having said that, I have no idea why the pic in question has to be tattooed with that after validation.

Message edited by author 2006-03-08 21:43:39.

03/08/2006 09:53:54 PM · #19

Originally posted by Riggs:

I have no idea why the pic in question has to be tattooed with that after validation.

so that other people will not ask the same photo to be validated again?

Cam

Sony DSC-F717

03/08/2006 10:02:31 PM · #20

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by Riggs:
I have no idea why the pic in question has to be tattooed with that after validation.

so that other people will not ask the same photo to be validated again?

Yeah, for sure. But, there must be a little less obnoxious way to do it.

Like if you were to hit the box asking for validation, then it tells you its already been looked at. Or, something along those lines.

Message edited by author 2006-03-08 22:05:44.

03/08/2006 10:19:59 PM · #21

Originally posted by Riggs:

Yeah, for sure. But, there must be a little less obnoxious way to do it.

Like if you were to hit the box asking for validation, then it tells you its already been looked at. Or, something along those lines.

A very good idea! lets suggest it on the website suggestion forum?

Message edited by author 2006-03-08 22:20:42.

Cam

Sony DSC-F717

03/08/2006 10:26:56 PM · #22

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by Riggs:
Yeah, for sure. But, there must be a little less obnoxious way to do it.

Like if you were to hit the box asking for validation, then it tells you its already been looked at. Or, something along those lines.

A very good idea! lets suggest it on the website suggestion forum?

I dont even know if its possible. Or, worth the time to code. But you are more then welcome to suggest it. :)