| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/31/2003 12:33:16 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by PSUBecker:
Actually, it's more like, let me apologize in advance... I was pretty strict with voting this time... if it met the challenge and was a creative idea, it got a 6.. More originality and better photo quality raised the score from there... but I have to admit, if the picture is JUST a plant, or is an insect, ON a plant..... it didn't make it above a 5. The reason for this is... anyone can take a macro shot of something..... bug, flower, whatever..... its when the imagination and creativity kick in, thats when I am impressed. |
Like I said, thanks for my 10 in advance!! :D
|
|
|
|
07/31/2003 12:43:02 PM · #52 |
I hope the right person reads this post and open their eyes a little.
I had one person leave a comment on my garden entry that really bugged me out. They could not see how it relates to a garden. I believe that the commenter has to blind or can't read. How obvious does it have to be............jeeezzzz. There, I got that off my chest.
The very next commenter left a comment saying because there are flowers showing, it rates a 2. Go figure.
Message edited by author 2003-07-31 12:54:54.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2003 12:46:51 PM · #53 |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 12:58:48 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Alpine99:
The biggest problem with voting is being able to see your own score.. If you are very happy with your entry it is human nature to compare the pictures you're voting on to the score you have.. This can only drive scores down.. |
It is? I must not be human, then. Because what I'm getting for a score doesn't change how I see other pictures in the slightest. Mostly, it just makes me wonder what people are smoking. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 01:15:12 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by Alpine99:
I have proof.. sort of..
Just had a look through 20 or so photographers profiles at random.. In the vast majority of cases the average vote given is less than the average vote received.. I think this shows a trend to score less than you are being scored.. |
I don't think that's really proof. Or even the point. If someone's average vote given is, say, 4, and their average vote received is 3, then I might still think they were being influenced by the votes they were getting, because really, after n-hundred pictures, your average vote given should probably be about an average vote.
On a 1-10 scale that'd be 5.5, +/- a standard deviation. Or, you could look at average high/low votes on the site and come up with a figure that fit that. I'd guess here it's more likely to be something like 5 +/- the standard deviation. Call it... 4.5 to 5.5, which is a large deviation but given subjectiveness probably a reasonable one.
I would only look for possible vote taint outside of that range, regardless of the voter's received votes. Even then I might just assume they're cranky. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 01:22:55 PM · #56 |
it would drive people crazy, but not seeing your average score would be a good idea. i think it directly affects/colors how you vote. if you are doing poorly, like a 2, you'll tend to dish out more low scores vs if you were doing really well you'll likely be more generous.
for my first challenge, i based each score given on how i thought it compared to my own image. this time around, i didn't do that. i mean despite naysayers, my pic is a 10. haha. :oP
pictures with similar ideas tended to be judged against each other. macros with macros, gnomes with gnomes, etc. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 01:27:51 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by Jaxson:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
Originally posted by Jaxson:
Anyone know how this "anti-idiot-vote software" works? |
A special sensor on all computers alerts DPC software when idiots vote. Then it alters the score accordingly. I thought everybody knew this. |
LOL. when I mentioned anti-idiot-vote I actually meant when the same voter votes all votes the same, ie all 1's. I've read in a few other threads that this is why scores jump up at the end of the voting because these types of votes get eliminated. Wasn't too sure if it's true or not (whether it be by the administrators or software that checks a voters voting pattern).....actually I still don't know. Maybe I should open a new thread!!
Forgive me I am new on here but I didn't think asking about software than can simply eliminate a particular voting pattern was that far fetched. After all this is the year 2003. |
I don't know how it works exactly but it will remove the votes of people voting all 1's, all 2's, etc., and I suppose all 10's (heaven forbid :)). If someone votes 10 on only 1 or 2 and 1's on the rest, those votes will be removed. It's not going to catch the more sophisticated "trolls" though. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 03:34:48 PM · #58 |
For my suggestion on what I think should be done about showing scores, see this thread.
Basically your score is hidden until you've completed voting (with a minimum being 20% + 3 extra in case any are disqualified).
If you don't vote on all the entries (i.e., you voted on 20% + 3 and click "I'm done voting"), your displayed score has some "random fuzz" added to it (proportional to the number of unvoted pictures) that prevents you from knowing your "real" score. The more pictures you vote on, the less fuzz in your displayed score. If you vote on all of the pictures your score and "Update Stats" button works as it does today.
And for extra credit, they could code up something to include "vote timing" as well. So if you vote on 300 pictures in less than half an hour (for example) just so you can see your score, your score is "fuzzed" as well (in this case, I'd make it so they only saw the number before the decimal point. "Is my picture getting a high 5 or a low 5? Guess I should have voted slower!")
Message edited by author 2003-07-31 15:37:55. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 06:27:23 PM · #59 |
I see where you're coming from Eddy it just seems unnecessarily complicated to me.. I'd just have no visibility until you'd clicked the I'm done button...
As a point of interest how many people only vote on some of the entries?
|
|
|
|
07/31/2003 06:47:53 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by Alpine99:
I have proof.. sort of..
Just had a look through 20 or so photographers profiles at random.. In the vast majority of cases the average vote given is less than the average vote received.. I think this shows a trend to score less than you are being scored.. |
This doesn't really pass some thought.
After all - those average results are coming from some where - on balance the average voted out and average score in must be the same. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 07:40:40 PM · #61 |
as jon and I went on to agree the less good photographers vote higher and the better photographers vote lower.. hence the averaging out.,,
Edited to say.. your own average score 5.9 is above the statistical average but your average given score is 4.7 which is significantly below it..
Message edited by author 2003-07-31 19:44:16.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2003 07:54:52 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by Alpine99:
as jon and I went on to agree the less good photographers vote higher and the better photographers vote lower.. hence the averaging out.,,
Edited to say.. your own average score 5.9 is above the statistical average but your average given score is 4.7 which is significantly below it.. |
There are always exceptions, my average score is 6.0118 and my average score given is 6.4973. |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 07:56:07 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by Alpine99:
as jon and I went on to agree the less good photographers vote higher and the better photographers vote lower.. hence the averaging out.,,
Edited to say.. your own average score 5.9 is above the statistical average but your average given score is 4.7 which is significantly below it.. |
It depends what the actual statistical average vote is. After all, your given score is even lower than mine. I suspect the average score is actually closer to 4 than 5, even though from the range it would be 5.5
We have very few finalists above 8 and very few if any below 2 |
|
|
|
07/31/2003 07:59:28 PM · #64 |
Gordon, I know I'm a culprit too! What are your thoughts on hiding scores until voting is done?
|
|
|
|
07/31/2003 10:25:46 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Alpine99:
I have proof.. sort of..
Just had a look through 20 or so photographers profiles at random.. In the vast majority of cases the average vote given is less than the average vote received.. I think this shows a trend to score less than you are being scored.. |
This doesn't really pass some thought.
After all - those average results are coming from some where - on balance the average voted out and average score in must be the same. |
Being the curious sort, I tried this experiment myself. Of the 20 profiles I randomly selected that had both submitted photos and cast votes, about half voted higher and half voted lower then their average scores. About what I expected.
It's true that the average voted out and average score in must be the same, but more people generally vote on a challenge than submit photos to it. It took about 45 tries to find 20 profiles with votes both cast and received. So it is certainly possible for the average of votes cast by challenge entrants to be less than the average vote for the challenge.
I'm pretty new here, but I like it how it is. I don't usually have time to vote early, and I like watching how my entries are doing. |
|
|
|
08/01/2003 01:26:11 AM · #66 |
| When you talk about where your pic "starts"... how many votes is it based on? First vote? First hour? First day? |
|
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: 06/22/2025 06:21:56 PM EDT.
