DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Control challenge sizes
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 52, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 08/30/2006 07:51:13 PM · #26
*when I was running today, I swallowed a fly, I think it's brain is giving me these ideas (blame the fly... I don't think I have much of a brain)*

Monthly tokens... Each member would have 5 tokens :P Or whatever... and each month, challenges will be told, which weeks and what challenges... Now, with my token, I can enter any I want, but only 5 of them...

So, I only enter the ones I think i will do good...

My god, this is getting out of hand, ideas making me dizzy :P

*My last idea I promise I won't annoy you anymore :P*

Message edited by author 2006-08-30 19:52:49.
 08/30/2006 07:54:24 PM · #27
Bad FLY!
 08/30/2006 07:57:38 PM · #28
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Set a limit of 200 entries on the Open challenges. First come, first serve. Leave members un-capped.


In response to all those saying cap as. soon as it gets to 200 not just the one I am quoting.

So because I can only take pictures on the weekends I would get shut out almost every week. Yes that seems real fair. Let's start penalizing people on their schedule. How about only every other entry actually gets entered. Tune in at rollover to see if you got selected or was all your work for nothing.

Message edited by author 2006-08-30 20:06:21.
 08/30/2006 07:59:11 PM · #29
Originally posted by Beetle:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Let's split the challenges when they reach three entries -- then everybody can get a ribbon.

If I had said that, you would have told me off for it.

I know you will never agree with anything I have to say, and I didn't expect it this time, either.
But "three entries" is going overboard just a touch, don't you think?

Just carrying things to a logical extreme, yes. What's so magically fair about a cap of 200? Why not 300, or 100, or 80?

I just don't think there's a problem the way it is -- the largest challenge we've ever had has been (considerably) less than 1000 photos, so no one has ever been required to vote on more than 200 pictures to have a say in the outcome.

What we have now effectively does what you want, but scrambles and randomizes the photos among the voters so that you don't have to "best of ___" in the same week.
 08/30/2006 08:00:09 PM · #30
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Large challenges are not a problem for me. If you feel they are too large to vote on, then don't vote.


Agreed!

This topic comes up everytime there is huge entry number in a challenge. If everyone would stop whining about the size and dedicate that time to voting, or deciding to not vote at all there wouldn't be a problem.
 08/30/2006 08:06:18 PM · #31
Originally posted by ShutterPug:
If everyone would stop whining about the size ...

Please explain to me how, exactly, I was "whining"?
I thought I had offered and opinion and a suggestion in a perfectly reasonable way.

It appears that my feelings on this subject aren't shared by the majority of people so far, so you have no fear that anything will actually change.
 08/30/2006 08:12:45 PM · #32
*please allow me one more*

what if voting would be divided instead of entries. What if each person gets 200 photos to vote, randomly selected images no more than 200 shuffled would showed to a person. Now, this case I will miss other photos, that I wish I voted... but isn't that something to think about?

450 entries, I will only see 200, someone else will see 200 but not the same batch.

I know we already have an option of voting 20%, but... most ( I think ) vote to the same photos, and those photos get more votes than others.

*Damn fly*
 08/30/2006 08:17:46 PM · #33
Originally posted by focuspoint:

*Damn fly*

At least your fly IS buzzing and trying hard :-)
 08/30/2006 08:18:36 PM · #34
Originally posted by focuspoint:
I know we already have an option of voting 20%, but... most ( I think ) vote to the same photos, and those photos get more votes than others.

Actually, I think the typical range between most and least votes received by photos in any given challenge is pretty small -- enough so that the admins are satisfied that it's statistically insignificant.
 08/30/2006 08:21:24 PM · #35
(I think my fly just flew away)

*drooooollll... shifty eyes*

DDHUUUUUUU
 08/30/2006 08:22:04 PM · #36
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I just don't think there's a problem the way it is -- the largest challenge we've ever had has been (considerably) less than 1000 photos, so no one has ever been required to vote on more than 200 pictures to have a say in the outcome.


Absolutely agree. Yes, the big submission numbers are daunting, but then you gotta remember that you only have to vote on 20% of it.
 08/30/2006 08:25:48 PM · #37
08/30/2006 08:29:42 PM · #38
I agree with DrAchoo that the photos are already being grouped by the voters anyway.

However, to re-enforce that further would be going in the wrong direction, IMO. The best way to handle this in my opinion is to simply run challenges side by side where both will get lots of entries. In other words don't run a free study type of challenge side by side with a Stupid Stupid challenge. Instead run two challenges together where one isn't going to dominate the entries. We have enough challenges already in the record books to determine more or less how many entries a challenge will get.
08/30/2006 08:35:03 PM · #39
its the same thing as just making it through what you can now....if i'm not wrong...which i could be.

i don't see a difference...more over i think its not such a good idea...and i'm still on dial-up so there ya go.

_bran(don't like this suggestion)do_
 08/30/2006 08:41:14 PM · #40
Originally posted by Beetle:
... the voting is nowhere near as daunting, and we have a better chance of everybody voting on 100% of at least one of the groups.
...

No thanks. It's fine the way it is. For the most part they even out. Currently the Silhouette challenge was more appealing than Scene It, therefore the larger number in one, smaller in the other. Combined it's only 450 entries - or 90 votes to hit the 20% mark.

When I vote I always vote 100% on the challenge I'm voting on. That's my prerogative - not everyone votes 100%, so be it.

I don't think putting a limit on the number of entries per challenge is healthy for this site. Then you'll have to deal with the issue of "placeholding" - more headaches for the admins. Splitting at 200, and having two challenges with the same theme doesn't cut it either.

BTW, I agree with doctornick's sentiment. It's a dead horse - been beat up a few times already. ;^)
 08/30/2006 08:57:30 PM · #41
Originally posted by Beetle:
Originally posted by ShutterPug:
If everyone would stop whining about the size ...

Please explain to me how, exactly, I was "whining"?
I thought I had offered and opinion and a suggestion in a perfectly reasonable way.

It appears that my feelings on this subject aren't shared by the majority of people so far, so you have no fear that anything will actually change.


I did NOT single you out as whining - but clearly others here are in my opinion. But then that is JUST my opinion and no need to go getting defensive about it.

Continue your suggestions and opinions....I'm going to head off to voting now.

Message edited by author 2006-08-30 20:58:39.
 08/30/2006 09:05:56 PM · #42
Originally posted by Konador:
I'd be annoyed if I got 4th place with a 6.8 when the winner in the other challenge got 1st with a 6.79.


For those that follow baseball, it's like 1981, when the players went on strike, and Major League Baseball decided to split the season into two halves. The St. Louis Cardinals and Cincinnati Reds (actually the best record in all of baseball) each finished the season with the best OVERALL record in their divisions, but didn't make it to the playoffs because they finished second in both halves. How can you not have the two best teams make the playoffs?

//www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL_1981.shtml

I'm not a Cardinals or Reds fan, but 25 years later, it still bugs me. So yeah, I'd be bugged if I finished without a ribbon with a score higher than someone that got one in the same category. (not like it would actually happen to me)

Message edited by author 2006-08-30 21:29:13.
 08/30/2006 09:26:38 PM · #43
seems to me everyone is just saying what they "think" and no one should be offended or offend....forum posts "throw" lots of topics out there...be nice danggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg

and if i don't like "dialup" and trying to vote em all..move, right?lol....danggggggggggg sometimes living in BFE isn't easy...been voting and commenting since i got in from work at 4...4.5 hrs and completed 16 % of silhouette challenge...how can you shoot AND vote 20% AND work?family?

and yeah..things are pretty good the way they are..but I can see both sides...i'd stay at DPC regardless...but then i'm just pitiful ;-) lol..hugs all

Message edited by author 2006-08-30 21:33:27.
 08/30/2006 09:40:53 PM · #44
Originally posted by glad2badad:

BTW, I agree with doctornick's sentiment. It's a dead horse - been beat up a few times already. ;^)

I know the topic has come up plenty of times, which only goes to show that I'm not the only one who would like to see a change, and at least I DID try to come up with a solution.

It is worth revisiting subjects since there are always new members around who A) haven't heard about it, and B) might have a fresh - and perhaps perfect - idea.

Relax - obviously nothing will change.
08/30/2006 09:52:29 PM · #45
It will change... This is an evolution. it's an adjustment. Sometimes it takes time and sometimes it has to be done quicker to prevent more damage.

I have talked about this in a few other posts... If this is out here that much, change could be sooner than we thought. That means Langdon is pondering right now with his partners about this.

After all, they would like to draw more people here, not scare away people... or discourage them for some reason.

I am sure one of us will find the magic idea. Easy to implement, and very smart, very suitable for all.

... of course after that's over, we will start talking about something else, and start beating another dead horse over and over again... until we bury the horse for good.

:)
 08/31/2006 12:56:31 AM · #46
And if entries are limited, first come first served, will the name of the site change to DPRace to reflect the change?
 08/31/2006 01:11:10 AM · #47
Also, remember that when dpc went to a paid membership, drew and langdon promised that the dpc that was free would stay that way, with nothing "lost" to those that did not pay.

By limiting entries to "x" you are essentially going back on that, and that is something they simply will not do. I think the challenges will be available to everyone, regardless of when they enter.

If the current challenges continue to grow and we are seeing a huge number of entries in both of the open challenges, the next logical step to me is to add a third open challenge . . .
 08/31/2006 01:12:22 AM · #48
I haven't read all the responses but my first reaction is I hate the idea of limiting numbers - I really prefer big numbers in challenges. the more people who enter the challenge the more CHALLENGING the competition is. The ribbon winners in big challenges are always awesome, sometimes in small challenges they are slightly less so.
It's not a rule that you must vote on 100% of photos - i quite like only voting on 21% sometimes and then going through the results and finding which photos I've voted on and where they placed.

And I'm really looking forward to seeing all the great photos in the free challenge - should be amazing to see what everyone has come up with.
08/31/2006 03:25:32 AM · #49
I recommend that people don't try to do all their voting in one big go.

You vote on a different challenge every week, so why not vote on the same challenge over a number of days?

I see no difference really, and it then makes every challenge's voting more managable.

08/31/2006 03:57:11 AM · #50
I do not agree at all with closing a challenge just because it's reached a 'limiting number'. I would feel gutted having spent a while on taking/creating a picture (however good or bad), post processing it and then trying to enter it only to find I was too late!

If the number of photos is putting off voting why not change the voting system. If, say, more than 'n' photos were entered then change the % to 15% of photos, for example, requiring votes for yours to count.

Just an idea, that's all but please don't limit the number of entries.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/01/2026 05:22:28 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/01/2026 05:22:28 PM EDT.