| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/28/2006 10:22:18 AM · #51 |
The only one I can think of was Rikki and in that case it was I who released his name by posting a note to DPC that he asked me to post on his behalf after his suspension. I don't think SC ever intended to mention his name, only the recalculations.
Still we're a bright community and someone always seems to figure out who SC is talking about and inevitably names them in a thread somewhere.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 10:47:44 AM · #52 |
| While I understand that SC keeps names private, what about the challenge names? It affects us all if votes are scrubbed from a challenge we entered. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 10:54:02 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
While I understand that SC keeps names private, what about the challenge names? It affects us all if votes are scrubbed from a challenge we entered. |
It was a lot of challenges. I guess you could look at the challenges held during wpl2, and assume it is most, if not all, of them.
(Not avoiding answering your question, I don't know which specific challenges either.) |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 11:53:19 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
It affects us all if votes are scrubbed from a challenge we entered. |
131 votes were scrubbed across 34 challenges- an average of 4.5 votes per challenge. As noted earlier, the offenders were only voting their teammates up, NOT voting others down, so your score probably wasn't affected at all. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 11:58:29 AM · #55 |
will the people who cheated have their images DQ'd in the challenges they cheated in?
Just curious
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:05:07 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by mrorange002:
will the people who cheated have their images DQ'd in the challenges they cheated in? |
No, their handful of "inflated" votes were removed. They had no control over the rest of the votes. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:05:51 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
It affects us all if votes are scrubbed from a challenge we entered. |
131 votes were scrubbed across 34 challenges- an average of 4.5 votes per challenge. As noted earlier, the offenders were only voting their teammates up, NOT voting others down, so your score probably wasn't affected at all. |
True, but standings could have been affected if somebody scored slightly higher. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:10:39 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
True, but standings could have been affected if somebody scored slightly higher. |
The change was very minimal. No ribbons were affected. I think the biggest change was one person who went from 7th to 10th in a close finish. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:11:49 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Krikkit:
Please forgive me, but what is WPL?
Deb :-) |
An excuse to have a really annoying signature block. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:14:20 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Krikkit:
Please forgive me, but what is WPL?
Deb :-) |
An excuse to have a really annoying signature block. |
If you don't like signatures, just turn it off in your preferences
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:36:37 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Judi:
...Please peoples...please refrain from crossing the obvious line of voting. It is okay to show someone your entry with PRIOR permission....but make it quite clear beforehand that you will NOT vote on that entry. Even if you voted honestly...one can never be sure if your vote was a deliberate attempt to alter the course of the overall voting or not.
What is also UNACCEPTABLE is to show your images in a chat room to other members and state that these are for a challenge and not warn anyone prior to this behaviour. And certainly with no warning to avoiding your vote on such images. |
It could be argued that a person should follow their own advice. For example:
Originally posted by Judi:
(From the Stop the Gangs! thread:)
...So lay off the accusations and just have fun with this site. If you really and truly have any evidence of tampering..then submit it and stop making unnecessary waves. This site has seen enough of waves of late and we really don't need any unsubstantiated accusations starting to fly again. |
Edited for clarity
Message edited by author 2006-10-28 13:06:11.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:49:57 PM · #62 |
L2, I'm sorry, maybe I'm dense, but I don't see the connection in the two quotes.
explain further, please. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 12:56:20 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by karmat:
L2, I'm sorry, maybe I'm dense, but I don't see the connection in the two quotes. |
I was thinking the same thing. I read them about 5 times and still don't get it. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 01:11:39 PM · #64 |
I think what L2 is saying is that if Judi has any evidence of people showing images in chat rooms then submit it and stop making waves.
Not saying I agree or disagree, just saying that's the way I'm reading it.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 01:15:05 PM · #65 |
Perhaps it was just was me, but it sure sounded like an accusation that some people were, in fact, posting challenge images in a chat room without warning, that other people were viewing those images within the context of the chat room, and that if one were to subsequently vote on those particular images that the vote would be tainted.
If someone thought this was the case, then proper channels should be followed with regard to reporting it to SC.
If someone didn't think this was the case, why bring it up at all?
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 01:16:00 PM · #66 |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 01:31:18 PM · #67 |
| It's good to hear of this investigation, because it's very important that these challenges are played honestly. Great work Langdon. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 01:37:59 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by Alain:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Krikkit:
Please forgive me, but what is WPL?
Deb :-) |
An excuse to have a really annoying signature block. |
If you don't like signatures, just turn it off in your preferences |
Adblock them, I do it with all those annoying WPL screaming signature pictures.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:15:02 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by Alain:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Krikkit:
Please forgive me, but what is WPL?
Deb :-) |
An excuse to have a really annoying signature block. |
If you don't like signatures, just turn it off in your preferences |
The problem is that some of the signatures I want to see, such as the ones that have a simple link to a photographer's website. It's the obnoxious ones, such as yours, that I find annoying. I wish there was the equivalent to a spam filter for annoying signatures. |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:17:09 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Alain:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Krikkit:
Please forgive me, but what is WPL?
Deb :-) |
An excuse to have a really annoying signature block. |
If you don't like signatures, just turn it off in your preferences |
The problem is that some of the signatures I want to see, such as the ones that have a simple link to a photographer's website. It's the obnoxious ones, such as yours, that I find annoying. I wish there was the equivalent to a spam filter for annoying signatures. |
IF you detest the WPL and the team signatures so much then why did you join team 50/1.8 last season just to never participate at all during the entire season?? |
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:18:27 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The problem is that some of the signatures I want to see, such as the ones that have a simple link to a photographer's website. It's the obnoxious ones, such as yours, that I find annoying. I wish there was the equivalent to a spam filter for annoying signatures. |
as Azrifel mentioned, I guess you could just adblock them all. https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1865/
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:38:28 PM · #72 |
"Holy losing sight of the topic, Batman!"
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:49:10 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
"Holy losing sight of the topic, Batman!" |
No doubt, like losing this rule: Any attempts to alter the point totals in any way for any photograph will result in immediate loss of account and a ban from the site.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:54:55 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by dudephil:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
"Holy losing sight of the topic, Batman!" |
No doubt, like losing this rule: Any attempts to alter the point totals in any way for any photograph will result in immediate loss of account and a ban from the site. |
Really GOOD point here.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2006 04:54:58 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by dudephil:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
"Holy losing sight of the topic, Batman!" |
No doubt, like losing this rule: Any attempts to alter the point totals in any way for any photograph will result in immediate loss of account and a ban from the site. |
Dead horse, beaten, buried, exhumed, beaten again. I thought of that too, but since the same discussion already happened with Rikki's bannination, I figured this smaller scandal was unlikely to change anyone's mind on the subject.
|
|
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: 08/24/2025 03:40:26 PM EDT.
