| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/18/2007 02:53:14 PM · #26 |
Face it. There are average people in the world. There is an average height, an average weight, an average shoe size, an average IQ. People fall above and below the line, but people also fall at the average. Nothing wrong with it.
If I stopped using a score of 5 for average quality images I would have to use a 4 instead. I'm pretty sure many people really would rather have the 5. Besides, I'd have to drop fours to threes and threes to twos and twos to ones so what would I do with the ones? Hmm... give them tens?!
A five tells you your shot is average. If you don't want to hear that someone thinks your shot is average, stop shooting things people vote as average. ;) Oh, and good luck with that one. From experience I can tell you that, no matter what, you will be average to someone. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 03:30:20 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
Originally posted by ursula:
The problem with commenting is that it is a lot safer to simply mention something you do like about the image, because, unless you're all glowy about your comments, quite a few people get offended, and claim that you don't get it, or whatever.
There's that old, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." Now, I guess it could be debated, what's "nice"? Is it "nice" to just pat your friends on the back? Sometimes it is. Is it "nice" to mention things you think might help the photographer, even if those things are not pats on the back? Yes, it is, but many people don't take it that way. Oh well.
|
Feel free to send all comments my way even the negative ones.
My only pet peeve is the "Snapshot" comment without any other detail. :) |
Another difficulty is that during a challenge you don't know whose image you're commenting on (or, at least, you're not supposed to know for the most part). I think that holds a lot of people back from commenting.
I really wish there was a way to increase and improve commenting during the voting stages of a challenge.
What "snapshot" comment?
Message edited by author 2007-01-18 15:32:36. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 03:35:32 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Nuzzer:
I agree with your comments here except that a scale of 5-6 would be more appropriate as the "average" vote is a 5.5 |
We could fix that by just adding 0 to the scale. Has the added benefit of giving the DNMC votes a more appropriate place to land rather than 1. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 03:39:51 PM · #29 |
This thread made me think about voting statistics in a way that I had not done before, at least directly. We have a challenge history, so it's easy to see what the average vote given for each challenge is. It's also then easy to take the average of those averages. The resulting gobal average for the average vote given is 5.33, which is close to midway between 5.0 and 5.5. That's expected; the true midpoint of the voting scale is 5.5, but folks often equate 5.0 with "average." My own voting average is 5.24, so apparently I'm a little conflicted myself, LOL.
By looking at how many images received very high or very low scores, I estimated the standard deviation of the "global vote" to be right around 1.0. Using this mean and standard devaition, and the knowledge that the distrubution of votes tends to be very gaussian or "normally distributed" I can calculate how many percent of votes should be in each "bucket" for a hypothetical "average voter." The results are as follows:
1: 0.006%
2: 0.23%
3: 3.13%
4: 16.97%
5: 36.42%
6: 31.15%
7: 10.60%
8: 1.42%
9: 0.08%
10: 0.002%
Notice that well over a third of all votes cast are expected to be fives! Only two out of a thousand votes are expected to be tens, and only six out of a thousand are anticipated to be ones. In reality, there are a few more ones and tens than that, since a few voters "vote the ends of the scale."
Message edited by author 2007-01-18 15:43:01. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 04:32:16 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
Originally posted by mist:
I'm sorry. I didn't realise that we were not allowed to vote 5s on photos. I shall go back and change them all to 1s. |
Not sure if you are joking...
I never meant to say you or anyone else can't vote 5. Another way to look at it, at the end of the challenge 70% of your votes are 5 (not specifically naming you). So you are telling those images are still equal in your eyes? I am just suggesting people might want to rethink their voting patterns for a second. |
I was joking. Though really I would expect to give out quite a few fives during a voting run because, yes, actually, I think a lot of photos are sometimes part of the "average". Motion panning II was a good example in my view, I found a lot of photos were about "the same", with just a few really good or poor ones. So natually I'm going to be giving out a lot of what I would think is an "average" vote. no? |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:29:18 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
This thread made me think about voting statistics in a way that I had not done before, at least directly. We have a challenge history, so it's easy to see what the average vote given for each challenge is. It's also then easy to take the average of those averages. The resulting gobal average for the average vote given is 5.33, which is close to midway between 5.0 and 5.5. That's expected; the true midpoint of the voting scale is 5.5, but folks often equate 5.0 with "average." My own voting average is 5.24, so apparently I'm a little conflicted myself, LOL.
By looking at how many images received very high or very low scores, I estimated the standard deviation of the "global vote" to be right around 1.0. Using this mean and standard devaition, and the knowledge that the distrubution of votes tends to be very gaussian or "normally distributed" I can calculate how many percent of votes should be in each "bucket" for a hypothetical "average voter." The results are as follows:
1: 0.006%
2: 0.23%
3: 3.13%
4: 16.97%
5: 36.42%
6: 31.15%
7: 10.60%
8: 1.42%
9: 0.08%
10: 0.002%
Notice that well over a third of all votes cast are expected to be fives! Only two out of a thousand votes are expected to be tens, and only six out of a thousand are anticipated to be ones. In reality, there are a few more ones and tens than that, since a few voters "vote the ends of the scale." |
Could a formula such as this be used to possibly corral the mythical troll? In other words, could calculations similar to yours be used to determine abnormal and possibly disruptive voting patterns? |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:31:19 PM · #32 |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:39:17 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
 |
What'd you beating that poor ol' horse for again? Give the poor creature a break. :)))) |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:44:38 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Chinabun:
If you guys (Site Council) monitor 1 votes, do you monitor 10 votes? |
They monitor all votes. I tried to slip an 11 by one time and they caught it right away.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:47:02 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Shakalaka:
Shukalaku sounds too much like an Anime character :-( |
I keep want to insert boom in front of it. ;)
|
|
|
|
01/18/2007 06:19:30 PM · #36 |
Just a thought of a new kid here in DPC.
My problem with voting..and commenting on votes is: It's so much time consuming to do it honest and right. With 100 to 700 entry's for a challenge and 4 challenges to vote on...some automated 5'es are slipping very easy in. My first opinion in a small month of use of this site is that the comments gained are understandable not very elaborated and explaining. It's just not possible for most people in the time which they can spend. After a 100 votes are in the statistical average is set, each extra vote is adding just a little more accuracy. At the end of the challenge that would not make that big of a difference.
Why not vote with less people on a challenge, an invitation to vote. So each challenge gets their own automated subset of voters (a random selection from the DPC community). This will bug trolls (if they exist, which i doubt)... this will get ride of family/friend out of the blue 10s...but actually i think voters will spend more time to do a fully conscious way with more comments throughout the full voting scale.
Maybe this is already discussed in length here, i don't know..but give your respond to this..i would like to know.
PS: I think after challenge results are in we could all profit from the comments and quality votes made when viewing trough the photos. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 06:32:46 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
I tried to slip an 11 by one time and they caught it right away. |
ROFL! That was you? ;-) |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 06:45:54 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Could a formula such as this be used to possibly corral the mythical troll? In other words, could calculations similar to yours be used to determine abnormal and possibly disruptive voting patterns? |
Similar calculations have potential applications in that area, and Langdon and I have discussed it. It's not as easy when individual images or individual voters are involved, since it changes some of the assumptions, but it has potential to raise the level of sophistication of the tools we can apply in looking for truly disruptive voting. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 06:51:37 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by ursula:
Could a formula such as this be used to possibly corral the mythical troll? In other words, could calculations similar to yours be used to determine abnormal and possibly disruptive voting patterns? |
Similar calculations have potential applications in that area, and Langdon and I have discussed it. It's not as easy when individual images or individual voters are involved, since it changes some of the assumptions, but it has potential to raise the level of sophistication of the tools we can apply in looking for truly disruptive voting. |
Wow, all of a sudden I feel like I'm in a meeting or something. You sound like a state employee when you speak like that. Interesting. :) |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 07:01:27 PM · #40 |
They caught you because you did it wrong. To give someone an eleven you need to first give them a 10 and then go back and give them a 1 :)
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by Chinabun:
If you guys (Site Council) monitor 1 votes, do you monitor 10 votes? |
They monitor all votes. I tried to slip an 11 by one time and they caught it right away. |
|
|
|
|
01/18/2007 11:35:20 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by fir3bird:
I tried to slip an 11 by one time and they caught it right away. |
ROFL! That was you? ;-) |
Yeah, it was for your flying carpet too!!!
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 09:35:49 AM · #42 |
By Jove.....I've finally got it!!!!!!
Are you ready?
It's a revelation!
Here at DPC......
No matter what you vote....
No matter how you vote.....
Somebody....somewhere.....will whine!
Jayson, I gotta tell ya....
After all the whining about trolls, myself included as one of those that didn't realize at first that even they average out, and the griping about the quality, quantity, or the lack thereof, of comments, even an argumentative and pedantic guy such as myself has a hard time figuring out where you're coming from with the moaning about a 5 vote.
After all, looking back through your challenge history, your scoring isn't much different than mine......and I'm happy with anything above 5.0.......as long as I'm improving steadily over time, the actual number isn't important, just my improvement.
That 5 vote on a quick vote roll though just means that the entry on a glance is decent and technically correct.....it didn't grab the viewer as either really good or really bad.
A lot of voters rip through to get their 20%, and then go back for a closer look as time allows.
Once you screen up the page(s) of the ones you voted upon, then the ones that pop more can be bumped up. The ones that were maybe gifted by a 5 on a passthrough, upon closer examination, go lower.
The point is, if you get a 5, you're doing fine, your entry just didn't excite anyone, good or badly.
But no way is a 5 a bad vote.
Except maybe for  Larus, Joey Lawrence, or someone of that ilk......8>)
Gawd, I love these whiny threads!
Message edited by author 2007-01-19 09:37:19.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 10:52:31 AM · #43 |
weird, but my voting bar doesn't allow me to click on the "5".
each time i try to click, a message pops-up asking me to vote as if i either love it or hate it. As Master Yoda said, "do 4 or do 6, there is no 5" |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 12:11:54 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
By Jove.....I've finally got it!!!!!!
Somebody....somewhere.....will whine!
Jayson, I gotta tell ya....
After all the whining about trolls, myself included as one of those that didn't realize at first that even they average out, and the griping about the quality, quantity, or the lack thereof, of comments, even an argumentative and pedantic guy such as myself has a hard time figuring out where you're coming from with the moaning about a 5 vote.
After all, looking back through your challenge history, your scoring isn't much different than mine......and I'm happy with anything above 5.0.......as long as I'm improving steadily over time, the actual number isn't important, just my improvement.
That 5 vote on a quick vote roll though just means that the entry on a glance is decent and technically correct.....it didn't grab the viewer as either really good or really bad.
A lot of voters rip through to get their 20%, and then go back for a closer look as time allows.
Once you screen up the page(s) of the ones you voted upon, then the ones that pop more can be bumped up. The ones that were maybe gifted by a 5 on a passthrough, upon closer examination, go lower.
The point is, if you get a 5, you're doing fine, your entry just didn't excite anyone, good or badly.
But no way is a 5 a bad vote.
Except maybe for Larus, Joey Lawrence, or someone of that ilk......8>)
Gawd, I love these whiny threads! |
Sometimes I wish I never created the thread. :) I think you are agreeing with me on the same points! My intention was really never to say you can't vote 5. My point was more that I believe that "5" has ended being nothing more than the "Next" key. Maybe it is voter fatigue, but I am guilty of just hitting 5 over and over. I was just proposing what I am doing to change my behavior. By not starting with a set notion of "5" I am actually engaging myself by looking at the photo more. Really, this wasn't meant more than to be a discussion of how to improve voting. Not neccessarily saying that 5 should be abolished. I know, I don't get my point across very well. It is definetly not meant to be a topic saying that people should or not not be average. I would expect things to follow a normal distribution curve and there is nothing wrong with being average.
Of course the title topic is meant to be catchy to have people actually read the message.
Now if someone could delete that 2.7149 score of mine that was a DNMC that would be great. :) Honestly, even that score doesn't bother me.
Cheers all. No I just wish there was a way to lock topics.
Message edited by author 2007-01-19 12:16:12. |
|
|
|
01/21/2007 03:52:54 PM · #45 |
| i like this idea, im modifying it a little to fit my needs, but i like it |
|
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: 10/15/2025 10:19:24 AM EDT.
