| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/06/2007 02:53:40 PM · #126 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
OK... no problem. Under normal conditions you first mentor the photographer and offer suggestions for improvement of their images. They address those issues and do a good job with it. |
That's ok and good
Originally posted by stdavidson:
That is enough to justify a good score from me. |
That's is not good. That's like comparing past entries to current entries to justify a score. What does past entries have to do with current challenge entry?
Originally posted by stdavidson:
There are plenty of others that will vote an image lower for the most rediculous of reasons. |
That is a problem and needs addressing too.
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Developing photographers don't need that. |
No photographer needs that!
Originally posted by stdavidson:
They need positive reinforcement and I chose to use my vote toward that purpose and as long as that is legal I will continue to do so. |
Giving someone a false vote in no way reinforces them, well maybe for a moment till reality sits in.
Ok thats how I feel about your post. Steve you know I respect you and we have the right to disagree. So I would like to ask you a question.
Lets go with your theory. You take a friend under your wing as a mentor, he or she has no skills at all and you want to help. After a little mentoring they go out and take a photograph, what score do you give them?
A)Is it based on the challenge or
B)improvement upon the prior skills?
If this is your way of voting shouldn't you start them out at a 1 vote and increase as they improve (2,3,4,etc). Have you done that or do you give them a high score to start with just because they listened and applied even if it's not the best shot they could of pulled off?
I would say this type of voting is equal to the "Sanjaya syndrome" of American Idol. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 02:53:48 PM · #127 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Yes, I am as honest as I can possibly be. Yes, it is possible I might give a lower score in some cases if I did not know the photographer. Is that wrong? No, and it is NOT against the rules. |
"Is that wrong?" YES And yes it is against the rules. You'd see that if you [insult removed] used some common sense.
Originally posted by stdavidson:
It is valid to worry that if how I vote might somehow skew the final vote in meaningful ways. It doesn't. |
If your vote doesn't matter in the end then even why boost it? If someone were popular and had a lot of "friends" those votes most certainly will matter in the outcome. And that is what is not fair to the rest of us.
Originally posted by stdavidson:
The real issue, within the rules, is what is fair by an individual's assessment. Mine is as good (or bad) as yours. I believe mine is good from my perspective. Even if we disagree, I believe yours is 'good' as well. |
That's all fine and dandy, but we can't vote on our own images. Gee.. wonder why that is..
The rules (whether you choose to comprehend them or not) are there for a reason. That reason is to make voting fair for everyone. There's no point in this site if everyone is just going to find a clique of friends and jack up the scores (whatever their intent, good or bad). I wish people like you would stop screwing up a great thing.
Stop being a [expletive removed]. There.. I've said it..
Message edited by frisca - no personal attacks please!. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 02:56:51 PM · #128 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
That rule is meaningless since it does NOT define what "biased" means. EVERY vote is biased in some way. People vote low bcause they do not like pet, or floral or kid or overprocessed images. Tell me the ways my vote is biased outside the rules in unacceptable ways and I will agree. |
Voting low for a pet, floral, kid or overprocessed image is bias for/against the IMAGE. The rule prohibits voting in a biased manner for/against a USER. Surely you can determine the difference between a picture and a person? |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 02:57:44 PM · #129 |
I'm a "Friend Voter"... I vote my friends a 10 every time...
before you kill me... i have no friends!!!, lol so i vote honestly.
But...
I am a Biased Voter, i vote down Over Processed images,(im a fan of picutres, not digital art), and i vote up appealing images... i dont mean to, but if a image makes me feel happy inside i am more likly to vote it a 8 than if it makes me go WTF...
thats my $0,02 worth...
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:02:36 PM · #130 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
The problem here is what is a "biased" vote.
That rule is meaningless since it does NOT define what "biased" means. EVERY vote is biased in some way. People vote low bcause they do not like pet, or floral or kid or overprocessed images. Tell me the ways my vote is biased outside the rules in unacceptable ways and I will agree.
But that will have to be defined within SC rules before I will agree. Currently, it is not! |
No, the problem here still remains that you refuse to open your eyes.
The rule does not say, "You may not offer or cast biased votes." it goes on to say "... for another USER."
Biased votes for subject are one thing.. biased votes based on who the photographer is.. the USER.. is another thing entirely. This rule is CLEAR. It cannot be made any clearer. Aye carumba. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:04:18 PM · #131 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
You said:
Originally posted by pccjrose:
No - I think the rule set (see bolded) says it pretty clearly.
offer or cast biased votes for any other user. |
The problem here is what is a "biased" vote. |
If you're voting a friend higher to encourage him or her, you should already know that's a biased vote for the user. No further definition is necessary. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:06:55 PM · #132 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
If you would just define the rule and tell us, please, what "friend voting" is then the site would be better for it. |
It's been pointed out to you MANY times: You may not: offer or cast biased votes for any other user.
Vote on the picture, not the person. |
This means NOTHING. Tell me what it means and I might even agree.
The rule you quote is meaningless and undefined. Clarify it! Maybe then I, and everyone at DPC, will understand it better.
That rule implies that what "biased" means is already clearly understood. It isn't, at least in this case by me and I suspect most everyone else. I think it is NOT defined within the rules. Please clarify this for me and for everyone else.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:08:57 PM · #133 |
| i think the rule is pretty clear :S , i mean i don't get the part that needs clarifying. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:09:04 PM · #134 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
If you would just define the rule and tell us, please, what "friend voting" is then the site would be better for it. |
It's been pointed out to you MANY times: You may not: offer or cast biased votes for any other user.
Vote on the picture, not the person. |
This means NOTHING. Tell me what it means and I might even agree. |
Did you read my post? It's even been quoted back to you. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:09:15 PM · #135 |
| Oh good lord the drama. Just give an image the score it deserves. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:09:27 PM · #136 |
I HAVE JUST ONE THING TO SAY:
STOP BEING SO RUDE!!!
you don't need to cuss, name-call, or do anything else to get your point across.
you might feel like pulling your hair out that steve isn't getting your point, but that's no reason to be rude.
absolutely. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:10:16 PM · #137 |
Does the SC have to define each and every word it uses!?? Go find Webster's or the Oxford Unabridged and start reading. Biased in this context is a verb - start there...
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
If you would just define the rule and tell us, please, what "friend voting" is then the site would be better for it. |
It's been pointed out to you MANY times: You may not: offer or cast biased votes for any other user.
Vote on the picture, not the person. |
This means NOTHING. Tell me what it means and I might even agree.
The rule you quote is meaningless and undefined. Clarify it! Maybe then I, and everyone at DPC, will understand it better.
That rule implies that what "biased" means is already clearly understood. It isn't, at least in this case by me and I suspect most everyone else. I think it is NOT defined within the rules. Please clarify this for me and for everyone else. |
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:10:52 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by Davenit:
Oh good lord the drama. Just give an image the score it deserves. |
I agree.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:11:00 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
If you would just define the rule and tell us, please, what "friend voting" is then the site would be better for it. |
It's been pointed out to you MANY times: You may not: offer or cast biased votes for any other user.
Vote on the picture, not the person. |
This means NOTHING. Tell me what it means and I might even agree.
The rule you quote is meaningless and undefined. Clarify it! Maybe then I, and everyone at DPC, will understand it better.
That rule implies that what "biased" means is already clearly understood. It isn't, at least in this case by me and I suspect most everyone else. I think it is NOT defined within the rules. Please clarify this for me and for everyone else. |
What?! lol.
Most everyone else seem to be responding to you in this thread with clear ideas of what "biased toward a user" means.
You're clinging. You're projecting your own inability to see clearly onto this magical "everyone else". Wow.
Just wow. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:11:47 PM · #140 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by Davenit:
Oh good lord the drama. Just give an image the score it deserves. |
I agree. |
but you're saying that it deserves a higher score just because you're friends with the photographer ... in my mind, that is just plain wrong ... |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:13:40 PM · #141 |
I am a very big fan of joey lawrence, silverfoxx, librodo and ursula but they are not really my friends and I can identify their works and I give them 10 almost all the time because I want to see their photos get ribbons, SO does that make me a friend voter?
And what is the difference of that to people giving whiterook a 10 to spoil his quest for a brown ribbon?
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:14:01 PM · #142 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
This means NOTHING. Tell me what it means and I might even agree.
The rule you quote is meaningless and undefined. Clarify it! Maybe then I, and everyone at DPC, will understand it better.
That rule implies that what "biased" means is already clearly understood. It isn't, at least in this case by me and I suspect most everyone else. I think it is NOT defined within the rules. Please clarify this for me and for everyone else. |
Steve - bias is a dictionary word. The word listed under "Bias; transitive verb" is the same definition that is used here. The one used in common language.
1 : to give a settled and often prejudiced outlook to
The rule is very plain. You can not give biased votes to other users. You are biasing your vote on who the user is. Not on the merit of the photo itself.
If "defined in the dictionary" isn't "clearly understood" then there's a larger issue here that doesn't reside with the SC. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:14:34 PM · #143 |
Originally posted by pccjrose:
Does the SC have to define each and every word it uses!?? Go find Webster's or the Oxford Unabridged and start reading. Biased in this context is a verb - start there... |
In this case I have to respectfully disagree. If rules violations are to be sanctioned as they ALREADY have been then they MUST be clearly defined! As it is "friend voting" is not.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:15:56 PM · #144 |
Steve, if there were only 2 photo, mine and your friend's, can you honestly tell me that you would give me a fair vote? Voted on the technical aspects of my photo against your friends. Are you honestly saying that no matter how good my photo is, your friend gets the higher vote just because he/she is your friend? Because, that is exactly how you are coming across.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:16:42 PM · #145 |
i personally think some one is trying to be difficult... i used to do the same type thing with my sister over dishes... i used to get her so frustrated by asking the same question after she answered it, that she would do what i wanted...(and yes, i was a bratty little brother)
in my opinion, stdavidson, you are just looking for a fight, looking to get some tempers flared.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:16:58 PM · #146 |
Originally posted by Simms:
SC, to remain consistant, should ban Stdavidson.
Friend voting is 1 tiny step above troll. |
Thanks for your support! :)
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:17:05 PM · #147 |
Seems no matter how many times or how many people explain that the described method of voting is wrong and attempt to define the rule, the OP refuses to accept it and continues to argue that the word 'biased' is not clear (despite a dictionary definition being posted). How long is this thread going to go on before it is locked? IMO the OP is acting like a little child in this blatant refusal to accept what has been offered repeatedly and seems to be readily accepted and clearly understood by the majority of others on the site (as the sample who posted in this thread have demonstrated).
This bend on one particular word is clear evidence that there is no argument behind the OP's statements other than a selfish attempt to get something 'his' way and have that way approved of.
Why can't this thread just be locked (it is going nowhere) and the SC do what they do to investigate this alleged rules violation and if there is merit, take appropriate action and if not leave it alone. The rules are clear and any individual who wants to be belligerent in their acceptance of them does not deserve this much forum space. No matter how much they may or may not be respected as a member of this site - or were before this thread.
Message edited by author 2007-06-06 15:47:07. |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:17:06 PM · #148 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by Davenit:
Oh good lord the drama. Just give an image the score it deserves. |
I agree. |
No you don't agree, you have said repeatedly, your friend gets a higher score because you know them. SO the image doesn't get the score it deserves.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:17:13 PM · #149 |
Originally posted by keans_d:
I am a very big fan of joey lawrence, silverfoxx, librodo and ursula but they are not really my friends and I can identify their works and I give them 10 almost all the time because I want to see their photos get ribbons, SO does that make me a friend voter? |
Yes, it is. Regardless of whether you are "friends" with them, you know who they are and intentionally vote them higher.
Originally posted by keans_d:
And what is the difference of that to people giving whiterook a 10 to spoil his quest for a brown ribbon? |
Very little difference, but it's of little consequence because that one ten doesn't counteract the 48 ones, so nobody cares. It's one case where there's truly no influence. (Some people do this to ALL photos that appear to be intentionally going for brown, so it's not especially a bias towards the user. It's purely based on the photo itself.) |
|
|
|
06/06/2007 03:21:22 PM · #150 |
Bold added for clarity of ensuing point...
Originally posted by stdavidson:
The rule you quote is meaningless and undefined. Clarify it! Maybe then I, and everyone at DPC, will understand it better.
That rule implies that what "biased" means is already clearly understood. It isn't, at least in this case by me and I suspect most everyone else. I think it is NOT defined within the rules. Please clarify this for me and for everyone else. |
Personally, I don't need it clarified and I feel I understand it well enough, thank you.
So, given that, you can cross-out your all encompassing use of everyone.
|
|
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: 08/01/2025 12:27:57 PM EDT.
