Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Why should someone get any benefit from a DQ? If the image is going to be DQ'd there should be no score. What's the point of seeing how something would do if it's not part of the challenge?
ETA: Why should voters have to waste their time on an image that's not part of the challenge? The sooner it's removed the better then the least number of voters waste time. |
What if the image were DQ'ed, pulled and later found to be legal? |
Spaz Mo - The following quote/comment by Shannon addresses your question quite well IMO. It's on this page of the thread, just scroll down a little and you're sure to see it if you care to catch up on what's already been hashed out in here.
Originally posted by scalvert:
... I can think of only two decisions that were reversed on images that hadn't completed voting- both of which had been "accidentally" DQ'd just before rollover. As Alan noted, basically all DQs enforced during the challenge are clear decisions (added text, invalid dates, and obvious editing violations). I know we've let some split decisions continue until rollover specifically to get all the votes in, but the obvious DQ's do more harm than good by remaining for reasons already stated. ... |
|
I read it, and the quote doesn't really cover much. It just explains a little bit about DQ'ing and highlights the variable nature of the DQ process. I've also not seen anything documented about how to appeal a DQ, if such a thing is at all possible. I would think that to be especially important given the vagueness of the rules under which this particular fiasco.....err...challenge was conducted.
Is a unanimous decision for DQ required for immediate removal? Certainly, the obvious DQ's would garner such a vote and the less obvious cases would be less likely to do so. How many dissenting votes are required for the image to stay until rollover in case of a reversal? One? More than 1/3 of voting SC members? Or some arbitrary number determined by reading tea leaves?
The problem is that the process of how the SC arrives at a DQ decision is not documented, transparent, or uniform.
|
