| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/27/2008 01:11:50 PM · #26 |
I think if a person were to dig hard enough you'd find that the majority of the so-called "trolls" pay to be here. Yes I'm saying it, I think most of the troll votes come from the members. Just my opinion on the subject.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:14:27 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
I think if a person were to dig hard enough you'd find that the majority of the so-called "trolls" pay to be here. Yes I'm saying it, I think most of the troll votes come from the members. Just my opinion on the subject. |
Very possible. The more experienced members are likely to have a more critical eye, though they are also more likely to appreciate what went into getting a shot. The only way you know is if that person leaves a comment. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:27:30 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
... people do deserve to be told the truth. But, there is really no way to tell who really WANTS the truth. |
I've suggested before that we have some feedback preferences, similar to these used at a writing site where volunteers edit each other's work.
The phoptographer's preferred feedback style could be displayed on the voting page without compromising anonymity. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:30:46 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
i think that instead of doing away with the 'suggestion pop-up' that a vote of 1-3 should get a comment, it should have been made a requirement for voting 1-3. if someone feels strongly enough to vote a '1' on something, they shouldn't have a problem with making a comment. if the comment is 'this photo sucks', then that post can be reported and that vote deleted. |
Though I understand your point, forcing people to comment is not the answer. Anyway, 4 would become the new 1, hence skewing the voting entirely which is not a good thing IMO.
Inspired comments are always better than forced ones. Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
an uninspired photo is not necessarily a bad photo. i would have thought that the 4-5 range scores were for uninspiring but technically ok photo. scoring someone a 1 is pretty harsh and, imo, must provoke a very strong feeling of dissatisfaction OR just a troll trying to skew the results. |
From your previous statement you don't want to hear the dissatisfaction ('this photo sucks'). Sure, it's not put very nicely, but it does provide the sentiment of the viewer. |
it's also not constructive and just gives a 'troll' an easy way to continue voting '1s'. if someone feels that strongly, surely they can come up with something better to express why they don't like it. |
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
What about 'nice shot'?
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 13:31:37. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:35:35 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
i think that instead of doing away with the 'suggestion pop-up' that a vote of 1-3 should get a comment, it should have been made a requirement for voting 1-3. if someone feels strongly enough to vote a '1' on something, they shouldn't have a problem with making a comment. if the comment is 'this photo sucks', then that post can be reported and that vote deleted. |
Though I understand your point, forcing people to comment is not the answer. Anyway, 4 would become the new 1, hence skewing the voting entirely which is not a good thing IMO.
Inspired comments are always better than forced ones. Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
an uninspired photo is not necessarily a bad photo. i would have thought that the 4-5 range scores were for uninspiring but technically ok photo. scoring someone a 1 is pretty harsh and, imo, must provoke a very strong feeling of dissatisfaction OR just a troll trying to skew the results. |
From your previous statement you don't want to hear the dissatisfaction ('this photo sucks'). Sure, it's not put very nicely, but it does provide the sentiment of the viewer. |
it's also not constructive and just gives a 'troll' an easy way to continue voting '1s'. if someone feels that strongly, surely they can come up with something better to express why they don't like it. |
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
What about 'nice shot'? |
the idea is to cut down on 'troll votes' . generally people who just want to skew results and cause trouble aren't going to go through and give higher votes with the comment 'nice shot'. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:39:29 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
i think that instead of doing away with the 'suggestion pop-up' that a vote of 1-3 should get a comment, it should have been made a requirement for voting 1-3. if someone feels strongly enough to vote a '1' on something, they shouldn't have a problem with making a comment. if the comment is 'this photo sucks', then that post can be reported and that vote deleted. |
Though I understand your point, forcing people to comment is not the answer. Anyway, 4 would become the new 1, hence skewing the voting entirely which is not a good thing IMO.
Inspired comments are always better than forced ones. Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
an uninspired photo is not necessarily a bad photo. i would have thought that the 4-5 range scores were for uninspiring but technically ok photo. scoring someone a 1 is pretty harsh and, imo, must provoke a very strong feeling of dissatisfaction OR just a troll trying to skew the results. |
From your previous statement you don't want to hear the dissatisfaction ('this photo sucks'). Sure, it's not put very nicely, but it does provide the sentiment of the viewer. |
it's also not constructive and just gives a 'troll' an easy way to continue voting '1s'. if someone feels that strongly, surely they can come up with something better to express why they don't like it. |
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
What about 'nice shot'? |
the idea is to cut down on 'troll votes' . generally people who just want to skew results and cause trouble aren't going to go through and give higher votes with the comment 'nice shot'. |
The point is the same, these comments are not constructive either. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:45:12 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
... people do deserve to be told the truth. But, there is really no way to tell who really WANTS the truth. |
I've suggested before that we have some feedback preferences, similar to these used at a writing site where volunteers edit each other's work.
The phoptographer's preferred feedback style could be displayed on the voting page without compromising anonymity. |
Would certainly work for me. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:48:19 PM · #33 |
I think that all of us need to remember that just because WE think our picture is fantastic and should be scoring 7 or more doesn't mean that other people are going to think that - just because someone gives you a low score doesn't mean you have been "trolled".
Everyone (even DPCers who enter challenges a lot and who have numerous ribbons decorating the side of their profile page) has different tastes and will think different pictures deserve different votes.
Many times, after the challenge is over and I look through the results the pictures I voted 9's and 10's aren't even in the Top 10 or sometimes even the Top 50.
The voting all evens out in the end - it is hard to stop being upset about getting low votes on a picture you think is great but that is just one of the facts of life here at DPC. If you like it, that's what is the most important. If you really want to get high scores and win lots of ribbons you need to take pictures that will appeal to a broad range of people. There is too broad a range of members here at DPC for the more avant garde type of pictures to score well on a regular basis.
That's my opinion, anyway! |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:48:37 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
... people do deserve to be told the truth. But, there is really no way to tell who really WANTS the truth. |
I've suggested before that we have some feedback preferences, similar to these used at a writing site where volunteers edit each other's work.
The phoptographer's preferred feedback style could be displayed on the voting page without compromising anonymity. |
Would certainly work for me. |
This would work for me. Be careful what you you wish for though. Don't ask for criticism etc then shoot down the commenter in the forums because you don't like what was said. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:48:54 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
i think that instead of doing away with the 'suggestion pop-up' that a vote of 1-3 should get a comment, it should have been made a requirement for voting 1-3. if someone feels strongly enough to vote a '1' on something, they shouldn't have a problem with making a comment. if the comment is 'this photo sucks', then that post can be reported and that vote deleted. |
Though I understand your point, forcing people to comment is not the answer. Anyway, 4 would become the new 1, hence skewing the voting entirely which is not a good thing IMO.
Inspired comments are always better than forced ones. Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
an uninspired photo is not necessarily a bad photo. i would have thought that the 4-5 range scores were for uninspiring but technically ok photo. scoring someone a 1 is pretty harsh and, imo, must provoke a very strong feeling of dissatisfaction OR just a troll trying to skew the results. |
From your previous statement you don't want to hear the dissatisfaction ('this photo sucks'). Sure, it's not put very nicely, but it does provide the sentiment of the viewer. |
it's also not constructive and just gives a 'troll' an easy way to continue voting '1s'. if someone feels that strongly, surely they can come up with something better to express why they don't like it. |
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
What about 'nice shot'? |
the idea is to cut down on 'troll votes' . generally people who just want to skew results and cause trouble aren't going to go through and give higher votes with the comment 'nice shot'. |
The point is the same, these comments are not constructive either. |
i understand and i'm not disputing that. i was only making a suggestion as to how to combat the 'troll voting' problem which is what the subject is. a troll is not going to take the time to give a reasonable explanation for voting a '1 or 2'. if they are, then they aren't a 'troll'. the non-troll voting a 7 and commenting 'nice shot' is not really a problem. maybe it's not that big of a problem. i had 12 votes with an average of 3.75 disappear during rollover in a challenge, so whatever they are doing is working somewhat. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:56:44 PM · #36 |
I don't think someone who is really a "troll" is usually bothering to participate in, or even read these forums.
I would just like a better understanding of why someone gives my shot the score they do, especially when it is out of line with what most others have been giving it.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 13:58:05. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 02:06:08 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
This would work for me. Be careful what you you wish for though. Don't ask for criticism etc then shoot down the commenter in the forums because you don't like what was said. |
I don't. I routinely mark negatively critical comments as "helpful" -- especially when they say specifically what they didn't like. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 02:07:25 PM · #38 |
First of all, we need a common definition of "Troll".
Is it someone who votes 1's and 2's? Just 1's? How about someone who votes mostly 5's and 6's and votes 1's and 2's on about 25% of their votes on a challenge? Is it someone who votes 1's and 2's, but then fails to vote on 20% of the images (in which case these votes are deleted). In that case, is a troll hurting someone?
My average vote cast is 5.2506. I do not vote in challenges in which I am entered. I will vote a 1 if a photo is totally against anything I believe in (content-wise), whether it is technically perfect or not. That's the subjectivity of DPC voting.
I know folks who will skip any image in which they wouldn't vote 6 or higher because they don't want their "Avg Vote Cast" metric to be low. Maybe it's time that DPC hid that metric from the public?
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 14:08:27.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 02:07:36 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
This would work for me. Be careful what you you wish for though. Don't ask for criticism etc then shoot down the commenter in the forums because you don't like what was said. |
I don't. I routinely mark negatively critical comments as "helpful" -- especially when they say specifically what they didn't like. |
... but others do. My comment wasn't pointed at anyone in particular, just a general word of advice.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 14:08:12. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 02:34:10 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
... people do deserve to be told the truth. But, there is really no way to tell who really WANTS the truth. |
I've suggested before that we have some feedback preferences, similar to these used at a writing site where volunteers edit each other's work.
The phoptographer's preferred feedback style could be displayed on the voting page without compromising anonymity. |
That's a pretty cool idea. That would encourage me to comment extensively on a bad pic, whereas now I have to take into account the risk that someone is aiming for brown. (which happened to me once, the photog did appologize though)
It would also save from those annoying PMs of people telling me why my comment is stupid or wrong. (not pointing at te good guys who PM me to answer a question that's in my comment)
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 02:39:23 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by mark_u_U:
That's a pretty cool idea. That would encourage me to comment extensively on a bad pic, whereas now I have to take into account the risk that someone is aiming for brown. (which happened to me once, the photog did appologize though)
|
lol...people actually TRY to come in last?
if it really would encourage comments on a 'bad pic', then i'm all for that, too, regardless of whether or not it shuts down real trolls |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 04:24:50 PM · #42 |
something just happened that it never occurred to me that someone would do. someone made a complimentary comment on my photo but voted it a 4.
i guess requiring comments would not stop stuff like that or prevent a troll from voting 1s and giving a comment that wouldn't invalidate their vote. i'd rather get no comment than a dishonest one. i'm so hard to please :D |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 04:30:02 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
What about 'nice shot'? |
What's wrong with telling someone they have a nice shot? Is it better to just make no comment, then have people complain that they don't get any comments? |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:06:21 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by icu1965:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
What about 'nice shot'? |
What's wrong with telling someone they have a nice shot? Is it better to just make no comment, then have people complain that they don't get any comments? |
It's always nice to know why, bad or good. Without the why, well ... you figure it out. Literally. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:29:36 PM · #45 |
I really think people on this site and others like it, worry way to much about scores and not on the art. High scores on DPC IMO equal to conformity , yes winning images are beautiful but seldom the most creative or " the best" images. It truly does not matter to me if I score 1's or 10's. What matters is that I took my best shot at it. Some of the images that I made scored low because I believe the voters did not get it or were frightened by it. Some I can look at and say " I know I could have done better".
I pose this question to everyone:
Whats more important realizing your own vision and havening it manifest exactly the way you see it, or someone giving it a low or high score? Thats up to you to decide.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 17:39:53. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:35:14 PM · #46 |
Let me just clarify what I mean by troll, because it is a widely abused term. In this context I suppose troll is the WRONG word, but let me briefly explain.
Most people usually think of trolls as being bad people being deliberately bad. I don't think that this behaviour is necessarily malicious or intentional, but it is a function of ability/taste/eye.
The logic goes that if someone can take a good photograph then they are well placed to give advice. I'm not talking about two tier DPC or anything like that, all I'm saying is that I think we ALL are happy to take advice from someone whose photography we like/admire.
However, conversely, it becomes difficult to take comments from people who either don't take a good photograph, or to put it more politically correctly, don't have a style of photography that you like.
SO...when I say troll I mean the kind of person who hasn't proven any ability to take a good photograph, but yet who constantly votes entries in challenges as being less than average. Yes, they have a valid opinion but what is the value to the learning process, or to DPC? I mean, why would you want that opinion? If I get a harsh comment (and vote) on a photograph and then I look at their portfolio, and it's full of fuzzy dog pictures and a voting average of <5 it gets a little frustrating.
Proof of entry into challenges not only shows effort, but it shows progression and ability over time. Without these entries taking criticism from people seems to have much less value. From reading this thread it seems many disagree and want the 'everyman' opinion. Personally I just want advice from people in the same boat as me...out shooting challenges and learning from each one.
And [user]BearMusic[/user] - I agree that such a policy would exclude people like your friends (who don't challenge but are well qualified to vote) but imho they are probably in the minority.
N
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:38:28 PM · #47 |
I would like to see a system like this during voting. Call it 'Quick Comments'. Where you have a list of predefined comments that people can just click on then click on their vote. That way if people think your image is too dark they can click "Too Dark" mark your 3 and move on. Same for too noisey, too blurry, out of focus and so on. The same could be put in on the positive side to tell people good shot, or beautiful lighting or anythign that people feel is pertinet. Maybe this would encourage comments because people wouldn't have to type, and it would give people a better idea of why theri score is getting hammered.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 17:38:53.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:45:06 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Quasimojo:
The logic goes that if someone can take a good photograph then they are well placed to give advice.
N |
Can you define a good photograph, I have already suggested that the "Good Photographs" end up usually not winning. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:50:54 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Quasimojo:
Let me just clarify what I mean by troll, because it is a widely abused term. In this context I suppose troll is the WRONG word, but let me briefly explain.
Most people usually think of trolls as being bad people being deliberately bad. I don't think that this behaviour is necessarily malicious or intentional, but it is a function of ability/taste/eye.
The logic goes that if someone can take a good photograph then they are well placed to give advice. I'm not talking about two tier DPC or anything like that, all I'm saying is that I think we ALL are happy to take advice from someone whose photography we like/admire.
However, conversely, it becomes difficult to take comments from people who either don't take a good photograph, or to put it more politically correctly, don't have a style of photography that you like.
SO...when I say troll I mean the kind of person who hasn't proven any ability to take a good photograph, but yet who constantly votes entries in challenges as being less than average. Yes, they have a valid opinion but what is the value to the learning process, or to DPC? I mean, why would you want that opinion? If I get a harsh comment (and vote) on a photograph and then I look at their portfolio, and it's full of fuzzy dog pictures and a voting average of <5 it gets a little frustrating.
Proof of entry into challenges not only shows effort, but it shows progression and ability over time. Without these entries taking criticism from people seems to have much less value. From reading this thread it seems many disagree and want the 'everyman' opinion. Personally I just want advice from people in the same boat as me...out shooting challenges and learning from each one.
And [user]BearMusic[/user] - I agree that such a policy would exclude people like your friends (who don't challenge but are well qualified to vote) but imho they are probably in the minority.
N |
i think the whole point of actually voting on challenges on this site and having winners is to learn to be able to please the masses as well as yourself. if you just want the opinions of a select group of people who *you* think take 'good' pictures, then set a challenge for yourself and ask those people for their opinion.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 17:52:07. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 05:56:36 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Quasimojo:
The logic goes that if someone can take a good photograph then they are well placed to give advice. I'm not talking about two tier DPC or anything like that, all I'm saying is that I think we ALL are happy to take advice from someone whose photography we like/admire.
However, conversely, it becomes difficult to take comments from people who either don't take a good photograph, or to put it more politically correctly, don't have a style of photography that you like. |
So, if I am to understand this correctly, you would like voting and commenting only from those people whose photography you like or admire? By extension, you should not be voting or commenting on any photos unless you know they like or admire your photos? Sounds like a very difficult structure to define and implement.
You have to remember that photography is an art that is for everyone to enjoy. Anyone should be allowed to tell you why they do or do not like your entry (or work), regardless of their own talent or ability. One doesn't need to know how to take good photos to know whether they like or dislike a particular photo. This is true in every aspect of our lives, not just photography (e.g. you don't need to know how to cook a good meal to know whether you like it or not and to say so). If someone doesn't like receiving low votes or negative (constructive) comments, just take pictures for your select friends who will 'ooh' and 'ahh' over your talent and don't enter the challenges. Every opinion has some value (yes, even the trolls as you define them).
Chuck
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 17:57:04.
|
|
