| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/27/2008 07:13:35 AM · #1 |
Why not add in additional criteria to voting:
- User must have entered a challenge in the prior 3 months to vote.
I have comments on a risky photograph that are not only unhelpful they show a real lack of clue. On further inspection both commenters haven't entered anything since Sept last year, and both have a sub 5 voting average.
If this rule was in place neither of these people would be allowed to vote. This is a challenge site - if people aren't entering challenges then I don't see why they should get a vote...i.e. why should we goto the effort only to have trolls just shoot it down, who have no appreciation because they make no effort.
So many people are affected by this, from regular ribboners downwards. I know it's a dead horse topic but more should be done to counter it, otherwise voting and feedback will continue to alienate and frustrate members. There's a WORLD of difference between learning from comments and feedback, and just getting panned for no good reason (i.e. the former makes you a better photographer, the latter has no value at all).
If a users voting average is particularly low and they aren't entering challenges then why are they allowed to continually participate and project their unhappiness/frustration/bile onto us? Adding a voting condition that someone has to have participated with 3 months isn't difficult or unreasonable, or radical for that matter...and it might start to clean up these rogue voters.
N
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 07:56:14 AM · #2 |
nevermind, i don't want to get in the debate and deleted my comment. I shouldn't open these threads.
I do however take it personally when someone doesn't want my comment just because I don't enter challenges and can't take great photos.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 08:13:04. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 08:15:18 AM · #3 |
I can see the problem of troll voters as highly frustrating, but I think its important to note that not everyone who doesn't enter challenges is a troll. Maybe people can find the site useful in different ways, yes it's a challenge site, but for me the learning/forum aspect is highly important also (though I understand there is a lot to be learnt from challenges). I don't really enter challenges, but I don't consider my voting average to mark me as a troll. I enjoy viewing other people's images, learning from them, and where something jumps out at me I try to comment in a useful fashion.
But still, down with the trolls ;) |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 08:21:48 AM · #4 |
Surely you're not suggesting that Langdon and I are trolls...
~Terry
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 08:23:05 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Surely you're not suggesting that Langdon and I are trolls...
~Terry |
Uhm!?
Never mind LOL |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 09:28:09 AM · #6 |
| If their avg vote given is low then that means they are speading the love(or lack there of) to everyone equally, so in effect, it all equals out. There are lots of folks here who don't participate in the challenges but do contribute to the site in many ways including voting and you would be alienating them. Would it be fair for someone who is disabled and unable to participate in challenges to be excluded from the site? There are many reasons why one doesn't enter challenges and I don't think excluding people from here is gong to be a good thing or accomplish anything. I also wouldn't discredit someones comments soley on their voting record or lack of challenge participation, you be surprised what you can find in a comment. Trevor~ |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 09:58:39 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Surely you're not suggesting that Langdon and I are trolls...
~Terry |
Uhm!?
Never mind LOL |
Meaning that neither of us have entered challenges in the last 3 months.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 10:03:00 AM · #8 |
I'dd rather have ten trolls voting me down than one person being excluded from voting for the wrong reason.
Besides, your judging people by their appearances. Not every Arab is a terrorist and not every non-submitter is a troll. No need for a wich hunt here, trolls have only a minor impact on this site.
Real trolls only vote good pics down btw, which means that I am safe anyway :P
ETA: In the proposed system, entering a snapshot every three months would mean the trolls can continue. What will we do next? Judge trolls by their score?
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 10:06:12.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 10:33:22 AM · #9 |
| 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. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 10:45:34 AM · #10 |
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. |
.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 10:46:56 AM · #11 |
| "Apparently, they were stopping every vehicle traveling down that particular sidewalk, and that's profiling, and profiling's bad." |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 10:57:09 AM · #12 |
My mate Finn is a troll
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 10:57:20. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 10:57:31 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
"Apparently, they were stopping every vehicle traveling down that particular sidewalk, and that's profiling, and profiling's bad." |
ok.....Tater Salad. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 11:59:41 AM · #14 |
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. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:06:01 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
I think it goes along the lines of "If you don't have anything good to say..."
1-3 images are, IMO, intimidating to try to comment on. Most are either really badly done, giving no real starting point for a polite critique within a short time frame, or just obviously (and I mean by no stretch of the imagination) a DNMC and I'm just not going to leave THAT comment. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:15:08 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
I think it goes along the lines of "If you don't have anything good to say..."
1-3 images are, IMO, intimidating to try to comment on. Most are either really badly done, giving no real starting point for a polite critique within a short time frame.... |
AND most leave me speechless.. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:16:14 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Images being scored 1-3 don't usually inspire the viewer therefore no comment is left. |
I think it goes along the lines of "If you don't have anything good to say..."
1-3 images are, IMO, intimidating to try to comment on. Most are either really badly done, giving no real starting point for a polite critique within a short time frame, or just obviously (and I mean by no stretch of the imagination) a DNMC and I'm just not going to leave THAT comment. |
So don't leave THAT vote either ;)
But seriously, I agree with what your saying, but I would like to stress that someone who recieves a 1-3 has some 'right' to be told why, even if why is DNMC
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:32:15 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by mark_u_U:
So don't leave THAT vote either ;)
But seriously, I agree with what your saying, but I would like to stress that someone who recieves a 1-3 has some 'right' to be told why, even if why is DNMC |
I do think you are right ... people do deserve to be told the truth. But, there is really no way to tell who really WANTS the truth. I'm more likely to give a negative critique on images posted in threads than in voting. At least then, I KNOW for sure the person is wanting critique. I generally keep my voting comments positive and light, unless I spot a nitpick in an otherwise competent image. Just my style, I like to help those that seek help.
--- ------
I think I'm kinda chasing bunnies off the side of this thread... I sorta agree with the OP, I don't think there should be a "have entered in a certain time frame" but, I think that maybe one should have at least entered a few challenges before being allowed a vote.
Or perhaps (and I believe I have recommended this before, but can't remember) a weighted vote based on site participation. Just some thoughts.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 12:39:12. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:39:05 PM · #19 |
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. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:42:24 PM · #20 |
Regarding the original post (if you don't enter challenges on a regular basis you shouldn't be able to vote) I have two friends who I introduced to this site who vote occasionally and who do not take pictures. One is an art critic from NYC and the other is an artist (a painter) who does not own a camera. I have encouraged both to vote on challenges whose topic "interests" them, and they do so from time to time. I don't think their opinions are in anyw ay invalid. In fact, I think they bring an interesting perspective to the mix.
R.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:45:05 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Regarding the original post (if you don't enter challenges on a regular basis you shouldn't be able to vote) I have two friends who I introduced to this site who vote occasionally and who do not take pictures. One is an art critic from NYC and the other is an artist (a painter) who does not own a camera. I have encouraged both to vote on challenges whose topic "interests" them, and they do so from time to time. I don't think their opinions are in anyw ay invalid. In fact, I think they bring an interesting perspective to the mix.
R. |
i agree. i think it's important to know how the general public thinks, not just those who are 'photographers'. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:45:23 PM · #22 |
Why don't we put some of those to voting areas? with some photos on it says "challenge entry"
 |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:52:28 PM · #23 |
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. |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 12:59:34 PM · #24 |
|
|
|
01/27/2008 01:05:11 PM · #25 |
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.
Message edited by author 2008-01-27 13:08:37. |
|
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: 08/06/2025 12:07:15 PM EDT.
