| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/02/2004 07:25:54 PM · #1 |
I am actually pro the challenge, even though I have no ribbons, as I greatly enjoyed seeing the results from the last one. I personally don't see I have lost anything, but would have had it replaced a standard challenge, which it has not.
Yup, I am one of those kids that can never reach the bonus level on the game (nice analogy there cbella) but I don't kick the game console for that ..... I go and beat up the kids that reach the bonus and take it out of them. Maybe, rather than blame the site we should all just lynch the Master's ;)
However, joking aside, I did just think of one thing then .....
If there are too many additional challenges open to only "Masters" that increases their chances of gaining ribbons, which does risk widening the gap between us mere mortals and the "Masters". Also, with a smaller number of entries, as I assume there would be with a 3 ribbon minimum now, it actually greatly increases any individual's odds opf landing an extra ribbon.
Not a whine though, just food for thought. I also agree with those that have recently said that this is not life and death, and may be blowing just a little out of proportion.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:20:14 PM · #2 |
Another Masters!!!
this sucks it's so unfair!!!
how can you do this too me??
What?
huh?
Oh...
you mean I can compete?
:'P
(sorry this was supposed to have [/sarcasm] surrounding it)
Message edited by author 2004-11-02 19:21:12.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:15:26 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by cbeller:
Yes. There should be a BONUS BUTTON for the non-expert to hit so they can automatically get to the bonus round. They may not have earned their way to the bonus round, but doggonit they paid $1 too. Who needs skill, when you can just have everything given to you?
|
Just ask George ...
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:13:26 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by micknewton:
... My “hubris” comment was sarcasm directed at the whole idea of the masters challenges. I find the idea that simply winning a couple of photo popularity contests makes one a ‘master’ of photography a bit ludicrous... |
No one EVER made any such claim. I believe that the bulk of your offense derives from a poor rhetorical choice of the word "master" (traditional term in photography) to designate the applicant category.
Paste this entire forum into a word processor, and use the search-and-replace function to substitute instead the term "winner of three or more challenges at DP Challenge.com" -- I think you will see how much more benignly the concept comes across, and merely at the expense of mind-numbing redundancy.
And everyone should ask themselves -- honestly -- if they'd lead the protest quite so strenuously if they were eligible to participate. I know of only one who has (and he won the last challenge instead of boycotting it anyway).
It's just a d*** online site and contest, not a nuclear power plant -- it's not going to be run mistake-free, nor be perfectly suitable for everyone. Instead of trashing the admins, I'd suggest moving on with constructive suggestions for the next "special" challenge; this will all be history in a few weeks anyway. |
I do agree that a lot of the problem is perhaps the term "masters". And none of this is life-and-death! lol
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:12:42 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
So, rewards should be doled out evenly and not to those who excel?
That's been tried before, I think that was Marx's idea. And, no, I don't mean Groucho. |
That is not an accurate interpretation of Marxism, and was certainly never practiced in any country considering itself Marxist, Communist, or Socialist. I'm not saying their actial ideas were necessarily any better, just need to counter the myth that Marxism/Socialism demands an equal division of the wealth regardless of individual effort or ability.
We now return you to your regularly-scheduled Rant.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:11:41 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Hey guys, I thought the idea of challenges was to get you thinking about taking pictures in a particular way. To stimulate your creativity in particular directions as you go about taking pictures.
Just because you can't enter a particular challenge, doesn't mean you can't take pictures about that, it just means that you can't be judged by other people about your skill.
I personally appreciate people who add pictures to the pot that are creatively rich but technically rough around the edges a bit, but Don't care if they get a low score, posting instead to see what could be done to improve their image capturing.
That is the real value of this site and it does apply most directly to those of less skill.
It is nice to look at all the pictures that the masters take, but I don't learn all that much beyond composition from that.
I personally take an idea from a challenge and toss it around in my head for a week or so enjoying the input just as much as the pictures that I might actually take. It all boils down to how much time you like to spend taking pictures compared to how much time you like to spend on the internet looking at other peoples pictures and talking about pictures.
-k |
Just wanted to say that I really enjoyed reading this post and it's perceptive and positive points. They are extrememly valid, no matter what other feelings you have on the subject.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:09:12 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Let's say I put that same $1 in an arcade game. I'm not all that good at the game, so I never make it to the bonus level. The guy next to me is an expert, and hits the bonus level all the time.
Unfair?
-Terry |
Yes. There should be a BONUS BUTTON for the non-expert to hit so they can automatically get to the bonus round. They may not have earned their way to the bonus round, but doggonit they paid $1 too. Who needs skill, when you can just have everything given to you?
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:07:58 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
... My “hubris” comment was sarcasm directed at the whole idea of the masters challenges. I find the idea that simply winning a couple of photo popularity contests makes one a ‘master’ of photography a bit ludicrous... |
No one EVER made any such claim. I believe that the bulk of your offense derives from a poor rhetorical choice of the word "master" (traditional term in photography) to designate the applicant category.
Paste this entire forum into a word processor, and use the search-and-replace function to substitute instead the term "winner of three or more challenges at DP Challenge.com" -- I think you will see how much more benignly the concept comes across, and merely at the expense of mind-numbing redundancy.
And everyone should ask themselves -- honestly -- if they'd lead the protest quite so strenuously if they were eligible to participate. I know of only one who has (and he won the last challenge instead of boycotting it anyway).
It's just a d*** online site and contest, not a nuclear power plant -- it's not going to be run mistake-free, nor be perfectly suitable for everyone. Instead of trashing the admins, I'd suggest moving on with constructive suggestions for the next "special" challenge; this will all be history in a few weeks anyway. |
|
|
|
11/02/2004 07:05:15 PM · #9 |
Hey guys, I thought the idea of challenges was to get you thinking about taking pictures in a particular way. To stimulate your creativity in particular directions as you go about taking pictures.
Just because you can't enter a particular challenge, doesn't mean you can't take pictures about that, it just means that you can't be judged by other people about your skill.
I personally appreciate people who add pictures to the pot that are creatively rich but technically rough around the edges a bit, but Don't care if they get a low score, posting instead to see what could be done to improve their image capturing.
That is the real value of this site and it does apply most directly to those of less skill.
It is nice to look at all the pictures that the masters take, but I don't learn all that much beyond composition from that.
I personally take an idea from a challenge and toss it around in my head for a week or so enjoying the input just as much as the pictures that I might actually take. It all boils down to how much time you like to spend taking pictures compared to how much time you like to spend on the internet looking at other peoples pictures and talking about pictures.
-k |
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:51:58 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by traser:
You gotta be kidding me right? If you pay $1 and get two cookies and I pay $1 and get one, everything's fair to you?
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by traser:
But I can understand that it IS unfair that Master's pay the same fee and can enter a greater variety of challenges. |
Why? |
|
Let's say I put that same $1 in an arcade game. I'm not all that good at the game, so I never make it to the bonus level. The guy next to me is an expert, and hits the bonus level all the time.
Unfair?
-Terry |
Good point CJ, good point indeed.
Message edited by author 2004-11-02 18:52:24. |
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:45:22 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
Not obvious or evident? Sure, if you completely ignore the facts.
Like the fact that this thread is as long as it is, or the fact that there have been many other similar threads, or the fact that some members have threatened to stop participating.
Yup, if you ignore those facts then it does become a bit less obvious. |
If you think this is a long thread criticizing a site change, go find the thread announcing paid membership. That was going to be the end of DPC, judging by many of the posts. Hasn't happened.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:43:39 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by jmlelii:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Why is it unfair? Has anything been taken away from you?
-Terry |
The chance to participate in an additional challenge. I dont mind the master challenge, just give us "non winners" a chance at winning something. Be fair to everyone, not just rewarding those who have won all ready. |
So, rewards should be doled out evenly and not to those who excel?
That's been tried before, I think that was Marx's idea. And, no, I don't mean Groucho. |
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:28:36 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by jmlelii:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Why is it unfair? Has anything been taken away from you?
-Terry |
The chance to participate in an additional challenge. I dont mind the master challenge, just give us "non winners" a chance at winning something. Be fair to everyone, not just rewarding those who have won all ready. |
Let me get this straight... we've taken away something you never had in the first place?
-Terry
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:27:57 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by mariomel:
If you only managed to get 69 entries with the ante at 2 ribbons, how many do you think you'll get when the ante goes up to three? Wasn't the reason that it was dropped down because D&L felt there would not be enough entries? Have so many new 3 timers been crowned?
Just a little curious and quietly sitting on the fence... |
I project approximately 40 entries in this challenge, maybe slightly less if there is downward pressure resulting from the challenge being shortened to two weeks.
The initial decision to run with three was made before looking at the numbers of possible entrants. This is in no doubt intended to be a slight to ANYONE with two ribbons (though undoubtedly someone will take it as one), but three ribbons was the level where we really started to see exceptional photography on a consistent basis*. To clarify -- we refers to myself and the member who made the initial suggestion, and not to all of Site Council. We then compared those numbers against a report listing members with two or more ribbons, and found that at three ribbons, the number was large enough to be workable.
I think Langdon's decision to drop the requirement to 2 was primarily due to being caught off-guard by the level of negativity that resulted from the challenge. Any major site change produces negativity (and if you think this was bad, you should have been here when paid membership was introduced!), I think much of the negativity can be attributed to the fact that, frankly, we botched the announcement of the concept. The Masters Challenge went from member suggestion to coding to reality in the space of about 3 or 4 hours, and in retrospect we did not put enough thought (hardly any, honestly) into how to best present the idea to the members.
Like the paid membership idea, though, I believe that once we get past the initial negativity and fire-and-brimstone predictions, the Member Challenges will prove to be an idea that truly benefits the site as a whole. The learning opportunities for participant and voter alike are tremendous.
-Terry
* - This is not to say that there are not a lot of exceptional photographers with fewer than three ribbons -- my point is that nearly 100% of the photographers with 3 or more ribbons producs exceptional photographs on a consistent basis.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:12:15 PM · #15 |
It seems that the minute anyone expresses anything other than sycophantic 'congrats' etc., they're branded a whiner.
So what if a thread runs long - why does it stop being a discussion?
(It is boring though!)
:D
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 06:04:29 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by traser:
You gotta be kidding me right? If you pay $1 and get two cookies and I pay $1 and get one, everything's fair to you?
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by traser:
But I can understand that it IS unfair that Master's pay the same fee and can enter a greater variety of challenges. |
Why? |
|
Let's say I put that same $1 in an arcade game. I'm not all that good at the game, so I never make it to the bonus level. The guy next to me is an expert, and hits the bonus level all the time.
Unfair?
-Terry
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:50:22 PM · #17 |
cbeller, my thoughts EXACTLY...
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:42:50 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
A lot of people (at least myself) have been totally turned off by the name calling that happened earlier in this thread. I wasn't actively participating, so didn't take it personally, but I believe calling people "whiners" is name calling and I was surprised the site council participated in the discussion and yet didnt step in. |
I'm sorry, but some of these people really do sound like they are whining. Just my opinion.
I do understand your frustration/position, being the one that suggested the challenge. I would vote to make you a "Honorary Master" for the challenge, if it was an option.
I don't understand what it is with people and their sense of entitlement.
For these people that think something is being taken away, was there a Master's Challenge in place when you paid your $25? Were you happy with the challenges that were offered when you paid your $25?
OK, I'm going to assume you answered "No" to the first. I also going to assume you answered "Yes" to the second, or you would probably still be a Registered User.
So, you felt it was worth $25/yr to enter a weekly Member Challenge, weekly Open Challenge, and periodic Speed Challenge and Free Study Challenge and the other membership benefits (i.e. portfolio, DPCPrints, etc.).
Now, after getting all the things that you thought were worth $25, the Admins/SC decide to ADD (just to clarify, that was ADD) an additonal challenge that can be earned.
So, nothing has been taken from anyone, but you have been given an opportunity to gain something. It's up to you though, as you have to earn the additoinal bonus.
I see nothing wrong with giving everyone a little incentive to excel in their photography.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:31:34 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Gordon - how many users have supported this idea in the thread? 15? 20? Only .003% support the Master's Challenge? ;)
|
Something like that. I'm not claiming it needs to be popular though - this ain't a democracy :) I was just trying to refute the position that it was 'obviously' and 'evidently' unpopular.
Message edited by author 2004-11-02 17:32:52.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:27:52 PM · #20 |
I always felt a "masters free study" would settle once and for all who the king/queen of dpc is. And then the reigning ribbon king didn't enter. :) Kinda defeats the purpose. I'm glad bod came back for it.
Gordon - how many users have supported this idea in the thread? 15? 20? Only .003% support the Master's Challenge? ;)
M
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:16:42 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Formerlee:
or run for president |
I'm actually trying to stay away from the presidential coverage!
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:15:32 PM · #22 |
Oh, this thread is getting so boring...
Did you all hear, it's BORING, BORING!!
Get a life and take some photos, or run for president
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:11:49 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by mk:
Where does it promise you that in membership? |
I think mick is referring to the assumptions that were made when he signed up, which I think is understandable to a degree |
Assuming you deserve something does not mean you deserve something...
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:06:32 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
One is a small minority of members who may have outgrown the site and want it changed to better suit themselves, |
Not a valid point as the masters did not request/demand/threaten to leave if did not get a masters challenge...
Originally posted by micknewton:
and the other is a small group of members that want what they paid for—i.e. a level playing field where they can enter and have at least a chance at winning any challenge. |
They still have a level playing field two times a week, 52 weeks a year with occasional speed challenges thrown in...
|
|
|
|
11/02/2004 05:05:52 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
not being a democracy would relinquish any responsibility that the SC and admin have to do anything with this site |
Actually, I don't this is a true statement at all. All it means is that the general body of users don't get to vote on every and any change. There are many forms of leadership where those in charge have responsibility without being voted for.
full article
Aristotle distinguishes between good and bad forms of ruling, whether it be rule by one, a few, or many. For him, democracy is not the best form of government. As is also true of oligarchy and tyranny, rule in democracy is for and by the people named in the government type. In democracy, rule is by and for the needy. In contrast, rule of law or aristocracy (literally, rule of the best) or even monarchy, where the ruler has the interest of his country at heart, are better types of government, according to Aristotle.
Web sites tend to usually be akin to monarchies, with the site owner being the sole and absolute ruler, for example. This has a whole load of elitist baggage that I'm not actually trying to bring in to the discussion and this is all a fairly major tangent from the original thread.
I'm certainly not claiming those who qualify as masters as are anything
to do with this ruling group, either.
Message edited by author 2004-11-02 17:15:00.
|
|
