| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/18/2002 02:21:58 AM · #126 |
Is there a way for us to vote on all the pics with one page instead of opening a new page for each and every pic? I usually end up clicking on the number before the pic even loads all the way just to save time, but it would still be faster if I could do it all from the thumbnail page.
I use a dial-up and have limited access (75 hours a month shared with 2 others). If this is going to be a requirement then you need to come up with a quicker and easier way to vote.
I don't have a major problem with the new rule, but I don't really know how necessary it is. I think we'd all like to know how big an issue this is before we all accept that it's really needed.
Last week I did enter a picture right before going out of town. I was in a cabin with no phone for a week so I couldn't exactly vote. Of course, I also couldn't submit to the current challenge.
Being required to vote in every challenge you enter wouldn't be any easier than having to vote on the current challenge before entering the next one. I just think that the more rules you have, the messier it all gets.
I also do NOT like the idea of getting your comments rated. Photosig does that, and it's controversial and complained about regularly. |
|
|
|
07/18/2002 02:54:45 AM · #127 |
| It's fair to insist everyone vote on all/majority of the photographs. It gives way to a more fair competition. I have always voted on all the photographs so this change won't affect me much. Someone earlier mentioned about being phobic to some of the entries to Fearless. I'm with you! I went on vacation last week so I didn't get the chance (thank goodness for me!) to vote on the Fearless challenge. I tried to take a look at the submissions but just couldn't do it because of all the ones with spiders. AGGHHHHHHH!!! |
|
|
|
07/18/2002 04:46:05 AM · #128 |
Hello, this is my first post here and this is my first week of actually voting after looking at the pics for a few weeks. Having a slow connection,it already begins to feel like "work" even though I enjoy looking at the images and find it an educational process. The tip about voting in two windows is much appreciated!!!
What are we trying to accomplish here with these rule changes? Its goal seems to be to force people who submit to also actual vote/comment. That's fair. I suspect though that the serious members here already do so willingly. With the new rules one is "forced" into voting/comments and that immediately makes the process less fun and may well have a detrimental effect on the quality of voting/comments. The new rules will either penalize the conscientious members who have periodic other commitments or require some cumbersome credit system. I go along with the suggestion made about the Deadbeat Voters or something along those lines. After all, it is because of those folks that all these rules are being created!
As to the comments, I would suggest to make an effort to give comments about the pics you give a LOW vote, too. Those are the people most in need of feedback and they have the biggest learning curve here. They also have the chance for the fastest improvement, so give them some help. The truly grand pictures, on the other hand, probably will be discussed in the forum threads anyway and the person taking that grand picture really already knows where she/he stands.
It seems counterproductive to receive a lot of (meaningless) comments because members have to do so according to the rules. Hey, we all already get plenty of spam. The submitters/nonvoters for whom these rules are being devised will opt for the 25% comments choice because that will be easier than voting on 95% of the pics. The conscientious members will be penalized twice: once by forfeiting periodically the chance to submit because of other commitments and once by becoming the recipient of trash comments.
|
|
|
|
07/18/2002 05:47:35 AM · #129 |
What is this "Fearless" challenge that a lot of you keep referring to? I remember a "Fear" challenge but no "Fearless" challenge.
|
|
|
|
07/18/2002 03:25:14 PM · #130 |
| I have a DSL connection and it still takes considerable time to vote. I find myself voting with less time spent on each photo. I feel that this is unfair to the one that submitted the picture. I also try to make comments on a lot of the pictures, this is the most difficult for me as I am not a trained critic in the world of photography, just an amateur that likes to take pictures. Once in a while I get lucky and submit one that a quite a few people like. I think that the voting page could be set up with check boxes for several aspects of the picture, such as composition, focus, meeting the challenge, difficulty, originality, etc. You could enter a number from 1-10 and these could then be averaged to determine your final vote. Of course this would be extra work for the site but it might also give the photographer more of an idea where he/she might need improvement without the voter spending extra time writing comments, that he might otherwise ignore or have difficulty putting together. Now that I have commented I imagine that this thread will end, as it usually does when I throw my 2 cents worth in! Autool |
|
|
|
07/18/2002 06:20:05 PM · #131 |
Wrong, Autool, here's another comment. I finished 100% of the voting today. It was most helpful to do so with two windows open, as suggested. Please post this dynamite tip somewhere with the voting rules or FAQs.
Still, to look at 175 pictures takes time. I hope to do a 100% vote every week; some weeks just won't have the time for it though. Therefore, I still feel the 95% rule to be somewhat harsh. I like Autool's idea of checkboxes on which you can rate aspects of a picture. This would give feedback to the photographer and you won't have to write lengthy comments. This, I feel, should be used more for feedback instead of calculating the rating you gave. |
|
|
|
07/18/2002 07:01:00 PM · #132 |
maybe the percentage requirement needs to be adjusted to something that still fulfills the requirement for a good statistical sample, but at the same time is not prohibitively burdensome.
perhaps drew co uld weigh in on where that "sweet spot" might lie. |
|
|
|
07/18/2002 07:45:43 PM · #133 |
Another hint for voting:
Rather than use two windows, I have one window open for voting and one(or more) for other things I need to do. Thus I can kill two birds with one stone and before I know it I have voted for all the pictures and commented where I feel I have something to say. |
|
|
|
07/18/2002 07:55:44 PM · #134 |
Originally posted by darylbrown:
What is this "Fearless" challenge that a lot of you keep referring to? I remember a "Fear" challenge but no "Fearless" challenge.
Hi Daryl, the Challemge you mention was the 'Fear' challenge, but several photos depict the seamingly [b]lack[/] of fear, which can be construed as the fear of being thought of weak or cowardly. It is strange that if one is confronted and threatenened by a fellow specie and then refuses to fight, you are thought of as being a coward when it is so much easier to succumb and rise/descend to this threat where you win or lose to the gratification of the onlookers.
anon
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 12:54:30 AM · #135 |
This is the typical response I expected.
This is a really stupid and counter productive rule. I have been voting and commenting all week long, and have not yet met the criteria. Why force me to comment on photos I do not have comments for? If this kind of crap keeps up, I will lose interest.
I am trying hard to only leave comments on photos that I have advice for, and then to leave a detailed response. But this rule favors those that have a high speed connection, and just leave a "sucks" "cute" or other worthless comments. Why do you want to contorl the photographers like this?
Originally posted by drewmedia:
Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]you could always create a new alias for your submision
Multiple accounts are monitored on the site, and if caught, all accounts will be suspended indefinitely and IPs may be banned. This is a horrible idea, and it's against the rules. Don't do it.
Amphian, may I suggest the comment route? I'd much rather users took that route anyway!
Drew[/i]
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 02:34:06 AM · #136 |
Can we rethink the 95% rule? It seems like a bit much.
This was an especially bad week to start the requirement since there are so many pics, and I am actually really surprised by how bad the pictures are this week. I thought we'd have some really good ones since it was basically a "take your best shot" sort of assignment, but that isn't the case. I spent a LONG time online last night (the fastest time for my modem) and only got about halfway through the voting. That's without leaving any comments. I'm afraid that I won't have time to comment at all now because it's taking so long to vote. Is it better for me to ONLY comment? Is the goal to get a lot more comments at the expense of the number of votes?
I really think that the other photographers were getting more benefit from me dividing my time between scoring and commenting than they are now.
I do appreciate the work going into this site and understand that you are only trying to improve it. I just don't think you've settled on the right solution yet. |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 03:11:46 AM · #137 |
Maybe we should all just vote and comment on our own pictures that way we get the results and feedback that we want. ;)
Seriously has anyone read the thread all the way through its kinda funny, the arguments go in circles you end up arguing a point you might have made 2 days ago.. well its late and i thought it was funny |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 04:00:33 PM · #138 |
Mmmm, I like Ronin's idea: it saves a lot of time and everybody will be happy with the vote :)
If the 95% rule will be here to stay, would like to see some accumulating credits type of deal. There will be weeks I won't submit, other weeks I won't have time to vote 95-100%. So, for the weeks I would like to submit, it would be nice to be able to rely, if need be, on past efforts in the voting department rather than having to re-invent the wheel each time.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 04:45:56 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
The submission requirement will get a revision when we have time to code a better submission, but right now, it's just not an unreasonable request. For those interested, right now there are 230 users on the site who have voted on 100% of the images in the challenge (62% of users who've casted even a single vote).
Thank you for all the opinions on this -- there were definitely a lot of valid points and suggestions that we're taking into consideration.
Drew
For anyone that missed this post of Drew's, I think it points out that the site admins see the need for and are prepared to make changes to this rule. Everyone should just hang in there a little while and see what happens. I am watching this thread closely myself since I'll be on the road for work a lot in the next few weeks. (Hoping to get soem nice shots in Singapore :)
The site admins are very responsive to the community here and I have no fear that they will act in all of our best intrest as soon as they can figure out what that is :)
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 04:54:29 PM · #140 |
Just curious Zeiss, but why is someone that has cast 780+ votes and made 250+ comments after only being here for 3 challenges worried about this rule at all? It doesn't look like it would affect you...
(If any offense could be taken from my post it's a misunderstanding... I mean no offense and am smiling the whole time I type)
Originally posted by Zeissman:
This is the typical response I expected.
This is a really stupid and counter productive rule. I have been voting and commenting all week long, and have not yet met the criteria. Why force me to comment on photos I do not have comments for? If this kind of crap keeps up, I will lose interest.
I am trying hard to only leave comments on photos that I have advice for, and then to leave a detailed response. But this rule favors those that have a high speed connection, and just leave a "sucks" "cute" or other worthless comments. Why do you want to contorl the photographers like this?
Originally posted by drewmedia:
[i]Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]you could always create a new alias for your submision
Multiple accounts are monitored on the site, and if caught, all accounts will be suspended indefinitely and IPs may be banned. This is a horrible idea, and it's against the rules. Don't do it.
Amphian, may I suggest the comment route? I'd much rather users took that route anyway!
Drew[/i]
[/i]
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 05:17:05 PM · #141 |
Originally posted by Zeissman:
But this rule favors those that have a high speed connection, and just leave a "sucks" "cute" or other worthless comments.
Zeissman, though those with high speed connections have a benefit that I, and others do not, I do not think this rule "favors" them. As mentioned before, I have a 56K dialup, that dials up at 36.6 OR SLOWER. To get around this I open several windows (up to 3 or 4, more and my computer would melt down) and vote. At work, where the connection is only slightly faster, but the computer is better, I had forty pictures left to vote on, so I opened 10 windows, put the first picture for each row in a window, and started voting. I was able to actually look at, analyze (at least as much as my little mind will do), and vote in less than 45 minutes. Now, I am doing the same thing with my comments, more or less.
Again, like myqyl said, Drew has stated this is a transitionary ruling. They are still working on it. Give them time. :-) |
|
|
|
07/20/2002 04:24:22 PM · #142 |
Originally posted by karmat:
As mentioned before, I have a 56K dialup, that dials up at 36.6 OR SLOWER.
If I remember correctly from my old dialup days, there are things you could do to improve your speed. If you have a 56k modem that connects at 36, try some or all of the following:
~ Get a new cable (the phone line that runs from your computer to the wall) and get a good one (shielded). It''ll cost a buck or two more, but could be worth it. Shorter cables are generally a better idea then longer ones. If you can get within 6 feet of the walljack, this is best.
~ Don''t have that line go through any other device (answering machine, phone, etc.)
~ Be sure the line isn''t wrapped up with power cables. The further they are from eachother the better.
~ Call your phone company and ask them to run a test on your line. I found this to improve a line by quite a bit (sometimes).
~ Price out high speed connections. They are become competative with dialup prices.
Good luck and I hope this helps, at least a little.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/20/2002 4:25:40 PM.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/20/2002 4:27:34 PM. |
|
|
|
07/20/2002 04:56:51 PM · #143 |
thanks for the suggestions. I will pass them along to the computer specialist of the house (my husband). I know a couple of them won't work simply because we've already tried. We had to have tests on our phone line when we were building our house because of the "noise" in our lines. That was a pain. Like you said, it sped it up a little bit.
Right now, dial-up is all that is available in our little podunk town that is 20 miles left of no-where. :-) We've checked into other possibilities, but dial-up is our best (and only?) option so far. (Smoke signals work well, too, but a strong wind, and *POOF* your message gets all discombobulated.)
Thanks again though! |
|
|
|
07/21/2002 01:22:53 AM · #144 |
| No offense anyone.........suggestion only. How about utilizing your thinking, complaining and posting time on voting? |
|
|
|
07/21/2002 01:25:16 AM · #145 |
| I'm surprised it took this long for that comment to come :)))) |
|
|
|
07/22/2002 04:28:56 AM · #146 |
| Actually, I think in order to vote you need to at least submit to one challenge before your vote counts towards the final out come. I realize this is only my second challenge, but after looking at some of the negative comments on my first submission, almost all of the negative comments were from people that have never even submitted to a single challenge. One person has commented negatively on ever challenge since they became a member. I appreciate honesty, and constructive critisim, but to me a person that's never even submitted to a challenge, their vote shouldn't really count towards the final outcome....just mho. |
|
|
|
07/22/2002 06:51:13 AM · #147 |
Sorry Tom, but you don''t have to submit to have your vote count. Some members don''t have cameras but they are still allowed to vote. I know there are some photographers on this site who started out just voting.
By the way, I thought your first submission was excellent.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/22/2002 6:55:35 AM. |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 06:53:06 PM · #148 |
I think it would be a shame to stop non submitters voting.
I am a 35mm print film photographer and love photography, I have been into it since I was 12 and I have been told I have an eye for composition and interesting shots. What I still don't have is a good grasp of light metering, using DOF more effectively (I tend to use it at the two extremes) and I am not at all good at full manual exposure setting.
But I am pretty sure I can offer comments which in some cases may be useful for some photographers.
I would never dream of saying "this sucks" and would be sad if I could no longer vote and comment.
I'd stop coming to this site and just visit a hundred other sites with pretty pictures to look at.
This one is cool because I can give my opinion.
I know I know photosig. But I like the themed challenges here. |
|
|
|
09/25/2002 03:01:56 PM · #149 |
Okay, the error is mine. When I saw the orginal posting of 7/9/2002, I mistaken that to be Sept. 7th (i.e. contemporary) rather than what I now see it actually being... a post from months ago. So my error, and my apologies to all concerned.
CJ
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/25/2002 3:47:14 PM. |
|
|
|
09/25/2002 03:07:26 PM · #150 |
CJ -- This thread has been "dead" for at least a month -- the voting requirements in order to submit were removed quite some time ago.
|
|
