| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/19/2004 09:32:27 AM · #1 |
How about a challenge where only a certain amount/type of person are allowed to vote on the entries?
Like say only people who have won a ribbon are allowed to vote.
I don't know if this could be implemented or not, but it would certainly stop people complaing about "troll voting" and "voters having no taste".
Or maybe a challenge where only the SC members and the top twenty photographers from the last challenge are able to vote.
I would trust these people to photographic integrity
You get the idea. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 09:40:56 AM · #2 |
Yeah, I like that idea too. Maybe we'll see a different pattern to voting? Nice & Clean is always the winner here, would be cool to see some new "styles" hitting ribbons. ;-)
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:06:05 AM · #3 |
and only those with ribbons can enter?
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:16:39 AM · #4 |
| A better idea, jonp, how about only those WITHOUT ribbons can enter? |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:18:59 AM · #5 |
Honestly, I don't think the results would be that much different. If it were only the ribbon winners who recognized quality or style, then they wouldn't have won in the first place. Individual tastes vary, whether you've won a ribbon or not. A more accurate result requires MORE voters, not better voters. The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer.
There is always at least one active thread complaining about low scores as a result of troll voters, voters misunderstanding the challenge, voters not appreciating creativity, voters who don't 'get it,' voters having no taste, etc... Yes, that's one possible explanation for a low score, but maybe not the most obvious explanation. ;-)
Message edited by author 2004-08-19 10:20:56. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:21:36 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Honestly, I don't think the results would be that much different. If it were only the ribbon winners who recognized quality or style, then they wouldn't have won in the first place. Individual tastes vary, whether you've won a ribbon or not. A more accurate result requires MORE voters, not better voters. The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer.
There is always at least one active thread complaining about low scores as a result of troll voters, voters misunderstanding the challenge, voters not appreciating creativity, voters who don't 'get it,' voters having no taste, etc... Yes, that's one possible explanation for a low score, but maybe not the most obvious explanation. ;-) |
Well said! |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:29:26 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Honestly, I don't think the results would be that much different. If it were only the ribbon winners who recognized quality or style, then they wouldn't have won in the first place. Individual tastes vary, whether you've won a ribbon or not. A more accurate result requires MORE voters, not better voters. The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer.
There is always at least one active thread complaining about low scores as a result of troll voters, voters misunderstanding the challenge, voters not appreciating creativity, voters who don't 'get it,' voters having no taste, etc... Yes, that's one possible explanation for a low score, but maybe not the most obvious explanation. ;-) |
I don't like the idea myself, but I do think the results would chnage on who votes rather than how many votes.
A team of photography professionals is unlikely to pick the same top 3 as a bunch of maths teachers for example.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:34:52 AM · #8 |
| I guess who should be allowed to vote depends on what you're trying to achieve with voting. Are you looking for something with mass appeal or something that meets an excellent photographic standard. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:37:22 AM · #9 |
Why not where only people who have given YOU scores of over, say, 7 are allowed to vote? No, how about only people who shoot cameras with more than 5 MP are allowed to vote - no, I mean only DSLRs. Yeah, that's it! In fact, only Nikon D100 users and up...
No, no, no - I want a challenge where only the photographers who SHOT the image can vote! (But they have to use DSLRs, never have submitted a flower shot except for Macro challenges, and they have to have given me a favorable comment on a previous challenge!) Yeah, that's the ticket!
And I'll run the entries past my wife - Morgan Fairchild. Yeah.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:37:56 AM · #10 |
| I have no doubt that the scores would change, but the change would be unpredictable and based upon the whims and personal tastes of a few individuals rather than a large group (no matter how well-respected they may be). One person with a bias against a particular subject would have an unusually large influence. As I suggested, a more ACCURATE score requires a larger pool, not better water. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:47:30 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer. |
Unfortunately, I don't believe that that is always true. For example, read the pre-results comments on Heida's Feet challenge entry.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:48:31 AM · #12 |
Well, I just thought it might make a change.
In the same way as a speed challenge makes for a different thought process of only having 24 hours to think of, create, compose, photograph etc.
I certainly didn't mean it to be every challenge.
And F-32, what's your problem, you seem a bit crabby this morning! |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 10:49:40 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by f-32:
Why not where only people who have given YOU scores of over, say, 7 are allowed to vote? No, how about only people who shoot cameras with more than 5 MP are allowed to vote - no, I mean only DSLRs. Yeah, that's it! In fact, only Nikon D100 users and up...
No, no, no - I want a challenge where only the photographers who SHOT the image can vote! (But they have to use DSLRs, never have submitted a flower shot except for Macro challenges, and they have to have given me a favorable comment on a previous challenge!) Yeah, that's the ticket!
And I'll run the entries past my wife - Morgan Fairchild. Yeah. |
Have a thing for Ms. Fairchild huh? LOL
I think that some folks take these scores just a wee bit too personally. But I have an idea! An epiphany, if you will.... What if the folks who are extending all that energy bitching about scores, troll voters, etc. refocus that same energy into something more positive like say... photography! I'd be willing to bet that they would be happier with their work and while their scores will probably improve as well, they will have too much inner satisfaction to give a rip. Just a thought... |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 11:15:00 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
Originally posted by scalvert:
The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer. |
Unfortunately, I don't believe that that is always true. For example, read the pre-results comments on Heida's Feet challenge entry. |
OK- so some people have a familiar style, but I don't think anyone is voting higher just because they know it's Heida. The comments were overwhelmingly positive, even among those who didn't recognize the photographer. That image stood out for its unusual technique- exactly the sort of thing that many people claim doesn't score well among DPC voters, and it certainly deserved a ribbon (even if I did like the second-place shot better). ;-p |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 11:16:28 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
Originally posted by scalvert:
The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer. |
Unfortunately, I don't believe that that is always true. For example, read the pre-results comments on Heida's Feet challenge entry. |
Quite.
And I get the impression that this thread alludes to the assumption that those who win ribbons are in some way better placed to judge others' shots - or to submit better photos. Looking at the top threes in many challenges I'd heartily disagree. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 11:20:04 AM · #16 |
John, I agree with what you said - but we all have different tastes eh.
When i joined a year ago, I thought the top 3 was pretty much as i would have picked it 90% of the time.
Now I do not feel that way, yet i don't know if it's my taste that has changed or the site.
How was it for you a year back?
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 11:30:18 AM · #17 |
maybe in addition to the open and membership challenges, a third type of challenge could be offered periodically: a juried challenge.
the jury would be made up of people that hit both ends of the bell curve consistently: they pick both the winners and the losers (determined by who their highest/lowest votes go to). other credentials would be # of challenges voted on, pctg of images voted on, etc.
another piece to throw in would be required commenting. so, you may be invited to be on the dpc jury, but if you can't commit to voting 100% and making a certain number of comments, you decline the invitation.
i think voting patterns would be a better indicator of judgement than challenge placements (not that i would qualify either way at this point...) |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 11:53:39 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
maybe in addition to the open and membership challenges, a third type of challenge could be offered periodically: a juried challenge.
the jury would be made up of people that hit both ends of the bell curve consistently: they pick both the winners and the losers (determined by who their highest/lowest votes go to). other credentials would be # of challenges voted on, pctg of images voted on, etc.
another piece to throw in would be required commenting. so, you may be invited to be on the dpc jury, but if you can't commit to voting 100% and making a certain number of comments, you decline the invitation.
i think voting patterns would be a better indicator of judgment than challenge placements (not that i would qualify either way at this point...) |
If you had a jury of people who always picked the winners, surely the results would be the same jury or public?
I like it as it is, I don't think there are many people under the illusion that DPC is a place to gauge your true photographic skill. Even the decent photographers here don't generally post their personal work - the challenge structure wouldn't allow for that as everything you shoot will be forced.
Just a bit of fun and a great excuse to practice and learn.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 11:59:50 AM · #19 |
I am not terribly happy with some of the commentt-score sometimes, and i try to go further to investigate (see the profile)...
Some of the worst score-comment come from people participating in ZERO challenge or have no camera..... PLEASE dont allow that to vote until they have participate in 5 challenge... the time they know what quality-art is... they will vote with a better taste.... my voting pattern chage a lot since my first vote, i i agree that i should not have vote the fisrt 5 challenge myself.....
Please dont let non-photograph people get this site down.... i am less and less excited to see my score, since they dont represent photographer voting for photo...
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 12:36:15 PM · #20 |
If my camera breaks, then I'm a voter with no camera. Similarly, a top professional photographer that shoots only film would be a voter with no camera. Giving my 5 year old daughter a Canon Powershot makes her a voter with a camera. Ownership does not make your opinion more or less valuable. I would welcome a comment from kiwiness, heida, jacko, et al. even if they had never entered a challenge (well... maybe not jacko).
That said, look at the average votes for people with and without cameras on the Feet challenge first and second-place entries. Notice anything funny?
Message edited by author 2004-08-19 12:39:48. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 12:42:57 PM · #21 |
I don't like the idea of paying members being restricted on this website. Just because I don't have a ribbon yet doesn't mean I should be excluded from a particular challenge, nor should anyone else.
Now non-paying members having to submit to 5 challenges before they can vote may be a fair idea. But personally I think the voting system is just fine here. Of course we all get awful, unfair scores and commens from some newcomers .. big deal. The majority voters will determine in the end who deserves to win and the low scores will hardly affect the outcome anyway. |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 03:27:01 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by micknewton:
Originally posted by scalvert:
The anonymity of this site ensures that the best photo wins, not necessarily the most respected photographer. |
Unfortunately, I don't believe that that is always true. For example, read the pre-results comments on Heida's Feet challenge entry. |
OK- so some people have a familiar style, but I don't think anyone is voting higher just because they know it's Heida. |
I would be very surprised if there weren’t at least a few whose votes were influenced, for better or for worse, simply because they knew it was Heida’s entry.
Originally posted by scalvert:
The comments were overwhelmingly positive, even among those who didn't recognize the photographer. That image stood out for its unusual technique- |
I was not offering any personal judgment of Heida’s entry. I was simply using the comments that people left on her entry as an example to show that challenge entries are not always as anonymous as we might hope. And, Heida’s ‘burninator’ technique isn’t the only giveaway either. How anonymous was the Self Portrait challenge?
Whether or not such a lack of anonymity affects the outcome of a challenge is entirely up to the individual voters. And, even the individual voter may not consciously know how much their voting pattern was influenced by knowing which photographer(s) entered which photo(s).
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 04:15:21 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
A team of photography professionals is unlikely to pick the same top 3 as a bunch of maths teachers for example. |
Not that there's anything wrong with MATH! |
|
|
|
08/19/2004 04:20:01 PM · #24 |
If we could wake D&L up to do it, there is no reason why you couldn't have another box in your score that shows 'average score from ribbon winners' as well as average vote by commenters.
Would that be interesting - I don't know.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2004 04:20:53 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
Originally posted by jonpink:
A team of photography professionals is unlikely to pick the same top 3 as a bunch of maths teachers for example. |
Not that there's anything wrong with MATH! |
...uh...ahem...er...... ;o)
|
|
