| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/19/2004 11:16:16 AM · #151 |
From the posts of Karalew, doctornick and Blackdog it appears that perhaps some are misunderstanding the current proposal. It would not prevent or discourage people from replying to comments received on their challenge entries, but rather it would only delay replying until voting is finished. The time delay in inself may serve as a cooling off period and thus lessen the angry replies.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:16:18 AM · #152 |
Originally posted by hardwaybets:
Well I thought this thread would have been dead by now...but obviously not...and I am quite glad it hasn't. I think it is an important element of this web site to express thoughts and opinions.
I think cghubbell is so money with his most recent comment. It was precisely the point (albeit I was sipping on some wine last night so my point may have been a bit sluggish) I was trying to make.
If you feel the need to "defend" your image, it simply isn't a very good image (i.e. mass appeal (or at least plurality appeal)) and no amount of PM lobbying should change that. |
I think there is a distinction that should be made here between defending your image and explaining another point of view.
For instance I've posted images in a challenge and had comments that lead me to believe the veiwer has missed he point. But in the same challenge had comments that make me sure another viewer has hit it right on the head.
Now if I were to PM the first veiwer and explain what I and the second veiwer had seen and they had not, would you class that as "Defending" my image.
I would say it was explaining what they had missed and perhaps even educating them, showing them an alternative way of looking at something. The image must have it in the first place, not therefore a weak image. Its just that some may not know how to see it.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:16:34 AM · #153 |
Defending? What about someone just explaining? This is a site for learning, I thought. If someone can not question your comment how will people learn? You may type something and someone may interpet it the wrong way, why not ask questions so we all understand?? I think if you are afraid to be confronted about your comments, then don't comment.
Originally posted by cghubbell:
I feel pretty strongly about this, so I'd like to weigh in on the PM / comments issue. I really don't like receiving defensive PMs. I rarely feel that they're disrespectful / rude. Quite the contrary - this community is overall one of the friendliest ones on the 'net. Hell, even the Canon vs. Nikon wars are friendly, even entertaining, here.
Here's my suggestion for responding to criticism: Don't ever defend your image. With all due respect, I even challenge the individual who thoughtfully said they would always defend (family) model criticism in their submissions. If you chose the models, and asked for critique, you need to be ready to accept criticism of your choices. Images are chosen by subjective aesthetic appeal, and family ties run no deeper than the photographer's viewfinder. I appreciate the frustration, but as I said, if you sumbit it, be prepared to accept good, bad, and valueless criticism.
Rather than defending images, think about what could have lead the viewer to their conclusion. If you conclude are ignorant, unobservant, or rude, then move on the the next more valuable comment. Your response won't change their personality. However, if you conclude they might be on to something, then think about how you could have avoided leading the critiquer to their suggestions. At a minimum respect the critiquer's time by making your PM's value a multiple of the value of the critique. Remember that 0 X 0 = 0, so valueless criticisms get no response.
As for anonymity, I have no problem with the DPC as it exists today. You can't please everyone, yet I think DPC finds a nice groove in terms of compromise and keeps the majority very happy. I've been on enough other sites to know that whatever is in place today is WORKING WELL. The community is mostly self-policing, and the number of forum wars, member abuse, etc. is TINY compared to many other communities. |
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 11:17:09.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:19:35 AM · #154 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
From the posts of Karalew, doctornick and Blackdog it appears that perhaps some are misunderstanding the current proposal. It would not prevent or discourage people from replying to comments received on their challenge entries, but rather it would only delay replying until voting is finished. The time delay in inself may serve as a cooling off period and thus lessen the angry replies. |
Absolutly agree about the time period for cooling off. I know that from experiance of working in an e-mail intensive environment.
The problem with text is that you are unable to convey emotion with it. Text on its own can very easily sound abrupt or even offensive. You should never reply to such textual comments imediately, its always better to have a cooling off period.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:20:01 AM · #155 |
Originally posted by Manic:
...(unless the comment in question is marked as offensive, which would require another layer of coding)... |
I don't see the need for any new coding, only reinstating the original code.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:24:42 AM · #156 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
There are solutions to the "create a new user account" problem. One idea would be a "participation requirement" before an account can vote/comment. Not only would you would have to have your account for a certain amount of time (no more "instant entitlement"), but perhaps you'd have to submit photos to at least 3 challenges to gain voting/commenting privileges. That way, when the challenge is over and the identities are revealed, they can go look at the user's profile, and see what that user is capable of submitting/scoring -- it won't be "empty" like is so often the case today... and then accurately assess the worthwhileness of the comments. (The "put up or shut up" analogy comes to mind...) |
Another solution would be to require an real e-mail addy by sending a confirmation when someone signs up as is done by a lot of sites. Wouldn't absolutely prevent ghost accounts, just make them harder to do.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:25:31 AM · #157 |
On my entry in Backlighting challenge I received many comments, and most had no idea what it was even the title said it. However, I refrained from PMing them and trying to explain. I did explain it in the pic description after the challenge.
Patience is a virtue. (cliche, but true)
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 11:26:33.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:35:23 AM · #158 |
If a reply to a comment is solely for the purpose of explaining, and/or educating, and not at all for the purpose of enticing a higher vote from a now more enlightened voter, why can't it wait until voting is finished?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 11:57:21 AM · #159 |
Blackdog, I am cognizant of your point. But I respectfully disagree. I liken photography to public speaking. If your message is "misunderstood" by another person, no matter what your intentions were with the substance of the message and the style (i.e. words chosen, use of demonstrative aids and the like)you chose, then your message was not effective.
The same can be said for the images we post. In my humble opinion, it is the audience's perceptions (be it in speaking or in viewing an image) that makes or breaks your image. If I have to explain my image, my intent behind it, my methodology, why I took it from a differnent angle, why that angle made sense to me, THEN the image was not effective.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 12:07:02 PM · #160 |
Originally posted by Karalew:
I think if you are afraid to be confronted about your comments, then don't comment.
|
Honestly, I would welcome you to review the comments I've made via my profile. I frequently provide critiques which take me considerable time to put together, and am rather proud of the efforts I put in. In fact, here's a PM I rec'd yesterday:
Thank you for an extremely helpful comment. I really appreciate it. You managed to "articulate what I couldn't figure out about my own picture."
A well thought out question intended to clarify a comment I made is always welcome. Given how much time I put into them, I certainly don't want that time wasted by misunderstanding, or I'd be better off getting houshold projects done :) I also welcome note like the above one which provide ME feedback on my efforts. However, a simple "thanks for commenting on my image" leaves me wondering (1) Which image? and (2) What did you find valuable about the critique? Did you change anything as a result?. But just to be clear, my point was not about PMs, it was about defensive PMs in response to image criticism.
What I wrote in my post was that I don't like defensive PMs. If I suggest that I had difficulty identifying a clear subject in a photo, don't respond by telling me what the subject was. Just absorb the feedback and consider how you could have made a stronger subject. I don't care what the photographer's intended subject was; I wanted the photographer to know that it wasn't clear to me. Of course, in that example, I usually offer suggestions as to how the composition could be changed so my point is better made. Being able to take feedback is not a skill everyone has developed, but photography can help to develop it, and it is extremely valuable outside of DPC / photography in general.
At any rate I feel you may be putting words in my mouth which weren't implied by my post - I didn't suggest banning PMs. I only suggest that photographers refrain from getting defensive when they receive criticism, and like in life, ignoring the bullies rather than fanning their fire.
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 12:13:25.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 02:23:43 PM · #161 |
I too am cognizant of your point hardwaybets, (good word that, must try to use it in conversation), but consider this.
If you liken photography to public speaking and the message is "misunderstood" you will very likely have the opportunity to rephrase the message, use different words to get the message across. Also this is a case where only part of the audience has not understood, not as of they are all standing about scratching their heads. I said earlier this may be the odd voter / commenter who has missed what others saw.
Are you saying we should just ignore the part of the audience who don't see the message straight away?
I've been to galleries and seen examples of art, not just photo's, and to be honest I just don't get it. Whereas if the artist had been there and was able to explain his/her thoughts/ideas/aspirations etc. I would have enjoyed the experience much more.
Just to be clear, I am not advocating the defense / explanation of an image for the purpose of eliciting a higher vote. Hence the next, (and last), point.
The last thing is, I'm not talking about sending PM's during the challenge, I think its fundamentally wrong. Anyone who does so should stop doing so in my opinion. You can't really discuss anything useful because you would identify your entry which is clearly not on. So wait until after the challenge.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 02:50:20 PM · #162 |
It can. But I guess, I don't think people are really trying to get a high score here. I mean it is not like you win money or anything. You win a virtual ribbon. I think people just want to clarify their work. When you go to a museum, regardless if you get the idea or not, there is a podium in front of the work that explains it to you.
Originally posted by coolhar:
If a reply to a comment is solely for the purpose of explaining, and/or educating, and not at all for the purpose of enticing a higher vote from a now more enlightened voter, why can't it wait until voting is finished? |
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 14:54:50.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 02:52:19 PM · #163 |
I agree. I also think that most people will not get defensive if you are giving a comment in the right way. Some people her are rude, and they post comments in a rude tone. I really think most people are getting defensive PMs when they post nasty comments. There is a polite way to tell someone their work sucks. I think a lot of people like being rude when they can hide behind a screen name. That same person would never speak like that, if they had to say it in person. If you say you will give a 1 for someone PMing you, I can tell from that you probably posted something really nasty.
Originally posted by cghubbell:
Originally posted by Karalew:
I think if you are afraid to be confronted about your comments, then don't comment.
|
Honestly, I would welcome you to review the comments I've made via my profile. I frequently provide critiques which take me considerable time to put together, and am rather proud of the efforts I put in. In fact, here's a PM I rec'd yesterday:
Thank you for an extremely helpful comment. I really appreciate it. You managed to "articulate what I couldn't figure out about my own picture."
A well thought out question intended to clarify a comment I made is always welcome. Given how much time I put into them, I certainly don't want that time wasted by misunderstanding, or I'd be better off getting houshold projects done :) I also welcome note like the above one which provide ME feedback on my efforts. However, a simple "thanks for commenting on my image" leaves me wondering (1) Which image? and (2) What did you find valuable about the critique? Did you change anything as a result?. But just to be clear, my point was not about PMs, it was about defensive PMs in response to image criticism.
What I wrote in my post was that I don't like defensive PMs. If I suggest that I had difficulty identifying a clear subject in a photo, don't respond by telling me what the subject was. Just absorb the feedback and consider how you could have made a stronger subject. I don't care what the photographer's intended subject was; I wanted the photographer to know that it wasn't clear to me. Of course, in that example, I usually offer suggestions as to how the composition could be changed so my point is better made. Being able to take feedback is not a skill everyone has developed, but photography can help to develop it, and it is extremely valuable outside of DPC / photography in general.
At any rate I feel you may be putting words in my mouth which weren't implied by my post - I didn't suggest banning PMs. I only suggest that photographers refrain from getting defensive when they receive criticism, and like in life, ignoring the bullies rather than fanning their fire. |
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 15:03:14.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 03:21:37 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by Karalew:
It can. But I guess, I don't think people are really trying to get a high score here. I mean it is not like you win money or anything. You win a virtual ribbon. I think people just want to clarify their work. When you go to a museum, regardless if you get the idea or not, there is a podium in front of the work that explains it to you. |
Most people are not trying to cheat, at least not very conspicuously, (perhaps subconscienously). But on the other hand some people have said openly in the forums that they do try to get higher scores by "explaining" their shots. There was even a post recently inviting PMs and saying that they would be rewarded with a higher vote. There was also one earlier in this thread that said they would raise a vote after receiving an explanation. Do you really want to be enabling that type of behavior? Isn't it worth it to just wait a few days until the voting is finished?
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 15:27:08.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 03:31:18 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
... Do you really want to be enabling that type of behavior? ... |
A little perspective here people - the world will not collapse in to anarchy or fascism if some people change their votes based on PMing during a challenge. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 03:49:06 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by joebok:
Originally posted by coolhar:
... Do you really want to be enabling that type of behavior? ... |
A little perspective here people - the world will not collapse in to anarchy or fascism if some people change their votes based on PMing during a challenge. |
Nothing wrong with a bit of anarchy every now and then !!!
I have not commented on many images lately because I didn't want to have to defend my comments during the challenges I still can't see why it can't wait till after voting or as mentioned before the option button not see the who made the comments.
Not so long ago during the selective saturation challenge one member went a little overboard with his comments and this caused uproar in the forums and huge debates on his comments all during the challenge which I thought spoiled the challenge to a degree. That whole issue could have been a lot smoother if people had the week to coool down. I have seen issues like this in several challenges since i have been here. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 03:54:10 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by magicshutter:
I don't always agree with the commentors, but I really don't appriciate people downtalking my children (has happened) when I use them as models. You're damn right if you think I'm going to PM you and express how pointless your opinion has become (they then rethought their opinion about my model and decided to alter the comment to exclude their personal judgements) Don't make rude comments and you're not going to get rude responses (see murphy's law about exceptions to all rules). You could hate everything about my photo and I don't really care anymore unless you abuse the comment box. By abusing it I mean personally attacking models, or breeds of dog, or anything else like that.
Joe |
Iv'e wasted a lot of time whining about what pople wrote in the comments about my shots- but I have always written it off as stupidity. But- I have to say - there isn't a more Assanine thing that I have read on this site than someone PM'ing someone about a breed of a dog. I had to laugh out loud.
If someone says "I like the shot but your kid is ugly" thats bad-
If someone says "nice lighting but the model needs to lose a few pounds"- thats tacky but legitimate.
If someone says "You goofball- everyone know that little rat faced terriers are smelly, inbred and unphotogenic" -well- I would like to meet that guy and buy him a beer, because cutesy dog shots are repugnant.
I'm sorry magicshutter- but come on. Getting mad about dog critism? |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 04:10:36 PM · #168 |
You know if we keep this up, the comments on this thread will outnumber the whopping number of entries in the BWII challenge.
Seriously folks...I got 3 comments in last week's challenge. I was disheartened by that low number of comments. But my image really lacked inspiration when I looked at it in light of those comments. And while I would have preferred a far higher score and better praise, the image really didn't deserve it (in retrospect of course). But to PM someone to argue the merits of my image is, IMHO, silly. I learned by looking at the comments, that, while scarce, was much appreciated by me for those few that took the time to make them.
Like I said yesterday evening...a picture is worth a thousand words...not a thousand words and a couple of PMs. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 04:10:44 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by joebok:
A little perspective here people - the world will not collapse in to anarchy or fascism if some people change their votes based on PMing during a challenge. |
At the risk of appearing to have lost even more perspective I'll say this - I don't predict world collapse, or anarchy. I just see a chance to improve our challenges. And I just don't see what would be lost by going back to the old way of comments being anonymous until voting is finished. I see a gain (however large or small is debatable) but see no counterbalancing loss. Am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 04:21:40 PM · #170 |
I dont see how saying someone needs to lose weight is legit. That is just rude. You are not putting in a bid for a magazine cover.
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by magicshutter:
I don't always agree with the commentors, but I really don't appriciate people downtalking my children (has happened) when I use them as models. You're damn right if you think I'm going to PM you and express how pointless your opinion has become (they then rethought their opinion about my model and decided to alter the comment to exclude their personal judgements) Don't make rude comments and you're not going to get rude responses (see murphy's law about exceptions to all rules). You could hate everything about my photo and I don't really care anymore unless you abuse the comment box. By abusing it I mean personally attacking models, or breeds of dog, or anything else like that.
Joe |
Iv'e wasted a lot of time whining about what pople wrote in the comments about my shots- but I have always written it off as stupidity. But- I have to say - there isn't a more Assanine thing that I have read on this site than someone PM'ing someone about a breed of a dog. I had to laugh out loud.
If someone says "I like the shot but your kid is ugly" thats bad-
If someone says "nice lighting but the model needs to lose a few pounds"- thats tacky but legitimate.
If someone says "You goofball- everyone know that little rat faced terriers are smelly, inbred and unphotogenic" -well- I would like to meet that guy and buy him a beer, because cutesy dog shots are repugnant.
I'm sorry magicshutter- but come on. Getting mad about dog critism? |
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 05:06:05 PM · #171 |
I would like to get more responses to my comments. Personally, I don't care when you get around to sending them.
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 17:06:31. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 05:56:28 PM · #172 |
I don't get why people think they are somehow above recieving email from avg people. Anyone want to email me about a comment I made, A photo I shot, or an idea they have that they think I would enjoy. Go ahead for anything! I for one enjoy the communication I get from this site, bad threads and all. A world without hostility would be boring. People don't see this site for what it really is, bragging rights and one giant marketing report. Some businesses pay thousands of dollars a year to get feedback from consumers, while we all get it for free. Alot of people are eager to use the comment box to tell use what's wrong, and even quicker to punish us for not knowing how to 'fix it'. While I agree some email replies are uncalled for and some people are just plain rude, and some people you couldn't help if you stapled the answer to their forehead. Not all are trying to get a better vote.
Take what I say for what it's worth. A guy who knows nothing giving you some useless advice over a forum, or a unique photographer offering a bright side to an obvious wide-felt problem. It's up to you, but remember, 'The more seriously you take things, the harder the rules become'.
Joe
Message edited by author 2004-11-19 17:58:17.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 06:15:25 PM · #173 |
What if the person who leaves the comments has the ability (check box) to remain annomous until voting has completed.
I know nothing of code so maybe that would be difficult as well. |
|
|
|
11/19/2004 07:20:05 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by Manic:
The SC currently have no way of seeing the current comments on any image, so they can't see who is making what comments until after the challenge ends, just like every user. Since the SC also compete and vote in challenges, I suspect that most of us wouldn't want to see what comments are being left by others until after the challenge (unless the comment in question is marked as offensive, which would require another layer of coding)...
As for disabling PMs, this would mean that certain users would be uncontactable while that user has an entry in a challenge, which would annoying for anyone trying to contact them for non-challenge related reasons!
Spaz, if I remember correctly, that user was given a written warning from the SC regarding their commenting style, and hasn't been on DPC since. |
That may be, but the account is still active, so what is to stop them from another round of troll comments just for old time's sake?
|
|
|
|
11/19/2004 08:27:57 PM · #175 |
I like communication/critique about photography, before, during or after a Challenge.
Personally, I very much appreciate knowing from whom the critique is coming from when I receive it. Thus saving a week's worth of steaming about which of my fellow DPCers said that mean thing, or wondering which of them gave that very nice, constructive comment about my image.
Dialogue is good. Whenever it occurs.
|
|
