| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/06/2005 08:56:56 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by rex:
Originally posted by Telehubbie:
I think the same scenario could be used with the registered users: only let them enter one challenge in a given week... kidding, only kidding. :-)
|
I know you are kidding but that is all the registered user can enter now. One open challenge per week. |
Only a joke... sorry. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:00:55 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by Telehubbie:
Originally posted by rgo:
Members can enter either the open or member challenge in any given week, but not both. |
I think the same scenario could be used with the registered users: only let them enter one challenge in a given week... kidding, only kidding. :-)
One thought that I've pondered on is how much the site has grown even in the short time I've been involved here, and that number will only continue to grow with how incredible this site is and the influx of digital cameras in the world today. Digital is surpassing film (if it hasn't already) and more and more people are using them and then learning the editing tools to enhance them. It's only a matter of time before we see an open challenge with around 700 entries. |
I can only see positives in the increase of the amount of entries and we should not put any measures in place to restrict entries this would have a negative effect and would be inequitable.
Surely a better method would be to offer a higher tier membership for those willing to pay its all about supply and demand.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:01:51 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by tfaust:
Originally posted by rgo:
Just tossing this out there...
I think one approach that would be fair and might reduce the number of entries in open challenges, at the same time that this might also improve quality:
Members can enter either the open or member challenge in any given week, but not both. |
Not a bad idea, but one of the 'perks' of becoming a member is being able to enter 2 challenges in one week. |
Well, members get many features that registered users don't get: Portfolio space, that addiction called the update button, etc.
The solution might involve allowing registered users to enter no more than a set number of challenges, say five or ten, and after that, they need to become a member to continue participation.
OR, the site can limit registered users to a maximum of two challenges per month, and their reward if they join is the freedom to enter up to four.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:02:03 AM · #29 |
| Don't be sorry. I was just stating that is how it is now. If you want to start a debate I will open myself up for a slap. Maybe have a monthly open challenge. In other words one a month. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:02:28 AM · #30 |
I don't understand why someone would hold back from entering, or unsubmit their entry, simply based on the number of entries in a challenge. Can someone please explain their thinking on this? rex? fotoshootme?
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:04:37 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
I don't understand why someone would hold back from entering, or unsubmit their entry, simply based on the number of entries in a challenge. Can someone please explain their thinking on this? rex? fotoshootme? |
I didn't do that. I pulled mine because I put way too much time into it and didn't get results I liked. I then said "the hell with it" and threw in the towel for that challenge. I limit myself to so much work for a challenge. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:05:59 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
1) Comments marked "useful" are used as credits for entering. You must have 10 (or some decided upon number) such comments in the previous week to enter. Now that would up the number of comments, wouldn't it!
|
This might work in a perfect world, but I think you would find a lot of people not marking many comments useful just to keep entries down. Also this would be very dificult for new members who have not yet built up the confidence to leave a post they feel IS usefull. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:06:52 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by rgo:
The solution might involve allowing registered users to enter no more than a set number of challenges, say five or ten, and after that, they need to become a member to continue participation.
|
Now that is a good idea
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:08:09 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by rex:
Originally posted by rgo:
The solution might involve allowing registered users to enter no more than a set number of challenges, say five or ten, and after that, they need to become a member to continue participation.
|
Now that is a good idea |
Yes i agree, very good idea.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:21:29 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
I can only see positives in the increase of the amount of entries and we should not put any measures in place to restrict entries this would have a negative effect and would be inequitable. |
I think I agree with what keegbow has said. It's a pretty public site and we should be encouraging participation, not wringing our hands in worry every time the number of entries gets high.
I especially dislike the proposals that would limit or exclude entering based on the photo. The ones who would be turned away are the ones who stand to benefit most from comments.
People just have to accept the fact that it is going to take more of their time to vote on all entries. If you don't have the time to invest, just vote on as many as you can. As long as people don't cherry-pick the photos they vote on from the thumbnails, their votes are just as valid as if they voted on all entries.
This same whining thread seems to appear everytime a challenge attracts a lot of entries. It really is getting to be sort of a dead horse, a stale subject. The people who complain might be spending their time in a more useful manner if they would just use it to vote instead.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:27:18 AM · #36 |
I think everyone has the right to enter a challenge that they are eligible to enter. However, I (in the last 6 months or so) have found my self in a bland; don’t care state because of high number of entries. What I mean by that is that I use to try to vote on every entry. As the number of submissions began to rise I found myself only voting on about 60% then 40% and now around the 20% and sometimes don’t vote at all. I want to comment more; I was hoping to do 1000 comments or more this year but that has suffered as well because of the number of entries. I know people say only vote on 20%, that’s only 100 entries out of 500, and yes that’s true but I find myself wanting to vote for another and another. But never get the chance to vote on them all. And the worst feeling I believe is to see three Great photographs, blue, red, and yellow ribbon winners and find that you did not vote on them due to time. And I think skipping photographs to vote on the ones you want skews the results.
I don’t know what the answer to this issue is but I do believe the Administrators and Site Council should sit down and discuss what possible options there may be. Maybe everyone can take a day or so and come up with some ideas to put in front of the SC and Admins as suggestions. Keeping every user in mind. If we all take a constructive approach to this one of us may have an answer just waiting to post.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:32:50 AM · #37 |
| I have personally quit the challenges and their hence the rest of the site because of these problems. I gave it a second chance when I left for about a week a month ago but I have realized things will not change. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:37:59 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by rgo:
Well, members get many features that registered users don't get: Portfolio space, that addiction called the update button, etc. |
For many, this wouldn't be enough to justify the membership fee - especially those that use other sites for their portfolio storage (pbase, smugmug, etc)
Originally posted by rgo:
The solution might involve allowing registered users to enter no more than a set number of challenges, say five or ten, and after that, they need to become a member to continue participation.
OR, the site can limit registered users to a maximum of two challenges per month, and their reward if they join is the freedom to enter up to four. |
I do think you have valid points here and good ideas. However, I still think this is too limiting in keeping with the spirit of the site. One of the absolutely fantastic things about DPC is that people can participate and feel like a member of the community without paying to use it. Limiting non-members like this completely changes things, imo.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:40:04 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by rex:
Originally posted by rgo:
The solution might involve allowing registered users to enter no more than a set number of challenges, say five or ten, and after that, they need to become a member to continue participation.
|
Now that is a good idea |
Not going to happen. One thing Drew and Langdon are passionate about is that Open Challenges stay open. That is not going to change. It was a promise they made when DPC 2 code was released and paid membership was introduced.
There is no quick fix, easy solution for this. It's an ongoing discussion in SC, and we still have yet to come up with a good solution that can be implemented rapidly. We know that the volume of entries is problematic. But part of our job is to take a long view and really think through the potential problems with some of these ideas.
We are not ignoring the problem, we are trying to come up with better than a bandaid solution. :)
Clara |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:58:02 AM · #40 |
I am sure many people don't see the harm in the word, "whining", but I see it as derogatory, and thus it's bad netiquette. It means:
"habitually complaining; "a whining child"
I don't think any of the posters, and particularly the original poster, Mandy, are habitual complainers (nor children ;)
(Actually Websters online has a different definition, which has to do mostly with the "pitch/sound" of the complaint, but that's equally unapplicable here.)
I think it was a legitimate question, and the discussion is also valid. If people want to discuss this, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to without name calling. If you don't agree with a thread, or want to participate in a discussion--no matter how many times it's been said before--simply use the ignore feature to ignore the thread.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 09:59:45 AM · #41 |
Okay here is a suggestion, have a preliminary round. The first 3 days is the sorting process and to be honest there is very little change in scores after the second day anyway. Anything below a 4.999 is removed and the 5s and aboves remain in place and voting continues.
Comments?
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:02:04 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by khdoss:
Comments? |
then what motivation do i have to vote during the first 3 days? not me personally, but that's the argument you're going to get.
Message edited by author 2005-07-06 10:02:32. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:04:44 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by khdoss:
Okay here is a suggestion, have a preliminary round. The first 3 days is the sorting process and to be honest there is very little change in scores after the second day anyway. Anything below a 4.999 is removed and the 5s and aboves remain in place and voting continues.
Comments? |
This idea has been suggested. It requires a significant coding change to implement. Ergo, it's not an easy thing to do. Plus there have been compelling arguments made that it deprives some entries of valuable comments that can be used to help the photographer improve.
Clara
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:09:34 AM · #44 |
Is there a breakdown of how many registered users vs members enter challenges? Would there be value in not limiting entries into open challenges, but rather dividing the entries into registered users and members? Registered users vote on their own entries, and members can vote on both, if they like.
I know this isn't as thought-through as perhaps it should be, but I'm just thinking out loud. As far as I'm concerned, I don't think threads like this amount to as much as a demand for change, but rather as a way for the site's users to dialogue, and perhaps collectively come up with potential ideas that SC can then consider for themselves.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:10:47 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by khdoss:
Okay here is a suggestion, have a preliminary round. The first 3 days is the sorting process and to be honest there is very little change in scores after the second day anyway. Anything below a 4.999 is removed and the 5s and aboves remain in place and voting continues.
Comments? |
I love this idea, it would get rid of all of the soccer mom pictures that I just give ones to anyway |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:10:58 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
I am sure many people don't see the harm in the word, "whining", but I see it as derogatory, and thus it's bad netiquette. It means:
"habitually complaining; "a whining child"
I don't think any of the posters, and particularly the original poster, Mandy, are habitual complainers (nor children ;)
(Actually Websters online has a different definition, which has to do mostly with the "pitch/sound" of the complaint, but that's equally unapplicable here.)
I think it was a legitimate question, and the discussion is also valid. If people want to discuss this, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to without name calling. If you don't agree with a thread, or want to participate in a discussion--no matter how many times it's been said before--simply use the ignore feature to ignore the thread. |
THANK YOU! I am glad you commented on that, it really pissed me off. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:12:02 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by gi_joe05:
Originally posted by khdoss:
Okay here is a suggestion, have a preliminary round. The first 3 days is the sorting process and to be honest there is very little change in scores after the second day anyway. Anything below a 4.999 is removed and the 5s and aboves remain in place and voting continues.
Comments? |
I love this idea, it would get rid of all of the soccer mom pictures that I just give ones to anyway |
WHat do you mean by soccer mom pictures? |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:12:55 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by blemt:
deprives some entries of valuable comments that can be used to help the photographer improve.
Clara |
It is easier to get comments by posting your photo in the forum. I have only two comments on my macro entry so people aren't really blazing the comments in to help. If I post in a forum then I will get more comments. I know registered user don't have portfolio space here but it has already been said and I belive it to be true that most here have other means of storing photos. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:13:39 AM · #49 |
How about having challenges that are harder to take photos of. Say, a requirement that a photo be taken in Washington one week, Barcelona the next. One week, the photo must be taken with a Konica-Minolta 7D, the next with an Olympus D-600L. That would sort out the hard core who will get on a plane or buy the right camera from the part timers.
Seriously: market forces will work. I find that voting 20% is a reasonable solution if the numbers are high and I do not have time. That is, if I feel the need to vote. And getting a good score in such a large field is quite gratifying. I am not sure that there is musch to be fixed.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 10:13:54 AM · #50 |
I have two suggestions and will throw one into the ring to test the water.
What I believe one of the main essences is, is 'the challenge'. It seems that this is being lost. Without going into the 'pp' side of things again, I am speaking about the challenge of using your 'eye'. The challenge of taking a better photograph. The challenge of taking the best photograph you can of the challenge subject. I think the subject DOES need to be adhered to, and strictly. That leaves less wiggle room. It makes it harder; it makes it a 'challenge'.
Additionally, I really would like to see a 'doesn't meet the challenge' button. Example, in this current Open Challenge, it was clearly defined as "Take a photograph where this basic shape is clearly shown as a key element. This may be a circular object, or a group of items forming a circle". For me, this has made it very simple. If a 'circle' is not the first thing I see when I view the photograph, it hasn't met the challenge. Simple. I do not even need to 'think' about the composition, colors, etc; 'bam' straight onto the next one. There are plenty of 'circles' out there, and if people cannot find one, they are not hard to make.
The other side of the coin there is, and this for me is the main side, ensuring what *I* choose to shoot MEETS the challenge. I relish the challenge. Frankly, I do not understand why people question it, or even complain. For me, it is not about what *I* would like to photograph, it is about what I have been *challenged* to photograph.
It is all about lowering/raising the bar. I AM new here and am still trying to decipher that aspect of this site.
In the short time I have been here, I have gained a lot. I do though understand that there are people who may just be here to enter 'photos' into a competition, rather than trying to improve/learn as a photographer.
I have some time right now that allows me to become a little engrossed, but that will not always be the case, therefore I entirely empathise with the vein of this thread. This is not work (photographing for here OR voting here), and, while the voting is a form of 'reciprocation', it seems it is becoming overwhelming and throwing the balance (of pleasure and education) out for many people.
People who do not wish to push themselves will likely not compete. Maybe, if a 'doesn't meet challenge' button is introduced, people can be 'made to wait out the next challenge' if they get too many of these in one challenge or if they get too many from two challenges in a row, I don't know.
I just think if the Challenge rules are enforced more, it is not so 'easy' to just 'submit' anything. People will have to 'think' and therefore the quality should get better and, if the numbers are still up, then a solution will need to be found. I can always throw my second suggestion out there for that ":)".
PS: as for the idea of requiring membership after 5-10 challenges, I for one may disappear. I do not like my hand being forced and I DO like the fact that I have been able to 'test the water' here for 'free'. As mentioned, in a sense, I see 'voting' as an unsaid 'give back', but I really don't want to analyze it that much.
Now if you want to give out a prize of 'a months/years membership' for a 'special challenge', I might prick up my ears. Otherwise, when I want to, I will become a member. I am content right now. Entertained too - where'd that fight go?
|
|
