DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> Ghost Accounts
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 60, (reverse)
AuthorThread
10/05/2005 02:13:09 AM · #1
Can these be tracked? There's been an awful barrage of low scores especially tonight and I'm wondering if there are any precautions SC or the Admins are taking to prevent this? It's utterly frustrating and when you see great photographers getting hit hard, it's depressing for people like myself who average 5.1s in challenges.

Just a thought.
10/05/2005 02:45:17 AM · #2
... the silence is deafening... I know I'm not the only one thinking about this :)
10/05/2005 02:51:04 AM · #3
I asked before and was reassurred that yes, there are systems in place to prevent 'dupe' or fake accounts being started to abuse the voting system. :-)
10/05/2005 02:51:52 AM · #4
Early voters often vote low ... it's just the way it goes. There's never been any evidence of that kind of vote-tampering, despite constant suspicion.
So far as I know, the rare times we've encountered any kind of multiple accounts it was for the purpose of multiple or disguised entries, or to raise havoc in the forums ... not to bother with any voting.
10/05/2005 02:56:05 AM · #5
Well... there's definitely someone wreaking havoc in tonight's voting... check both threads for the recent challenges (i know you did)...
10/05/2005 03:05:02 AM · #6
Originally posted by GeneralE:

So far as I know, the rare times we've encountered any kind of multiple accounts it was for the purpose of multiple or disguised entries, or to raise havoc in the forums ... not to bother with any voting.

I think there *might* be few cases of multiple accounts, but not enough to be statistically significant.

Proof? Some photographs on the bottom 10% of the challenge results will have votes that looks like:

1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
4 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
5 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
6 xxx
7 x
8 -
9 -
10 xxx

Of course, the 10s might be friends for all I know.

10/05/2005 03:48:37 AM · #7
Another reason for all the one's and two's could be the voting system used by some people.
They will go through all the photos once giving them a one or two to help sort them.
I don't do this so I'm not sure what type of groups they are sorting them into.
After they are all sorted they go back through them and adjust the scores to the score they want to give.
10/05/2005 04:04:20 AM · #8
Originally posted by aaronb532:

Another reason for all the one's and two's could be the voting system used by some people.
They will go through all the photos once giving them a one or two to help sort them.
I don't do this so I'm not sure what type of groups they are sorting them into.
After they are all sorted they go back through them and adjust the scores to the score they want to give.


I use 4, 5 and 6 as my sorting bins.If I see something special then it may get placed in a 7 bin, or something dire goes into 3.

After the initial sort I will go back and adjust the scores.
10/05/2005 04:17:05 AM · #9
Maybe it's just the way people vote.
I've recently asked a user with average vote cast of around 3 what her voting scheme was and actually got a lengthy reply: this user likes to score average pics a 3 and gives 8+ to really oustanding images - nothing in between!
This is the voter's prerogative...
10/06/2005 11:56:59 PM · #10
I too was rather surprised at the stunning number of 1's and 2's I got on my entry. It was significantly better than my branches entry and got 3 times more 1's and 2's. Perhaps it was based on people not liking the style of the picture, but it was in line with the challenge and it did show strong evidence of thinking and planning in the picture, so I found it a little hard to swallow that the pic could have done so much worse in the 1-2 range. (I'm not actually disappointed with my overall score tho. I figured it might have gotten a 5, I got a 4.5)

I actually am a little concerned that all challenges seem to be dropping in their top vote. I am very glad that there are now 2 separate open challenges and I feel that splitting the voters can also reduce homogenization of votes.

I also use 1-3 do indicate that I do not see the connection with the challenge and I make sure I spend a little extra time on such photos to make sure I didn't miss anything.

I vote first on challenge connection, second on photographic quality and third make minor adjustments based on whether or not I liked the picture.

Falc: you might consider that because this is a voting system, it is appropriate to use the full spectrum of voting numbers. To keep most of your votes between 4 and 6 means that your vote really isn't going to count in most cases unless you intend for your vote to draw a pic back to the middle. If you want to affect the vote in any way, you will have to start giving out 8's 9's and 10's. There are usually a small handful of pics that truly merit a 10.
10/07/2005 12:09:48 AM · #11
Originally posted by Nitin:

Proof? Some photographs on the bottom 10% of the challenge results will have votes that looks like:

1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
4 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
5 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
6 xxx
7 x
8 -
9 -
10 xxx

Of course, the 10s might be friends for all I know.


I thought it meant the voters and photographers had taken the same mind altering substances ;-)
10/07/2005 12:57:19 AM · #12
Come on guys and gals, there are indeed multiple votes from ghosts. Husbands or wives, friends etc who setup accounts to make double votes. It happens all the time. The only way to get the vote on level grounds is by eliminating in the averages the top 10% and the bottom 10% of votes. Let them show just don't use them in the final average and winning stats. Then if they setup more ghost voting accounts it will become obvious. It really is time to balance the overly good votes and jerks who had a bad day and vote 1's on reasonable photos. Indeed there are some great photos and there are some real bad ones. There are also a number of ghost entry memberships. Almost every chanllenge has near identical photos. Maybe the same group of 2-4 people travel together and take the same picture? Great to have friends that close.

Not a bell curve but a modification of averaging to eliminate best friend votes and bad attitude votes. It's time!
10/07/2005 01:02:01 AM · #13
Originally posted by PhantomEWO:

Come on guys and gals, there are indeed multiple votes from ghosts. Husbands or wives, friends etc who setup accounts to make double votes. It happens all the time. The only way to get the vote on level grounds is by eliminating in the averages the top 10% and the bottom 10% of votes. Let them show just don't use them in the final average and winning stats. Then if they setup more ghost voting accounts it will become obvious. It really is time to balance the overly good votes and jerks who had a bad day and vote 1's on reasonable photos. Indeed there are some great photos and there are some real bad ones. There are also a number of ghost entry memberships. Almost every chanllenge has near identical photos. Maybe the same group of 2-4 people travel together and take the same picture? Great to have friends that close.

Not a bell curve but a modification of averaging to eliminate best friend votes and bad attitude votes. It's time!


IF it happened that I were one of these people, who voted high and low for such egregious reasons, and IF they changed the system to peel off the top and bottom 10% of votes, THEN it would be simple to change my tactics and award 3's and 8's instead of 1's and 10's.

I don't see it making much of a difference. Stattistically these troll votes don't even make a real difference now...

R.
10/07/2005 01:07:13 AM · #14
I have seen this tactic done on other sites....you cannot rate an image a 1 or a 10 without a comment. So maybe make it that you cannot rate 1,2,9 or 10 without a comment in this instance. Sure you could still rate a 3 or a 7 but 10 votes of 3 is nowhere near as harmful as 10 votes of 1 etc...!

Just my two cents worth.

Judi
10/07/2005 01:08:10 AM · #15
Originally posted by bear_music:

Originally posted by PhantomEWO:

Come on guys and gals, there are indeed multiple votes from ghosts. Husbands or wives, friends etc who setup accounts to make double votes. It happens all the time. The only way to get the vote on level grounds is by eliminating in the averages the top 10% and the bottom 10% of votes. Let them show just don't use them in the final average and winning stats. Then if they setup more ghost voting accounts it will become obvious. It really is time to balance the overly good votes and jerks who had a bad day and vote 1's on reasonable photos. Indeed there are some great photos and there are some real bad ones. There are also a number of ghost entry memberships. Almost every chanllenge has near identical photos. Maybe the same group of 2-4 people travel together and take the same picture? Great to have friends that close.

Not a bell curve but a modification of averaging to eliminate best friend votes and bad attitude votes. It's time!


IF it happened that I were one of these people, who voted high and low for such egregious reasons, and IF they changed the system to peel off the top and bottom 10% of votes, THEN it would be simple to change my tactics and award 3's and 8's instead of 1's and 10's.

I don't see it making much of a difference. Stattistically these troll votes don't even make a real difference now...

R.


I could care less what the Trolls vote or my average but for a lot of people when a good photos is submitted and they get a bunch of 1's and 2's that is just abusive and uncalled for. The same when a terrible picture is given 9 and 10's by friends, same thing. This site is a competition and a learning place. How are noobs going to learn with Trolls who have the appearance. You are right a half dozen 1's or 2's out of 150-300 votes means nothing other than pride. Same if a noob looks at some of the top 20 and see's junk but it has a bunch of friend or ghost votes. This discussion has been around the table so many times we're all dizzy. Why is it brought up???? BECAUSE it is a matter of pride and honesty, trolls have none of either.
10/07/2005 01:13:55 AM · #16
I'm starting to feel insulted. All you folks stating with such certainty that their are multiple account and cheaters out there.

You have no proof. If you do, please email the admins (Menu: Help > Contact) as they are prepared to do something about it. But if you have no proof, please quit insulting the administrators (and their unpaid lackeys) and impugning the integrity of those who cast votes.
10/07/2005 01:16:56 AM · #17
I usually agree with bear, but I am starting to see a trend. I like the idea of 1/2/9/10 votes must have a comment. I comment on 80% of those votes anyhow and I think most people try to as well.

I realize that there are a lot of pictures that genuinely deserve a lot of 1's, and mine are in that bunch, but I DO think it is suspicious that my branch photo which was terrible got 8.4% of votes in the 1/2 range. My beverages challenge got 16.7% of its votes in the 1/2 range.

It IS starting to have an effect at that point. On the other hand, I can't say all of those 1/2's were undeserved, it is merely weird to see the numbers increasing in this way.

PS. I have had 10's on both of those challenges as well, and for the record, I don't have any friends voting for me.
10/07/2005 01:27:19 AM · #18
I would very rarely give a vote of 1, the picture would have to be both dire and completely off topic to do so poorly, but when you see some really great pictures, (and I dont include any of mine in this category) getting votes of 1 from some voters, it starts to become clear that there is a core of members who are doing their level best to influence the vote, either to promote or push up their own entry, or possibly just to diminish someone elses entry out of spite or envy
10/07/2005 01:37:46 AM · #19
There just isn't any way to police it, sheesh. In order to police this you have to have some sort of consensus as to which pictures don't "deserve" the low (or high) votes, and the only way you can generate the consensus is by peeling off a certain percentage of votes, and if you do THAT then the supposed "trolls" will just migrate to the middle values where their votes will remain intact. Carry it to extremes, and everyone is scored on the basis of who has more 6's than 5's and 4's.

At another site, they have a panel that reviews all entries and selects 10 or so for voting, and the members vote on ONE of the 10 as their favorite of the group. Would you prefer this?

Robt.
10/07/2005 01:51:21 AM · #20
I've notice in some profiles where there average score given is around 4 or less. I'm sorry, to many good images on this site to have that low of an average score. Maybe disqualify any votes that came from that type of average range? or some oher type of block type of systems. I just can't see how anybody can have that kind of average......imo
10/07/2005 02:05:04 AM · #21
Originally posted by ace flyman:

I've notice in some profiles where there average score given is around 4 or less. I'm sorry, to many good images on this site to have that low of an average score. Maybe disqualify any votes that came from that type of average range? or some oher type of block type of systems. I just can't see how anybody can have that kind of average......imo


Ace, some people just have a higher standard they apply. One of them has already spoken up in here. As long as one votes one's system consistently, it's not a problem. It's the average relative to the other images that counts, not the individual votes. In my opinion, anyway.

Robt.
10/07/2005 02:06:48 AM · #22
Originally posted by bear_music:

There just isn't any way to police it, sheesh. In order to police this you have to have some sort of consensus as to which pictures don't "deserve" the low (or high) votes, and the only way you can generate the consensus is by peeling off a certain percentage of votes, and if you do THAT then the supposed "trolls" will just migrate to the middle values where their votes will remain intact. Carry it to extremes, and everyone is scored on the basis of who has more 6's than 5's and 4's.

At another site, they have a panel that reviews all entries and selects 10 or so for voting, and the members vote on ONE of the 10 as their favorite of the group. Would you prefer this?

Robt.


Let them migrate to the middle, that doesn't inflate votes either up or down and people don't get discouraged with troll votes. Sounds good to me.

And ya maybe a panel (impartial and anonimous for themselves and owner of photos, they narrow it down to top 15% of great pics (top 10 is too restrictive) and then members vote on thier choice of top three. Combine top three from each member and you have winner and top 10 photos. No ones feelings get hurt and everyone learns.

And yes there are great photogs who were paid members who have left this site due to troll voting .... that is real sad.
10/07/2005 02:28:20 AM · #23
Originally posted by bear_music:

Originally posted by ace flyman:

I've notice in some profiles where there average score given is around 4 or less. I'm sorry, to many good images on this site to have that low of an average score. Maybe disqualify any votes that came from that type of average range? or some oher type of block type of systems. I just can't see how anybody can have that kind of average......imo


Ace, some people just have a higher standard they apply. One of them has already spoken up in here. As long as one votes one's system consistently, it's not a problem. It's the average relative to the other images that counts, not the individual votes. In my opinion, anyway.

Robt.
text

Rob, ton of respect for you and most all the people on this site, but it just doesn't make sense. Basically some one with an 4 average is maybe picking one or two images as quality and the rest is crap. I see at least the top 25 to 50 images in a large challenge as pretty solid qualify shots. The other thing that brothers me on very low average votes cast, most of the folks I seen have about a full point higher personal average, so they walk on water but 95% of the images in a challenge is crap. Just doesn't make common sense to me. My last words on this issue. IT IS WHAT IT IS. If you have a strong image the trolls don't really manner......
10/07/2005 02:38:56 AM · #24
Originally posted by ace flyman:



Rob, ton of respect for you and most all the people on this site, but it just doesn't make sense. Basically some one with an 4 average is maybe picking one or two images as quality and the rest is crap. I see at least the top 25 to 50 images in a large challenge as pretty solid qualify shots. The other thing that brothers me on very low average votes cast, most of the folks I seen have about a full point higher personal average, so they walk on water but 95% of the images in a challenge is crap. Just doesn't make common sense to me. My last words on this issue. IT IS WHAT IT IS. If you have a strong image the trolls don't really manner......


I tend to agree with you in principle, but I think the cure may be worse than the disease. There's a price we pay when we start policing this stuff, and it gets pretty steep. So IMO as long as a person is consistent in his/her voting, the system isn't really a matter of concern.

If I were voting on an absolute scale (ranking challenge entries against the great and nearly-great images of the world, the Ansels and Dorothea Langes and Carier-Bressons) then my average vote given would be a lot lower than it is now, and it's fairly low already. But I rank on a challenge-specific scale, rating the images in the challenge against each other. I put most of them in the mid-ranges, 4 thru 6. Very few 3's, rarely a 2 or 1. More 7-10 than 4-and-lower, but usually few 9 or 20 votes. On an absolute scale, I'd rarely give a 9 or 10...

It's at least possible that these people are voting an absolute scale, and then their numbers make sense. There's no rule against it, and if they do it consistently I don't see where we have the right, or the need, to change the way they vote.

But that's just me.

R.
10/07/2005 03:06:51 AM · #25
I think you've got it just right, Bear - consistency is the key.
Since photography is an art-form it can not always be judged objectively. There must be room for personal interpretation and I believe we must allow for voters to disagree about scores, even if it does not make sense.
What I am worried about is that it seems that the number of comments are dropping?
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/26/2019 08:06:15 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 06/26/2019 08:06:15 PM EDT.