| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/31/2006 02:57:32 AM · #226 |
I don't think it possible to have a completely "fair" way to fix all this. Some people's scores will move up some down.
Eventually we'll all have to "move on" though. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 02:57:58 AM · #227 |
Originally posted by beggs:
Why are they not being banned from the site? |
As has been mentioned already in the thread, all users who were involved in the voting have also had their accounts suspended. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 02:59:01 AM · #228 |
This is just...shocking. I mean, Rikki? Rikki?
I just can't get over this. He was always so nice, and he did the best photos... |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 02:59:39 AM · #229 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by jdannels:
I am not trying to hurt Rikki while he is down but isn't this the punishment deemed appropriate by the site? |
I'm sure a one year suspension is the equivalent of a ban. |
personally I'll be surprised if we ever see him come back. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:00:56 AM · #230 |
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
With regards to the year ban, why not allow Rikki the incentive to show the level of remorse that he states he feels. I think time off for substantial contribution would work well for everyone. Allow Rikki to put together some comprehensive tutorials, and workshops with each yielding valuable tools for DPC members. |
HONOUR THE CHEATERS....
GREAT SUGGESTION |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:03:18 AM · #231 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by jdannels:
I am not trying to hurt Rikki while he is down but isn't this the punishment deemed appropriate by the site? |
I'm sure a one year suspension is the equivalent of a ban. |
I agree I guess, and agree that that is along time to be away and come back. But it seems it should say a year ban in the DQ notes.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:11:52 AM · #232 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by beggs:
Why are they not being banned from the site? |
As has been mentioned already in the thread, all users who were involved in the voting have also had their accounts suspended. |
I didn't think "loss of account and banned from site" was the same as suspended. If this is the final decision of the site council then the rules should be updated to reflect the reality of the punishments. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:13:32 AM · #233 |
Originally posted by beggs:
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by beggs:
Why are they not being banned from the site? |
As has been mentioned already in the thread, all users who were involved in the voting have also had their accounts suspended. |
I didn't think "loss of account and banned from site" was the same as suspended. If this is the final decision of the site council then the rules should be updated to reflect the reality of the punishments. |
In this case it is the same thing, just different wording...
Suspended forever. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:13:46 AM · #234 |
| I just can't believe Rikki would do this he seemed so nice.. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:14:25 AM · #235 |
Originally posted by jdannels:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by jdannels:
I am not trying to hurt Rikki while he is down but isn't this the punishment deemed appropriate by the site? |
I'm sure a one year suspension is the equivalent of a ban. |
I agree I guess, and agree that that is along time to be away and come back. But it seems it should say a year ban in the DQ notes. |
Unlike many judges, we are not required to always impliment the maximum possible punishment.
Those familiar with the facts have made a decision felt to be fair to the user and the site/membership. Those of you without the facts may disagree, but you should realize that you are basing your opinions on speculation and not evidence. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:14:38 AM · #236 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by PhantomEWO:
Delete all accounts that have no camera, sorry but this is a photo site, to actively participate you really need a camera. |
If my camera breaks tomorrow I can't vote? *sniff* |
Just fake it. Or do we have PO-lice now checking for actual camera ownership? Shall we also ban people who, out of envy, lay claim to a better camera than the one they actually have? jejeje™ |
Yeah I actually have a Canon Mark-II-something and you can see it on my EXIF data but I just faked it and say it's a tiny Fuji PnS camera, hehe (I wish!) |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:17:26 AM · #237 |
Only a few days ago I was talking to Rikki about buying a lens off him even though i have always said to myself that I would never buy a second hand lens. But my thoughts were that Rikki would be a very trustworthy person to purchase off as i believed that he would have too much to lose on this site to have any bad intentions.
I will now be re-ordering my NEW lens. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:24:58 AM · #238 |
I don't know Rikki from Adam's housecat and I don't feel any personal loss either from his suspension or from the apparent "acts" that resulted in his suspension. When I joined this site, I mentioned it to 5 or 6 guys I hang out with. I even showed some photos I was planning on entering to some of the guys and without my suggestion they came on here to register and "give me votes". With that knowledge I decided to never show any of those guys my work that I planned to submit to a challenge again. Its not like my work does well here anyway but its exactly as GraphicFunk stated, I didn't ever want to feel like I might have had to depend on help from any of them. I find it difficult to believe that Rikki wouldn't have at least suspected that someone else was inflating his scores especially if he sent them copies of the image beforehand.
Sad to hear that this happened to a community that works on trust and respect but based on everyone's comments about Rikki's work and the few images of his that I can remember I'm sure that he'll be able to gain some respect for his work again someday even if he fails to gain it for his decision making.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:29:43 AM · #239 |
Originally posted by KevinRiggs:
I find it difficult to believe that Rikki wouldn't have at least suspected that someone else was inflating his scores especially if he sent them copies of the image beforehand.
|
Especially when you look in past (Ghost Account) threads |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:30:12 AM · #240 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by beggs:
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by beggs:
Why are they not being banned from the site? |
As has been mentioned already in the thread, all users who were involved in the voting have also had their accounts suspended. |
I didn't think "loss of account and banned from site" was the same as suspended. If this is the final decision of the site council then the rules should be updated to reflect the reality of the punishments. |
In this case it is the same thing, just different wording...
Suspended forever. |
Does that mean that those who colluded with Rikki where given a worse punishment than Rikki who way only suspended for year?
Originally posted by GeneralIE:
Unlike many judges, we are not required to always implement the maximum possible punishment.
Those familiar with the facts have made a decision felt to be fair to the user and the site/membership. Those of you without the facts may disagree, but you should realize that you are basing your opinions on speculation and not evidence. |
That may be true but by clearly stating something in the rules and then choosing to not enforce that don't you undermine your own position? As user I read the rules and they seem to say 'if you cheat you will be banned' but that is not how they are being enforced. The rules state:
Voting patterns are also automatically monitored. Users whose vote patterns suggest an intent to unfairly disrupt the system will have their votes ignored and may be suspended from site functions. DPChallenge also monitors and enforces a strict policy against fraudulent accounts and 'ghost' ballots. Any attempts to alter the point totals in any way for any photograph will result in immediate loss of account and a ban from the site. Photographs by any participating parties may also be removed from past or current challenges.
Which I interpret as saying that if your vote patterns are deemed to have the intent to cheat you MAY be suspended. And perhaps this is the category into which the co-conspirators fall, if so then I am wrong. However it seems that this line is at odds with the line in bold which says; if you cheat you WILL be banned. (Whether or not your photos will be removed is at the discretion of the site council, and how your votes will be handled is not stated.) I am not saying the actions taken were wrong but the rules seem vague, given the way the punishment has been applied.
Message edited by author 2006-07-31 03:31:23. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:34:19 AM · #241 |
Glad to see that the offending party was caught and properly dealt with.
DPC members should keep this in mind when soliciting support from DPC members on photos they have submitted on off-site competitions. This is a very common practice and should be discouraged as well, in my opinion.
Vote tampering on other sites should be frowned upon, just as it is here. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:34:33 AM · #242 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Unlike many judges, we are not required to always impliment the maximum possible punishment.
Those familiar with the facts have made a decision felt to be fair to the user and the site/membership. Those of you without the facts may disagree, but you should realize that you are basing your opinions on speculation and not evidence. |
Agreed, I am sure the SC has deliberated plenty on this issue,while having all the facts, and the punishment is fair.I have said what I felt necessary. I am sure this is going to go on for days as people check in to the site and moreover I am glad this was stopped and hopefully makes others think twice before letting something like this snowball out of control.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:34:34 AM · #243 |
Originally posted by colyla:
Originally posted by KevinRiggs:
I find it difficult to believe that Rikki wouldn't have at least suspected that someone else was inflating his scores especially if he sent them copies of the image beforehand.
|
Especially when you look in past (Ghost Account) threads |
colette, you're a friggen riot! i read that thread and all i could see was dennis the menace with cookie crumbs on his face ;-) |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:44:04 AM · #244 |
Say it ain't so Rikki!
Of course none of this affects me personally as far as DPC goes because my 4.9 average will not be seeing any leaps :P
However, I am grateful to the site admins, sc and so many folks here from whom I continue to learn. It is refreshing to see through all of this a high level of integrity. Also, I don't think I have ever seen a thread where so many SC's and an admin participated to this extent. That should speak volumes to its seriousness.
I will say, one thing Rikki said in his apology rings true - how much the people here meant to him. I know, at least that part must be hurting him right. For that I feel for him. The other stuff - well, I hope he can learn from it.
However, as a side note, I personally believe this other thread about a possible missing member ( Steve Davidson) is far more troubling. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:44:45 AM · #245 |
colette, you're a friggen riot! i read that thread and all i could see was dennis the menace with cookie crumbs on his face ;-)
LOL...that's hillarious skip...I thought something similar
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:53:06 AM · #246 |
Originally posted by DAWAR:
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
With regards to the year ban, why not allow Rikki the incentive to show the level of remorse that he states he feels. I think time off for substantial contribution would work well for everyone. Allow Rikki to put together some comprehensive tutorials, and workshops with each yielding valuable tools for DPC members. |
HONOUR THE CHEATERS....
GREAT SUGGESTION |
Actuallyl, I personally think the proposal made by garrywhite2, is one of the better thought out suggestions made to date on this thread. It reminds me a great deal of the type of "Justice" meted out by several of the native north american tribes.
A person found guilty of a crime is brought before the council where the person is required to atone for his or her mistake by making restitution, and then performing a service for the benefit of the tribe as a whole.
It's a win/win situation, since the perpretrator actively recognizes the harm caused, makes restitution to the agrieved party and performs a service for the betterment of the general population.
This course or action is a far cry from "Honouring Cheaters"... rather it is a wonderful vehicle whereby all parties gain.
Just a thought from an old man who has seen a bevy of people veer off-course, and managed to re-align their compass and lead productive lives.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:56:51 AM · #247 |
here, here Ray...a great suggestion...but I can't see it being adapted with emotions running high. In fact, everytime I see Rikki's name at the moment, it makes me cringe/sad
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 03:57:53 AM · #248 |
sometimes it happens. even from unpredictable ones ...
rikki made a wise decision not to return to DPC coz his integrity is lost by majority of active members here ... mine included.
thanks to admins and sc
|
|
|
|
07/31/2006 04:12:46 AM · #249 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by DAWAR:
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
With regards to the year ban, why not allow Rikki the incentive to show the level of remorse that he states he feels. I think time off for substantial contribution would work well for everyone. Allow Rikki to put together some comprehensive tutorials, and workshops with each yielding valuable tools for DPC members. |
HONOUR THE CHEATERS....
GREAT SUGGESTION |
Actuallyl, I personally think the proposal made by garrywhite2, is one of the better thought out suggestions made to date on this thread. It reminds me a great deal of the type of "Justice" meted out by several of the native north american tribes.
A person found guilty of a crime is brought before the council where the person is required to atone for his or her mistake by making restitution, and then performing a service for the benefit of the tribe as a whole.
It's a win/win situation, since the perpretrator actively recognizes the harm caused, makes restitution to the agrieved party and performs a service for the betterment of the general population.
This course or action is a far cry from "Honouring Cheaters"... rather it is a wonderful vehicle whereby all parties gain.
Just a thought from an old man who has seen a bevy of people veer off-course, and managed to re-align their compass and lead productive lives.
Ray |
I agree to a certain extent, but I believe Rikki would actually enjoy that 'punishment'. It would be like punishing an alcoholic by making him guard a brewery. |
|
|
|
07/31/2006 04:36:50 AM · #250 |
WOW and here's me thinking I was the bad guy... shocked to see it was Rikki but also glad to see he apologised and I for one totally accept his apology he made a mistake as we all do at times and now regrets it and has apologised for it. I still LOVE his work and consider him a fine photographer but as I now know, RULES ARE RULES and if you break them you will pay the price.
Apology accepted dude gonna miss your work and person about the place.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 07:59:26 AM EDT.
