| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/29/2006 07:40:32 PM · #151 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
However, I am wondering if my voting style was to give 1's to photos I dislike and 10's to photos I like and 5's to all the others of which I have no strong opinion of, would I be considered one trying to alter the points? What if I voted no 5's at all? It seems to me, casting any vote at all is an attempt to alter a score. |
If you cast your votes consistently, then there's no problem, pretty much regardless of the scale or system you use.
Where there's a problem is when you give one person's landscape a 1 and your buddy's landscape a 10, even though the overall site average vote for each is around 5.6 ... When my son Isaac* first signed up (he was 5-1/2 at the time) he pretty much took the 1=bad/10=good scale at face value and wanted to vote everything using one or the other -- discussing how something could be in between was very educational for both of us. ; )
* IsaacM88 |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 07:40:50 PM · #152 |
I know with 100% certainty that every member of the wpl and every vote cast by a member of the wpl was reviewed by the SC and Langdon. I personally sent the full wpl2 database to the SC and Langdon so they could make sure they looked at everyone and every vote. I was even looked at even though I was not on a team.
As far as not being able to vote on your teams photographs in the WPL rules. I considered putting that in the rules before the WPL2 started but after a day or two of thinking about I found out that the rule would not apply. If I had put a rule stating that a member of a team could not vote on any pictures entered by their team mates then what would happen to the people that voted on a entry from their team because they didn't know the picture belonged to a team member. Not all teams shared their photographs before or during entry.
When WPL goes to it's own domain name and server this will not be an issue because the code will be set up not allowing a team to vote on each others entries.
The only thing I can say is that I wish the individuals were notified by DPC before I notified them. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 08:12:34 PM · #153 |
And it was our understanding that the individuals would be (contacted). I know Langdon was out of town or away from the computer or something yesterday (and today, maybe?), and I know that some of the "warnings" bounced and came back to us because of undeliverable email or invalid email addresses.
Also, I saw the words "permanent ban" somewhere back there. Again, those found in violation were suspended from submitting for one month and Scott chose to implement the three seasons for wpl (which, has nothing to do with SC, d&L, or the price of beans in China, and as his project has every right to do.). That is hardly a permanent ban. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 08:25:56 PM · #154 |
Well, SC has a very difficult job to perform in a field that is very personal and subjective to each viewer of a photo. It is very likely they, as a group, many times are split in a decision. Sometimes this shows up appearing as a discrepancy in applying the rules. They do a good job as best they can overall and have done well in this matter too. It looks to me like they treated what appears to be team voting in a fair manner while trying to keep the actors anonymous. Hopefully those affected will continue as members and we can all enjoy their contributions.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2006 08:35:06 PM · #155 |
As one of the approximately (as of this viewing) 5,000 lurkers in this thread, I'm going to stop being a lurker and chime in with my 2¢.
First, I want to thank both the site adminisrators and the site council for tackling this tough task. Morality 101 is always a difficult course, and must be offered frequently with testing.
Frankly, I think the names of the members who have been banned for one month for cheating should be published. For a while, or at least until the next Challenge, I shall (and undoubtedly others shall as well) look at those whose signatures identify them as being in Teams and wonder "was that person one? Or that one?"
But the primary message in this post is to say, thank you for keeping this a site that we can safely participate in.
That means a lot. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 08:59:17 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
As one of the approximately (as of this viewing) 5,000 lurkers in this thread, I'm going to stop being a lurker and chime in with my 2¢.
First, I want to thank both the site adminisrators and the site council for tackling this tough task. Morality 101 is always a difficult course, and must be offered frequently with testing.
Frankly, I think the names of the members who have been banned for one month for cheating should be published. For a while, or at least until the next Challenge, I shall (and undoubtedly others shall as well) look at those whose signatures identify them as being in Teams and wonder "was that person one? Or that one?"
But the primary message in this post is to say, thank you for keeping this a site that we can safely participate in.
That means a lot. |
pretty easy to see that the three people that spoke up are on the same team. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 09:01:19 PM · #157 |
As far as I know, the cheaters are also prohibited from participating in WPL3, so the current teams and their members have been exonerated of any wrongdoing.
IMO, I am amazed that some believe it is ok to share images with others and then go out and vote on them. Further mind-blowing, is the fact that they think this is fine and that everyone does it.
No, everyone does not do it and you don't need to cheat to win. You just need to shoot the best you can and keep improving your skills and creativity. Being on Underexposed last season was the most wonderful learning experience. I entered more challenges than I normally would have and actually improved. And we even won the PhotoBowl!
Originally posted by sfalice:
As one of the approximately (as of this viewing) 5,000 lurkers in this thread, I'm going to stop being a lurker and chime in with my 2¢.
First, I want to thank both the site adminisrators and the site council for tackling this tough task. Morality 101 is always a difficult course, and must be offered frequently with testing.
Frankly, I think the names of the members who have been banned for one month for cheating should be published. For a while, or at least until the next Challenge, I shall (and undoubtedly others shall as well) look at those whose signatures identify them as being in Teams and wonder "was that person one? Or that one?"
But the primary message in this post is to say, thank you for keeping this a site that we can safely participate in.
That means a lot. |
|
|
|
|
10/29/2006 09:05:13 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Morality 101 is always a difficult course, and must be offered frequently with testing.
That means a lot. |
Great quote! I love this site for the fact that it can always sift out the people who failed the morality test. WTG site council. Whatever scheme gives anyone an unfair advantage (or disadvantage) should be stamped out/exposed/dealt with. Seems like the people who hate this are always trying to find loopholes and hate getting caught...whatever happened to competing in the spirit of fair play?
|
|
|
|
10/29/2006 10:07:03 PM · #159 |
I don't understand why an open forum is made available to discuss these sort of summary judgements. If DPC is a benevolent dictatorship, just drop the hammer on whomever you (admins) feel deserve it, post a note saying the deed was done, and lock the thread.
What purpose is served by publically annoucing that half a dozen people have been punished for cheating without offering names or proof, then sitting idly by while the accused post note after note about how they were wronged, how no rules have been broken, etc and everyone else then takes up one side of the argument or the other and proceeds to vehemently argue their point of view.
This does as much if not more damage to the feeling of community than a handful of rigged votes. It causes bad blood, hard feelings, and perpetuates distrust among the members of a site where trust in the honesty of your fellow dpc'ers is paramount to the whole concept of competitive challenges.
So again, and I realize this is so much pissing in the wind like the hundreds of posts preceding it, it would be nice to either see the proof so that the ensuing discussions might actually have some benefit and merit, or else to have the days of bickering and bad blood nipped in the bud by simply locking the thread and moving any subsequent posts about it to Rant.
Message edited by author 2006-10-29 22:08:52. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 10:45:34 PM · #160 |
To anyone who is objecting their suspension in this thread:
I believe it would be helpful to this discussion if we were all looking at the same information. I am therefore requesting your permission to share information about your voting patterns during WPL in this thread. This information would include the specific votes you cast on your teammates' entries, as well as a summary of how many votes of each number you cast in each challenge.
If I have your permission to do this, please reply to this message confirming that permission.
Thanks,
Terry
|
|
|
|
10/29/2006 10:48:50 PM · #161 |
Post mine big daddy Terry - I don't have a problem with that.
Or do you just want the nay-sayers? |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 10:51:24 PM · #162 |
I say just post, do it and get it done. Lets see who, why and when and let this thread die a natural death.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2006 10:58:51 PM · #163 |
| Honestly, saying you can post is good enough. I'd rather not see alot of good people get embarassed. It's not important at this point is it. Just an opinion. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 11:02:42 PM · #164 |
Rudy makes a good point, why can't people just take SC's word for it? It's not in their, nor the site's, best interest to behave in any manner on what can only be described as conspiracy theories - if they say they have the proof, they have the proof.
But if y'all want to post my votes go ahead. |
|
|
|
10/29/2006 11:18:42 PM · #165 |
Ban them get it over with >.> so they can stop whinging
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 03:26:30 AM · #166 |
Just one litle thing that I want to point out to the Administration of this website.
I was checking how this ban works and saw that I can not send pictures into competitions but I can vote.
Doesnt that show what kind of haste this was done in?
Atleast ban me from the activity you wanted to ban me from, not from the activity where I didn't do anything wrong. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 03:51:29 AM · #167 |
Originally posted by Bolti:
Thats where I think that the problem lies... I and no other person in the group of the banned ones voted in any other way then what we thought was the right way. I didn't vote anyone down. Maybe I voted someone up. But I promise you that I didn't vote anyone down. |
Very recently, a prominent and talented member here was banned from the site for a year (along with a number of coworkers) for exactly that - the coworkers were voting up that member's entries, but otherwise voting normally (i.e. not voting anyone down).
It doesn't matter whether you voted anyone down or not. If your vote has anything to do with who took the image (rather than the image itself), then it is cheating.
Edit to remove redundant word.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 03:56:58. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 04:23:13 AM · #168 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
To anyone who is objecting their suspension in this thread:
I believe it would be helpful to this discussion if we were all looking at the same information. I am therefore requesting your permission to share information about your voting patterns during WPL in this thread. This information would include the specific votes you cast on your teammates' entries, as well as a summary of how many votes of each number you cast in each challenge.
If I have your permission to do this, please reply to this message confirming that permission.
Thanks,
Terry |
you have my permission. and i know my opinion is very important :-) as all others here on dpc is.
peace
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 04:32:28 AM · #169 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I don't understand why an open forum is made available to discuss these sort of summary judgements. If DPC is a benevolent dictatorship, just drop the hammer on whomever you (admins) feel deserve it, post a note saying the deed was done, and lock the thread.
|
In a way, I completely agree. However, you just know that, if that happens, you'd get six new threads popping up about the decision, all with the same stuff in them, instead of one thread. At least this way it's contained in one place. Everyone vents their spleens and then the thread casually drifts off.
To be honest if people want - however rightly or wrongly - to protest their "innocence", then it's an open forum and it's their "right" to do so. Personally I would be a tad embarrased and would think that there is very little to gain from flogging such a dead horse, and that such protests in the face of the evidence would simply tarnish my character. But that's just me. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 05:17:30 AM · #170 |
Can I allso just add the message that langdon sent to one of the Ninja Newbies members last night. (He still has not been in touch with any of the banned members as far as I know)
Originally posted by Langdon:
At the request of several DPChallenge members, we have thoroughly investigated the voting behavior of all WPL team participants. A few people have been suspended for voting their teammates up with consistently high scores. While you didn't rise to that level of offense, your voting patterns DO suggest that you were either revealing your entry to another member and/or voting consistently high on another member's entries.
Let this serve as a warning that voting up friends and relatives is not tolerated. You are welcome to get feedback from or give feedback to another person before submitting an entry, but if you or they cannot vote objectively, then we ask that any entries discussed before voting be skipped by the voter. Giving your friends an undeserved 9 or 10 might seem like a nice thing to do for them, but it amounts to vote tampering and WILL result in suspension if it continues.
Please keep it fair for the enjoyment of all.
Thanks,
Langdon |
This is a message Langdon sent to one of the not banned teammembers. The notable thing about this message is this part.
While you didn't rise to that level of offense, your voting patterns DO suggest that you were either revealing your entry to another member and/or voting consistently high on another member's entries.
The member in question has not ever made a single vote on DPC.
Doesnt this serve as enough proof that this whole thing is a very strange attack on the Ninja Newbies as a team?
As I stated earlier, this whole deal is over from my part. But when the accusations just continue raining inn on me and my friends, I can't just sit and watch it saying nothing.
Edited for PHPBB error.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 05:18:35. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 05:22:58 AM · #171 |
Originally posted by gooc:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
To anyone who is objecting their suspension in this thread:
I believe it would be helpful to this discussion if we were all looking at the same information. I am therefore requesting your permission to share information about your voting patterns during WPL in this thread. This information would include the specific votes you cast on your teammates' entries, as well as a summary of how many votes of each number you cast in each challenge.
If I have your permission to do this, please reply to this message confirming that permission.
Thanks,
Terry |
you have my permission. and i know my opinion is very important :-) as all others here on dpc is.
peace |
I don't care one way or the other. But do we have any reason to believe that SC has not been thorough in their investigation and fair in their judgement?
Is it your opinion that we should distrust the SC?
If the members involved in incorrect voting didn't get their message from SC before they got their message from southern gentleman, then there is an area that the SC should look into and maybe a better routine needs to be set for the future. Several weeks ago it did actually take SC a few weeks to dq a ribbonshot and thus I came to earn my first ribbon. But as I said at the time - SC said they were sorry for that mistake and I know I make mistakes, it's only human.
Saying sorry can be difficult. The SC has quoted the paragraphs that were not respected and you shold stand corrected, you did indeed vote in a manner that you are not allowed to do. Whether a ribbonshot was involved or not is totally besides the point. The majority of dpc participants is not here because of the ribbons, we are to participate, learn, get better week by week. A ribbon is of course great, but we can live without them.
It is sad, but not one of you has said that your are sorry, or that you made a mistake. But you have indeed boldly stated that you are not cheaters, and blamed the SC for making rules along the way.
Edit: for clarity
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 05:24:56.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 05:33:33 AM · #172 |
Originally posted by GuGi:
Originally posted by gooc:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
To anyone who is objecting their suspension in this thread:
I believe it would be helpful to this discussion if we were all looking at the same information. I am therefore requesting your permission to share information about your voting patterns during WPL in this thread. This information would include the specific votes you cast on your teammates' entries, as well as a summary of how many votes of each number you cast in each challenge.
If I have your permission to do this, please reply to this message confirming that permission.
Thanks,
Terry |
you have my permission. and i know my opinion is very important :-) as all others here on dpc is.
peace |
I don't care one way or the other. But do we have any reason to believe that SC has not been thorough in their investigation and fair in their judgement?
Is it your opinion that we should distrust the SC?
If the members involved in incorrect voting didn't get their message from SC before they got their message from southern gentleman, then there is an area that the SC should look into and maybe a better routine needs to be set for the future. Several weeks ago it did actually take SC a few weeks to dq a ribbonshot and thus I came to earn my first ribbon. But as I said at the time - SC said they were sorry for that mistake and I know I make mistakes, it's only human.
Saying sorry can be difficult. The SC has quoted the paragraphs that were not respected and you shold stand corrected, you did indeed vote in a manner that you are not allowed to do. Whether a ribbonshot was involved or not is totally besides the point. The majority of dpc participants is not here because of the ribbons, we are to participate, learn, get better week by week. A ribbon is of course great, but we can live without them.
It is sad, but not one of you has said that your are sorry, or that you made a mistake. But you have indeed boldly stated that you are not cheaters, and blamed the SC for making rules along the way.
Edit: for clarity |
Q: why are You quoting me ? :-)
EDIT : i was just kidding, of course the permission was asked only for "persons" involved, sorry ... i'll go on coffee.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 05:35:38.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 06:00:22 AM · #173 |
Originally posted by alanfreed:
I don't normally chime in on this kind of thing, but this activity makes me sick and disgusted. I'd like those of you who were banned to put your computer screen right up to your ears, and listen very carefully:
IF YOU ARE ALLOWING YOUR VOTE TO BE INFLUENCED BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHO TOOK THE PICTURE, THEN YES, YOU ARE CHEATING.
You're cheating the entire DPC community with this kind of crap, and it baffles me to see you guys denying that there's anything wrong with it.
No, there are no cash prizes being handed out here (imagine how much worse this kind of thing would be if there were!), but people still enter contests with an expectation of integrity in this site.
Langdon and several SC members went to great lengths to investigate allegations that this kind of thing was going on, and they have proven it beyond a reasonable doubt that vote swaying has indeed been a problem with select users.
Simply put, there is no excuse for this kind of activity. If you're going to participate and vote here, do it fairly or accept the consequences. |
I said it in my post Yesterday evening and will say it just once again and I will ask you alanfreed to put your computer screen right up to your ears, and listen very carefully now:
I DID NOT ALLOW MY VOTES TO BE INFLUENCED BECAUSE I KNEW WHO TOOK THE PICTURE, THEN YES, I DID NOT CHEAT. I GAVE THESE PHOTOS LIKE ALL OTHER PHOTOS WHAT I THOUGHT THEY DESERVED - I GAVE THEM FROM 5 to 10 AND GAVE MANY OHTER PHOTOS 9 AND 10 IN THESE CHALLENGES.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 06:25:47. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 07:02:55 AM · #174 |
Originally posted by idnic:
I say just post, do it and get it done. Lets see who, why and when and let this thread die a natural death. |
I'd like to, but I don't know whether the site's privacy policy allows me to do that without permission. Without that permission, therefore, I don't feel entirely comfortable posting.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 07:13:20 AM · #175 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by idnic:
I say just post, do it and get it done. Lets see who, why and when and let this thread die a natural death. |
I'd like to, but I don't know whether the site's privacy policy allows me to do that without permission. Without that permission, therefore, I don't feel entirely comfortable posting.
~Terry |
Would posting the names make the site better? No. Would it cause the people who learned a valuable lesson and are now better DPCers a bunch of trouble as people would then harrass then in PM? Yes. Should SC reveal them? NO |
|
