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

Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> Update Regarding Vote Monitoring
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 361, descending (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/20/2007 12:32:52 PM · #1
Originally posted by raish:

Originally posted by Simms:

I dont think its fair that Jimbob has been drawn into all this.


It'll be dq'ed - you're not allowed to draw things in.


ROFL!
11/20/2007 12:24:02 PM · #2
Hey, LG!

This is kinda a weird community here, but I think you'll grow to like it. Just a couple things I'd like to point out, lest they be forgotten.

It IS possible to comment on photo without leaving a vote, so if you see a comment mentioning the photographer's name, that doesn't necessarily mean that person voted - or that they were right! People like to take guesses around here, too.

Also, frankly, a bad apple here and there is bound to happen and the SC works really hard to make sure they don't have much effect. They're doing a pretty good job so, and, unless you're a ribbon competitor, .01 here and there doesn't make a huge difference.
11/20/2007 11:45:11 AM · #3
Originally posted by Simms:

I dont think its fair that Jimbob has been drawn into all this.


It'll be dq'ed - you're not allowed to draw things in.
11/20/2007 11:35:29 AM · #4
I dont think its fair that Jimbob has been drawn into all this.

Originally posted by basssman7:

Originally posted by Veiolets:

[
hummm, I didn't say that it is human nature to cheat. I don't believe that. I did say it is human nature to vote a friend's photo a little higher, even without meaning to do so. That's why it's better to just not vote on a friend's photo. And friends do vote on friend's photos. The comments with the name called out are in the "before voting ends" comments.

LG


It is wrong to vote on a photo when you have seen it and know who's it is. As part of Team Suck, we sometimes ask another member for advice on an image, but whomever gives the advice (and has seen the photo) will then not vote on it in the challenge.

It is also wrong to quote a person's comment in a scoring thread if the challenge is still being voted on. So "Thanks Jimbob for saying my photo gives new meaning the the colour purple" is not right because it identifies your photo. simply saying "thanks Jimbob for the nice comment" does not identify your photo, so it could still be any photo that Jimbob commented on, so that is different.

Bascially it is frowned upon (and SC will call you on it) if you say anything during a challenge that will identify your photo to the voters.
11/20/2007 11:33:58 AM · #5
Originally posted by Lowcivicman99:

Why are we trying to start a fight here. Maybe someone interpreted it the wrong way. Lets not start an argument here.


no fight from me. I should probably have read the post over several times before posting. I see what they mean. I don't think most people want to cheat. There are some people who do cheat. I did floral arrangements for a time and entered contests. It slowly became apparent that my "friend" who I buddied around with for the shows was cheating and cheating a lot.

At one point I asked her directly why she would cheat. She said that she wanted to win. I asked her how could she enjoy winning when she knew she had cheated. She told me that she just liked to win.

Now I laugh. At the time, I was appalled. Cheating and even admitting it didn't bother her at all. She wasn't even embarrassed. I stopped entering floral shows.

Cheers,
LG
11/20/2007 11:28:23 AM · #6
Originally posted by Veiolets:

[
hummm, I didn't say that it is human nature to cheat. I don't believe that. I did say it is human nature to vote a friend's photo a little higher, even without meaning to do so. That's why it's better to just not vote on a friend's photo. And friends do vote on friend's photos. The comments with the name called out are in the "before voting ends" comments.

LG


It is wrong to vote on a photo when you have seen it and know who's it is. As part of Team Suck, we sometimes ask another member for advice on an image, but whomever gives the advice (and has seen the photo) will then not vote on it in the challenge.

It is also wrong to quote a person's comment in a scoring thread if the challenge is still being voted on. So "Thanks Jimbob for saying my photo gives new meaning the the colour purple" is not right because it identifies your photo. simply saying "thanks Jimbob for the nice comment" does not identify your photo, so it could still be any photo that Jimbob commented on, so that is different.

Bascially it is frowned upon (and SC will call you on it) if you say anything during a challenge that will identify your photo to the voters.
11/20/2007 11:21:42 AM · #7
Why are we trying to start a fight here. Maybe someone interpreted it the wrong way. Lets not start an argument here.
11/20/2007 11:13:17 AM · #8
Originally posted by Veiolets:

Originally posted by scarbrd:

I disagree with your comment that it is human nature to cheat. ...

hummm, I didn't say that it is human nature to cheat. I don't believe that.

Kind of sounds that way...

Originally posted by Veiolets:

Obviously, if people share photos prior to entering with friends who vote, that pretty much leads to cheating - deliberate or not. It's human nature to give our friends an extra point of two.


11/20/2007 10:44:28 AM · #9
Originally posted by scarbrd:

I disagree with your comment that it is human nature to cheat. The majority of the members want the process to be fair. We all have understandings that if we know who shot a particular entry we don't vote on it. It's understood and self enforced.

The overwhelming majority of members are good honest people. We differ in opinions and approaches, but we all want to learn and win honestly. Otherwise, what's the point?


hummm, I didn't say that it is human nature to cheat. I don't believe that. I did say it is human nature to vote a friend's photo a little higher, even without meaning to do so. That's why it's better to just not vote on a friend's photo. And friends do vote on friend's photos. The comments with the name called out are in the "before voting ends" comments.

LG
11/20/2007 10:33:43 AM · #10
Originally posted by Veiolets:


well, I guess this is rambling but I think that there should be no point tally emails in the forums and I think all comments should be bagheads until voting is over.

LG


You can go back through the 14 pages of this thread and countless other threads to read about all the ways there are to cheat. acknowledging comments and score postings are some of the milder ways.

The SC does a good job of monitoring voting trends and anomalies to give credibility to the voting process. There have been times and people that have shaking the confidence of the users in the past and there will be in the future.

Keep in mind, one or 2 votes will not have that much of an effect on the over all score. If anything really big happens the SC catches it pretty quick.

I disagree with your comment that it is human nature to cheat. The majority of the members want the process to be fair. We all have understandings that if we know who shot a particular entry we don't vote on it. It's understood and self enforced.

The overwhelming majority of members are good honest people. We differ in opinions and approaches, but we all want to learn and win honestly. Otherwise, what's the point?

Welcome to the site and I hope you enter often.

11/20/2007 10:29:20 AM · #11
... yea! and i think that____BEEP____BEEP____BEEP____oh crap! sorry i have to go home now.
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/38509/thumb/457350.gif?0', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/38509/thumb/457350.gif?0', '/') + 1) . '
11/20/2007 10:02:21 AM · #12
I'm new to DPC and frankly wonder about fairness. Obviously, if people share photos prior to entering with friends who vote, that pretty much leads to cheating - deliberate or not. It's human nature to give our friends an extra point of two.

What bothers me is that the Current Challenge forums provide a means for favorites voting and even out and out cheating.

For example, the points count tally may be fun - but - it also provide a lot of information to anyone deliberately playing fake votes. It's easy to watch the posts and figure out how others are scoring and adjust fake votes. I have no idea if this is happening, but given human nature - there always seems to be some who cheat. I've noticed on recent winners that there are comments made during voting where people use their friends name - like Good Job Billy - they clearly know whose photo it is and doesn't let that stop them from voting.

Another example is that the points count tally posts have emails saying "thanks for you comment on my photo", etc. It's pretty easy for a friend to figure out who belongs to the comment. Similarly, all comments should be bagheads until after voting closes. If you get a note from the person thanking you for the comment, you now know what owns the photo. Votes can be shifted up or down all through the voting. I do this, re-evaluate my votes. If I knew a photo belonged to a friend would the vote be influenced? Probably, it's just human nature.

well, I guess this is rambling but I think that there should be no point tally emails in the forums and I think all comments should be bagheads until voting is over.

LG
07/02/2007 07:41:49 PM · #13
Interesting to see results of voting, not knowing who the photog was.
Ignoring those with less than 10 samples.

Coley 8.2143 14
idnic 8.0000 22
Neuferland 8.0000 12
librodo 8.0000 11
elsapo 8.0000 10
dahkota 7.9286 14
jrtodd 7.9091 11
floyd 7.9091 11
SandyP 7.9000 10
LindaLee 7.9000 10

Message edited by author 2007-07-02 19:42:11.
07/02/2007 07:10:34 PM · #14
Originally posted by yanko:


I have many people on my statistical favorites that aren't household names as well as the usual high scorers. Take a look at these two:

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' librodo - 7.0 (25 votes)
' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' sibeling - 7.0 (13 votes)

One might say that sibeling shouldn't be tied with librodo but he is. I don't know sibeling and have never even communicated with him yet there he is ranked right up there with Manny. So far nobody has questioned me about this or any of the others in my list. Probably because there is no reason to as there is nothing else to assume foul play.


I think it's absolutely humiliating that someone has voted me the same avg. score as they have ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' librodo - not humiliating for me, but for Librodo!

For the record: I am prepared to offer sworn testimony that I have had no dealings with ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' yanko.
05/14/2007 10:41:49 AM · #15
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

... I'm sure that statistics will show that the 1, 2 and 3 voters are far outnumbering this percentage, thereby, being a far more insidious and destructive type of voter or voting problem!

That's probably true, but I disagree with your assessment on how to fix it. I haven't entered a challenge yet (that is about to change, as I'm now a DPL tournament participant), but I take voting seriously. Voting has been my way of easing into participation.

Also, I've handed out a few 2 and 3 votes to photos that thematically meet the challenge but are otherwise disastrous. A 1 vote is rare and would only go to something small and completely unidentifible. I think some people give out 1s to punish nudity or other perceived transgressions, but I suspect most are given out in an attempt to bring down a winner.
04/30/2007 03:32:48 PM · #16
Originally posted by yanko:


LOL. It's just a web site owned by two people and if they wanted to turn it into a big game fishing site come tomorrow they have every right to do so.


I caught a trollfish this weekend!
04/27/2007 11:12:01 PM · #17
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

Is DPC a third world country where the current leadership will protect the status quo from some radicals trying to upset the system and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?



Do you know all the facts about the country you live in?

Do you know the detailed capabilities of the military? The identity, mission and cover for your nation's covert agents?
04/27/2007 11:05:43 PM · #18
Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:


However, I find it interesting that they both oppose the notion of greater transparency. Are we to give up our right to know so the administration can "protect us from a few obvious trolls?" Is DPC a third world country where the current leadership will protect the status quo from some radicals trying to upset the system and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?

We already know DPC is a virtual country (just not sure about the third world part.)

Anyway, thanks for the debate.


LOL. It's just a web site owned by two people and if they wanted to turn it into a big game fishing site come tomorrow they have every right to do so. There's no elected representation here. You paid $25 to get disk space for a portfolio and enter more challenges. That's it.

Yes people, lets keep it all in perspective...it is what it is.
04/27/2007 11:00:49 PM · #19
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:


However, I find it interesting that they both oppose the notion of greater transparency. Are we to give up our right to know so the administration can "protect us from a few obvious trolls?" Is DPC a third world country where the current leadership will protect the status quo from some radicals trying to upset the system and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?

We already know DPC is a virtual country (just not sure about the third world part.)

Anyway, thanks for the debate.


LOL. It's just a web site owned by two people and if they wanted to turn it into a big game fishing site come tomorrow they have every right to do so. There's no elected representation here. You paid $25 to get disk space for a portfolio and enter more challenges. That's it.

Message edited by author 2007-04-27 23:01:24.
04/27/2007 10:48:36 PM · #20
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

Your statement assumes the scripts are working properly. My concern is with the growing complexity of vote scrubbing, the growing volume of code required, and therefore the growing likelihood of software errors, or unintended consequences.


Your statement assumes that the vote scrubber is complex, requires additional code, and isn't already monitored for errors or unintended consequences. I for one would much rather leave obvious trolls blissfully ignorant that their efforts are wasted than give them a way to figure out the system. ;-)


Okay, one last post and then I'm out of the thread: If it isn't software scripts that are scrubbing, then it's the subjective acts of individuals or more likely, a combination of the two. All the more reason for transparency.

I appreciate the two responses from SC members. And I appreciate the recent efforts of the SC and Admins to strengthen measures to prevent vote tampering.

However, I find it interesting that they both oppose the notion of greater transparency. Are we to give up our right to know so the administration can "protect us from a few obvious trolls?" Is DPC a third world country where the current leadership will protect the status quo from some radicals trying to upset the system and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?

We already know DPC is a virtual country (just not sure about the third world part.)

Anyway, thanks for the debate.


Just to make sure we're on the same page, and just to clear up any confusion on my end, I never said I "opposed" it, I just said I didn't think it was necessary or practical to implement.
04/27/2007 10:20:35 PM · #21
In discussing this issue and seeing the clamp down on "friend voting", this brings to mind a few other issues here that I think might be valid points to make as well.

Firstly, it's been stated several times that the "friend votes" really have very little impact on the overall score at the end so, to me, the entire hysteria of this type of thing is more of a "moral issue" rather than one that has a great impact statistically on the entire voting system as a whole. Ok, a moral is a moral. Good to keep that up.

However, having said all of the above, should this type of "moral" also go towards those who may be considered "Trolls" in handing out 1's 2's and 3's to a lot of excellent photos? One need only look at ribbon winners to see the 1's 2's and 3's handed out to them, even though those photos were technically and esthetically beautiful. That says that there are people in here who are deliberately out to do the opposite, or cause the opposite effect of the "friend vote". They are out to pull down scores. Whether that be for personal gain, through anger or simply people who are in here voting for the sake of giving out these low scores. (Heaven only knows what kind of a kick that gives them but, whatever rocks their boats or hats off to them if they have that kind of simplistic mentality that they get their kicks doing this or that kind of time to do it in.)

After all of the hoopla over this topic, what about clamping down on that type of thing? There's nothing more disturbing to see your own photo destroyed by a one or a two when it's worthy of more, is there? And, by far, since it's been recognized that only .5% of voters fall into the "friend voting" category, I'm sure that statistics will show that the 1, 2 and 3 voters are far outnumbering this percentage, thereby, being a far more insidious and destructive type of voter or voting problem! Anyone care to disagree with this?

I've mentioned this to SC, but here's a thought. All voters should have to EARN the right to vote by entering at least 2 challenges before they can vote and perhaps, having a certain number of photos in their portfolio before being able to vote. This could cut down on a lot of the "troll votes" by some degree or another.

Secondly, I'd hope that anyone consistently voting on photos which are clearly not DNMC's with 1's 2's and 3's would also receive a hand out of voting for a period of time.

To stop one type of anti-moral voting and not another is only half solving a problem, is it not? It's either solve it all or let it balance itself out from my point of view.

Just my 2 cents worth for anyone still reading this thread. :)
04/26/2007 12:39:00 PM · #22
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

... and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?


Assuming we as a collective did have all the facts... what exactly would we gain from that. Do we have the ability to rectify any situation we find odd? You mention the subjective aspect of the decision making process... just how would that differ under your proposal, or would we simply see a wider chasm of discontent.

I may be in the minority here, but all factors taking into consideration, it must be borne in mind that this venue while fun is not the most important thing that happens in my life on a daily basis.

To the SC I say, keep on doing the wonderful job you are doing, and do not let the musings of some deter you. Yours is indeed a thankless job which brings to mind the old adage that says: "No good deed goes unpunished".

Have a great day all

Ray
04/26/2007 02:28:28 AM · #23
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

Are we to give up our right to know so the administration can "protect us from a few obvious trolls?" Is DPC a third world country where the current leadership will protect the status quo from some radicals trying to upset the system and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?

We already know DPC is a virtual country (just not sure about the third world part.)

You're thinking of DPC Nation. ;-)

Not so sure about the "right to know" part of your post. You really don't have any rights here as far as I know.
04/26/2007 02:00:05 AM · #24
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

Your statement assumes the scripts are working properly. My concern is with the growing complexity of vote scrubbing, the growing volume of code required, and therefore the growing likelihood of software errors, or unintended consequences.


Your statement assumes that the vote scrubber is complex, requires additional code, and isn't already monitored for errors or unintended consequences. I for one would much rather leave obvious trolls blissfully ignorant that their efforts are wasted than give them a way to figure out the system. ;-)


Okay, one last post and then I'm out of the thread: If it isn't software scripts that are scrubbing, then it's the subjective acts of individuals or more likely, a combination of the two. All the more reason for transparency.

I appreciate the two responses from SC members. And I appreciate the recent efforts of the SC and Admins to strengthen measures to prevent vote tampering.

However, I find it interesting that they both oppose the notion of greater transparency. Are we to give up our right to know so the administration can "protect us from a few obvious trolls?" Is DPC a third world country where the current leadership will protect the status quo from some radicals trying to upset the system and where citizens cannot be trusted with the facts?

We already know DPC is a virtual country (just not sure about the third world part.)

Anyway, thanks for the debate.
04/25/2007 10:19:40 PM · #25
Shush, you! :P
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 02/22/2020 08:09:21 AM

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 © 2001-2020 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: 02/22/2020 08:09:21 AM EST.