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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> First time in site history WARNING: graph/debate
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 168, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/22/2007 01:55:13 PM · #1
The polynomial averages between entries and votes have a large gap with entries going higher and votes lower. Have we got to the point that the site needs to do something to get the averages closer to each other? If so, what?
Should the site limit the amount of entries?
Should the site require voting to submit?
Should the site reduce the amount of challenges?
Should the site do nothing and see if the trend reverses?

Im interested in hearing some of your thoughts.

this is not a rant thread. It is a thread to debate what a growing site should or should not do when it sees trends change dramatically.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/22970/thumb/541092.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/22970/thumb/541092.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

For a large view for clarity click here
06/22/2007 01:57:42 PM · #2
LOL, you got too much time on your hands...now get away from the spreadsheets and go vote! ;)
06/22/2007 02:01:01 PM · #3
Didn't I see that graph on the UC Berkeley Seismology lab site? I think it was California on a good day.
:P

Your chart does show what so many have been saying though - submissions are up, voting is down.
:(
06/22/2007 02:03:24 PM · #4
hmmmm.... interesting.... looking forward to the debate....

' . substr('//www.tlplanet.com/forums/images/smilies/popcorn.gif', strrpos('//www.tlplanet.com/forums/images/smilies/popcorn.gif', '/') + 1) . '
06/22/2007 02:04:09 PM · #5
I wonder if vote counts continue to drop if entries will drop too and then balance itself. That would really kill the site though.

One option is to not make your score visible until you have voted 20% of the challenge.
06/22/2007 02:06:22 PM · #6
Reward the voters and those that comment.
06/22/2007 02:06:54 PM · #7
I find it very disturbing because if the trend continues, submissions will soon be infinitely large and voting will fall below zero.

edit: typo

Message edited by author 2007-06-22 14:07:54.
06/22/2007 02:09:00 PM · #8
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

One option is to not make your score visible until you have voted 20% of the challenge.

What about the trolls? ;)
06/22/2007 02:10:09 PM · #9
That is an interesting point, i wonder how not seeing your vote until you vote would help because it would force you to vote if you want to keep track of your score, and i know of several people who don't like voting in challenges they have participated in
06/22/2007 02:10:12 PM · #10
Who cares...it is what it is...

Message edited by author 2007-06-22 21:29:35.
06/22/2007 02:11:48 PM · #11
Originally posted by _eug:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

One option is to not make your score visible until you have voted 20% of the challenge.

What about the trolls? ;)


Trolls are people too! :P
06/22/2007 02:12:41 PM · #12
Originally posted by doctornick:

Originally posted by _eug:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

One option is to not make your score visible until you have voted 20% of the challenge.

What about the trolls? ;)


Trolls are people too! :P


And suffer from update addiction like the rest of us.
06/22/2007 02:13:22 PM · #13
It's no real surprise... entries have spiked significantly, with the DPL probably being the biggest driver. Meanwhile, the voting pool, those users that regularly vote on challenges, has not grown substantially. Therefore, unless those users increase the number of images they vote on, the number of votes per image will drop.

ETA: During DPL, total votes per challenge actually increased, about 50% in Member Challenges, and somewhat less in Open Challenges. The number of entries increased by a larger margin, however, and thus it looks like "entries are increasing and voting is decreasing." Based on the observed data, I'd conclude that "entries dramatically increased suddenly, and voting could not keep up."

Message edited by author 2007-06-22 14:25:09.
06/22/2007 02:13:23 PM · #14
Originally posted by doctornick:

Originally posted by _eug:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

One option is to not make your score visible until you have voted 20% of the challenge.

What about the trolls? ;)

Trolls are people too! :P

Quiet Dr. Smurf! hehe
06/22/2007 02:14:17 PM · #15
I'm too tired from writing grad papers to sound technical, even if I could...and hope this doesn't qualify as rant...because it isn't..

I don't vote in many challenges now..because it's very hard to vote on all submissions (which is what I try to do WHEN I vote).
obviously...voting 100% on challenges with 200 entries works better for me than even attempting to vote 100% on challenges with 350+ entries. not limiting entries does give pokey butts like me time to get entry in...but if # of entries is limited folks, such as myself, would either have to get off duff and entry or be left out...goals and deadlines really do help procrastinators, again...like me, correct bad habits :-)

summation? limit entries...so that it is possible to vote the full challenge.

06/22/2007 02:15:37 PM · #16
I don't think you have a statisticly significant trend there, frankly. Polynomial fits are famous for allowing the illusion of trends where there are none; this is particularly true at the ends of the data (notice the same problem exists at the beginning of the graph, where it is ignored becuase it makes no sense there.

I think you could argue a slight decrease in votes since the 300 mark; I would be loath to claim any trend in entries without looking more closely at the data, but I certainly don't see a dramatic upswing.
06/22/2007 02:18:57 PM · #17
Originally posted by pineapple:

Reward the voters and those that comment.


I like this...we once had a challenge that you couldn't enter unless you had given more comments than recived. I don't know how that would work for votes...maybe the same way.
06/22/2007 02:19:17 PM · #18
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by doctornick:

Originally posted by _eug:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

One option is to not make your score visible until you have voted 20% of the challenge.

What about the trolls? ;)


Trolls are people too! :P


And suffer from update addiction like the rest of us.


So they'll just speed through giving everyone the same vote (1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1) until they reach the magic number to see their scores. They'll be tossed out at the end, but in the meantime render the score you see utterly useless. Not to mention that this approach would unfairly lock out those who have an ethical objection to voting in challenges they've entered.

A better tactic might be to hide scores until 75% of the entries have received 100 votes. That way, everyone on the site is accountable for the lack of votes, and the voting is more likely to be honest.
06/22/2007 02:21:52 PM · #19
Originally posted by Rebecca:

A better tactic might be to hide scores until 75% of the entries have received 100 votes.


a new idea ... and one that i like

:)
06/22/2007 02:24:28 PM · #20
Imagine how wild the conspiracy would get if people were forced to vote.

"Why did we make people vote when they didn't want to? My score is 5.1 and I know it would've ribboned before we made the new rule! Of course, my past scores consist of plenty of low numbers but I know very well that my scores would be much better because these new voters don't see my awesomeness. Of course, the old voters didn't see my awesomeness either but we won't talk about that".
06/22/2007 02:24:43 PM · #21
Think you need a better graphic. What is what and on what lines do you base your conclusions?
06/22/2007 02:24:50 PM · #22
Originally posted by hopper:

Originally posted by Rebecca:

A better tactic might be to hide scores until 75% of the entries have received 100 votes.


a new idea ... and one that i like

:)


I agree.
06/22/2007 02:31:40 PM · #23
//www.fotofight.com/contests/380/22358479.php

Hey, look. This guy got 5th place out of 15 entries at fotofight with 14 votes :-)

What we complaining about?
06/22/2007 02:32:04 PM · #24
Ok, what if challenges were doubled, 2 member, 4 open but still exclusive, and you weren't allowed to vote in the challenge you entered. Entries would still grow over time, but the amount of voting you could do would be cut in half. Now i know it would seem like its less voting, but could the reason less votes are happening because people don't want to vote, or because there's too many entries to simply vote on them all?

And assigning DPL teams to specific challenges each week would still keep the # of submissions per entry about avg, even though they even out each week anyway. And it could do away with the perception of people voting harsher during the DPL season since your not voting on entries you've entered, it has no bearing on your score.

Don't mind me, just thinking outloud.
06/22/2007 02:33:05 PM · #25
Originally posted by eamurdock:

I don't think you have a statisticly significant trend there, frankly. Polynomial fits are famous for allowing the illusion of trends where there are none; this is particularly true at the ends of the data (notice the same problem exists at the beginning of the graph, where it is ignored becuase it makes no sense there.

I think you could argue a slight decrease in votes since the 300 mark; I would be loath to claim any trend in entries without looking more closely at the data, but I certainly don't see a dramatic upswing.

The problem does not exist at the beginning. At the beginning of the graph there are more votes than entries, directly opposite, which would not pose a problem.

Message edited by author 2007-06-22 14:35:52.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/06/2019 04:34:33 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: 12/06/2019 04:34:33 PM EST.