| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/22/2007 08:46:30 PM · #176 |
Originally posted by soup:
if all the challenges were like the 'rubber ducky' challenge things would be a lot easier around here... ;}
an open mind is a powerful tool |
Ok then it is decided. All challenges henceforth must include either a ducky, a woody or for us Canucks, a beaver or a moose.
Problem solved. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 09:07:32 PM · #177 |
Originally posted by mk:
If you don't think a shot meets the challenge, the use your votes and comments (although something more than an acronym would be nice). If you don't want to vote on challenge relevance, then don't, but don't complain about the results, either.
|
This attitude never solves any problems.
if-you-do-not-like-it then 'do-not-vote' or 'just-stop-participating' is one way of saying that the site does not care what a member feels.
If this goes on like this dpc would not improve. How about thinking for just a moment that there is a merit in suggestion of providing a check box for dnmc. (I remember I suggested this idea about one and a half year ago and no body gave an ear to it).
|
|
|
|
09/22/2007 09:53:55 PM · #178 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by mk:
If you don't think a shot meets the challenge, the use your votes and comments (although something more than an acronym would be nice). If you don't want to vote on challenge relevance, then don't, but don't complain about the results, either.
|
This attitude never solves any problems.
if-you-do-not-like-it then 'do-not-vote' or 'just-stop-participating' is one way of saying that the site does not care what a member feels.
If this goes on like this dpc would not improve. How about thinking for just a moment that there is a merit in suggestion of providing a check box for dnmc. (I remember I suggested this idea about one and a half year ago and no body gave an ear to it). |
I absolutely did not say just stop participating. I said that if you don't feel that you should vote or comment on the relevancy of the challenge, that you don't have to. But then you also lose the right to complain about "irrelevant" shots placing highly because you opted not to do anything about it. I would ask again what exactly the checkbox will solve. I don't see anyone complaining that they themselves do not feel there is an adequate arena to register their opinion...the complaint is how other people register theirs. I guess we could provide a checkbox that says "I think everyone else's opinion is absolute horseshit." |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 09:59:01 PM · #179 |
Originally posted by basssman7:
Originally posted by soup:
if all the challenges were like the 'rubber ducky' challenge things would be a lot easier around here... ;}
an open mind is a powerful tool |
Ok then it is decided. All challenges henceforth must include either a ducky, a woody or for us Canucks, a beaver or a moose.
Problem solved. |
Clarification, is that a rubber beaver and a wooden moose or a wooden beaver and a rubber moose? lol |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:12:43 PM · #180 |
Originally posted by mk:
I absolutely did not say just stop participating. I said that if you don't feel that you should vote or comment on the relevancy of the challenge, that you don't have to. |
Yepp, if you do not like the current status you do not have to vote, and no body is forcing you to vote. This is what I felt you meant. I may be wrong in understanding you (as you claim you never said do not participate).
Originally posted by mk:
I would ask again what exactly the checkbox will solve. |
Yes, it could solve lots of things. If we count each dnmc click as the vote of saying that the photo was irrelevant to the challenge topic and then adjust final score of the photo according to number of dnmc vote it got.
final score = function of (original score, total number of dnmc votes). More dnmc votes you get more reduction in final score you see. And you could put condition that if some minimum number of people find it dnmc it might be through out of challenge completely irrespective of whether someone asked for dq or not.
For example if 50 people thought it is dnmc, it shall be thrown out. Then you will see everybody will be taking challenge topic seriously.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:26:12 PM · #181 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by mk:
I absolutely did not say just stop participating. I said that if you don't feel that you should vote or comment on the relevancy of the challenge, that you don't have to. |
Yepp, if you do not like the current status you do not have to vote, and no body is forcing you to vote. This is what I felt you meant. I may be wrong in understanding you (as you claim you never said do not participate). |
I said you can take whatever you want into consideration when voting. I didn't say don't vote.
Originally posted by mk:
I would ask again what exactly the checkbox will solve. |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Yes, it could solve lots of things. If we count each dnmc click as the vote of saying that the photo was irrelevant to the challenge topic and then adjust final score of the photo according to number of dnmc vote it got. final score = function of (original score, total number of dnmc votes). More dnmc votes you get more reduction in final score you see. And you could put condition that if some minimum number of people find it dnmc it might be through out of challenge completely irrespective of whether someone asked for dq or not.
For example if 50 people thought it is dnmc, it shall be thrown out. Then you will see everybody will be taking challenge topic seriously. |
How is using a checkbox and then calculating that into the final score any different than just altering your vote to begin with? If a dnmc should = reduction in score, then just reduce the score from the start, no? |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:31:28 PM · #182 |
Originally posted by mk:
How is using a checkbox and then calculating that into the final score any different than just altering your vote to begin with? If a dnmc should = reduction in score, then just reduce the score from the start, no? |
Makes too much sense... does not compute, cannot register... AARRRGGHHH!!!!
Ray |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:37:07 PM · #183 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by mk:
How is using a checkbox and then calculating that into the final score any different than just altering your vote to begin with? If a dnmc should = reduction in score, then just reduce the score from the start, no? |
Makes too much sense... does not compute, cannot register... AARRRGGHHH!!!!
Ray |
LOL, c'mon this is DPC land why keep it simple when you can make it Uber complicated...Plus this keeps my horse beating arm active and in shape... |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:41:58 PM · #184 |
Originally posted by mk:
I absolutely did not say just stop participating. I said that if you don't feel that you should vote or comment on the relevancy of the challenge, that you don't have to. |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Yepp, if you do not like the current status you do not have to vote, and no body is forcing you to vote. This is what I felt you meant. I may be wrong in understanding you (as you claim you never said do not participate).
[quote=mk] I would ask again what exactly the checkbox will solve. |
Nobody's saying that it has to solve anything.....but it's an idea that has a certain merit if you look at its possibilities rather than continuing to scoff at it or dismiss it.
Originally posted by zxaar:
Yes, it could solve lots of things. If we count each dnmc click as the vote of saying that the photo was irrelevant to the challenge topic and then adjust final score of the photo according to number of dnmc vote it got.
final score = function of (original score, total number of dnmc votes). More dnmc votes you get more reduction in final score you see. And you could put condition that if some minimum number of people find it dnmc it might be through out of challenge completely irrespective of whether someone asked for dq or not.
For example if 50 people thought it is dnmc, it shall be thrown out. Then you will see everybody will be taking challenge topic seriously. |
And for that matter, as I said earlier, maybe it doesn't have to solve anything but it could be instituted on a trial basis to see if the voters in general would use it and that those who do, would feel that they are accomplishing something with it.
I think over time, were it used, it would have some effect on those, such as Robert, myself, and some of the others here who legitimately try, for reasons of their own improvement and to test their resourcefulness, to hit the mark with the voters at the same time that they try to work within the challenge description. I know I would certainly use it as a barometer for whether or not I'm conveying my concept of the challenge details.
The one thing that aggravates me more than anything about having these discussions is that so many have to have a black and white answer, and get adversarial. I think that a number of proposals here have possibilities and could be implemented fairly easily without having to have them be anything more than a tool for those who'd choose to use it.
If nothing else, if it was implemented for a trial period, and the numbers indicated that it was only a minisclue percentage who utilized it, I'd sure shut the Hell up.
That in and of itself would be worth something, eh?.....8>)
It seems to me that there are a couple of people here honestly trying to come up with some way to differentiate between voting down a shot on the merit of it as an image versus it doing a good job of conveying the image description as closely as possible.
I love the beautiful shots, but you have to admit that all too often there are a couple in the top 10 that while terrific, breathtaking images, really skirt the message of the challenge description.
And yes, I have said exactly that in numerous comments to the photogs, but wouldn't mind having the checkbox so that when I don't have time for a comment (Dialup SUCKS!!!), I can both vote the quality of the image and register my OPINION on whether or not it speaks to me about tha challenge description.
I really don't think that the majority of the people in this thread interested in doing something are asking for anything other than consideration on this subject.
Nobody's gonna quit or go hungry, we'd just like to possibly experiment with broadening the base of reviewing an image as it pertains to the basic concept of DP Challenge.
Nobody's trying to save or change the world.
Just the fact that there are so many willing to endure the constant abuse time after time to try and do something about this should indicate an honest interest in trying to come up with some kind of happy medium.
Is that such a bad thing?
|
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:58:17 PM · #185 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Nobody's saying that it has to solve anything.....but it's an idea that has a certain merit if you look at its possibilities rather than continuing to scoff at it or dismiss it. |
Well, actually, yes, several people are touting it as a solution. But if I were dismissing it, I wouldn't have asked several times for explanation of how it would work, would I? I just fail to see how, when the complaint is that other people aren't voting DNMC when they should, implementing another way to vote DNMC is going to change anything. Is checking a box somehow more enticing than selecting a number or having an open text box? Perhaps. So maybe we should try it and buckle down for triple the number of complaints about narrow minded voters. It's going to be a lose-lose situation for as long as we feel the solution is to better control what others do until the result is more in line with our own opinions. So carry on... :) |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:06:43 PM · #186 |
| IMO, it seems that this proposed 'solution', or alternative or whatever, would actually just increase the supposed 'problem'. `I don't get it. The complaint is that some people disregard the challenge and enter great shots to get good scores. So you want a way to encourage people to NOT score low, and just have a dnmc stat? So then, even more people can just say "hey, I can enter whatever, now I'll get less low scores and just a bunch of dnmc checks. so what. cool, easy ribbon" |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:14:50 PM · #187 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Nobody's saying that it has to solve anything.....but it's an idea that has a certain merit if you look at its possibilities rather than continuing to scoff at it or dismiss it. |
Well, actually, yes, several people are touting it as a solution. But if I were dismissing it, I wouldn't have asked several times for explanation of how it would work, would I? I just fail to see how, when the complaint is that other people aren't voting DNMC when they should, implementing another way to vote DNMC is going to change anything. Is checking a box somehow more enticing than selecting a number or having an open text box? Perhaps. So maybe we should try it and buckle down for triple the number of complaints about narrow minded voters. It's going to be a lose-lose situation for as long as we feel the solution is to better control what others do until the result is more in line with our own opinions. So carry on... :) |
There is the rub. People that wish to better define whether or not a photo meets the challenge are, generally, and for the most part, to stupid to understand the subtlities involved. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:16:57 PM · #188 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I love the beautiful shots, but you have to admit that all too often there are a couple in the top 10 that while terrific, breathtaking images, really skirt the message of the challenge description. |
I don't see that I have to admit anything of the kind -- perhaps you could cite a stistically significant number of samples to support this contention.
Originally posted by zxaar:
For example if 50 people thought it is dnmc, it shall be thrown out. Then you will see everybody will be taking challenge topic seriously. |
I really resent the implication that people who choose to depict or interpret the challenge description in a creative or less than obvious (to you) way are not taking the challenge seriously.
A DQ should be reserved for pictures which break the rules, not those whose creators have a different opinion of what the challenge description means than you do. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:26:26 PM · #189 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Nobody's saying that it has to solve anything.....but it's an idea that has a certain merit if you look at its possibilities rather than continuing to scoff at it or dismiss it. |
Well, actually, yes, several people are touting it as a solution. But if I were dismissing it, I wouldn't have asked several times for explanation of how it would work, would I? I just fail to see how, when the complaint is that other people aren't voting DNMC when they should, implementing another way to vote DNMC is going to change anything. Is checking a box somehow more enticing than selecting a number or having an open text box? Perhaps. So maybe we should try it and buckle down for triple the number of complaints about narrow minded voters. It's going to be a lose-lose situation for as long as we feel the solution is to better control what others do until the result is more in line with our own opinions. So carry on... :) |
I agree, maybe you should try it. Then we can see if your prediction comes true. Hardly seems lose-lose to have a bunch of bitching now and possibly a bunch of bitching on the other side, and the feature can always be removed.
Another alternative would just be to walk away from the challenge concept. Remove all verbage about considering the challenge topic while voting from the rules and just be done with it.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:27:51 PM · #190 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I love the beautiful shots, but you have to admit that all too often there are a couple in the top 10 that while terrific, breathtaking images, really skirt the message of the challenge description. |
I don't see that I have to admit anything of the kind -- perhaps you could cite a stistically significant number of samples to support this contention.
|
Of course he could, if only there were a checkbox so such data could be gathered. But we don't want that... |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:28:05 PM · #191 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I love the beautiful shots, but you have to admit that all too often there are a couple in the top 10 that while terrific, breathtaking images, really skirt the message of the challenge description. |
I don't see that I have to admit anything of the kind -- perhaps you could cite a stistically significant number of samples to support this contention.
Originally posted by zxaar:
For example if 50 people thought it is dnmc, it shall be thrown out. Then you will see everybody will be taking challenge topic seriously. |
I really resent the implication that people who choose to depict or interpret the challenge description in a creative or less than obvious (to you) way are not taking the challenge seriously.
A DQ should be reserved for pictures which break the rules, not those whose creators have a different opinion of what the challenge description means than you do. |
The DQ is a red herring. Forget DQ. Pull back. Just a checkbox. No penalty. Just for fun. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:30:45 PM · #192 |
Originally posted by jonejess:
The DQ is a red herring. Forget DQ. Pull back. Just a checkbox. No penalty. Just for fun. |
Exactly. Stop bring up the dq idea! |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:49:30 PM · #193 |
Originally posted by jonejess:
There is the rub. People that wish to better define whether or not a photo meets the challenge are, generally, and for the most part, to stupid to understand the subtlities involved. |
You know what?
I finally understand.
It's comments like this that really makes this place a pleasure.
BTW, genius, *TOO* would be the correct application of that word.
I don't even know what that other word "subtlities" is.
Perhaps you meant subtleties??????
You don't know jack about me or what I'm trying to say, plus it's obvious you have no interest in trying to understand it.
I'm too stupid?
Up yours!
I should have known better than to try and be civil and reason with the likes of someone like you.
I realize I'm wasting my thoughts and time with this.
BTW, if you're going to throw stones about the grasp I have on being able to reach the voters in my quest to learn and do better, then you damn well ought to check and see where your scores are relative to mine.
Duh!
My apologies to those in this thread that are trying to be civil and accomplish something.
Good luck, I am sooooo done now.
Message edited by author 2007-09-22 23:55:33.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2007 12:01:20 AM · #194 |
A DNMC checkbox is an interesting idea. Fine for me, as long as it doesn't alter the final vote calculation.
It's an interesting learning tool because there are at least 10 times more votes per shot than comments left. So if a nice shot scored low and not many comments where left and the submitter did try hard to be on topic or did actually see it as on topic. Seeing how many DNMC votes he or she received will give them a better idea if the shot was voted down for content and quality, or because it didn't connect well enough with viewers on the message or challenge topic it was trying to portray.
If this makes people feel any better, this may be a private stat. OH and leave the box out of Free Studies ;) |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 12:06:58 AM · #195 |
Originally posted by Techo:
If this makes people feel any better, this may be a private stat. OH and leave the box out of Free Studies ;) |
Leave it in. Humor is scare as it is! |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 12:40:23 AM · #196 |
Why is it we always need to attack the images that win, enough people liked them that they got a ribbon so who are we to play judge and jury on how people should have voted and what really should have been allowed in the challenge? Is it really such an issue that we have to make it a big deal every time there is a winner that we do not personally agree with, there are several challenges a week to try again. To me I feel we should start congratulating the winners and move on. All this talk of DQ's is not good for the site. If someone wins a ribbon, good for them!
Let's start respecting people on this site, how do you think it makes people feel when they win a ribbon only to hear a bunch of insulting questions about how thier image should not even be in the challenge. If I win a ribbon I can only hope people on this site are happy for me rather than waiting to tear it down..... |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 12:46:39 AM · #197 |
| I know it hasn't gotten a lot of views, but I had a suggestion to have just one challenge where you have to use the title of the challenge as your title. Nothing else, or DQ. I think this would really help to cut out the challenges that might be REALLY stretched to meet a challenge. |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 12:46:45 AM · #198 |
| I hate bugs and splashes. |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 04:24:44 AM · #199 |
Originally posted by jonejess:
[
The DQ is a red herring. Forget DQ. Pull back. Just a checkbox. No penalty. Just for fun. |
But why? If you are going to take a stance on dnmc, why not go all the way and "fix" it once and for all?
to simply put a check box is like saying you are opposed to abortion, but just want to gather statistics but still allow them to happen! |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 05:41:27 AM · #200 |
I entered a shot called 'Chalk and Cheese' in the dichotomy challenge. It was a picture of - yes - chalk and cheese. A number of people said this was not a dichotomy. I have the impression that they are unfamiliar with the idiomatic use of the phrase chalk and cheese.
It wasn't a great shot, and the reference was more verbal than visual, so there were plenty of reasons to vote it low. However, had the dnmc checkbox with dq powers been available, I strongly suspect that the image would have been disqualified, thus forming a brief monument to common ignorance. |
|
