| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/11/2007 12:05:52 AM · #201 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
In the For What It's Worth category, I voted all but 7 images in the last free study and commented on 26% of 'em. And this is while hanging out in Afghanistan with limited computer time and VERY slow access. Why? Because if I enter a challenge, I feel it is only fair to do my part. I must be an exception.
If we go to a tiered system, I'll concentrate on the "cut" images rather than the contenders. There are plenty of people who will want to vote on the contenders. |
Here here!
We all must ask ourselves : what kind of group do I want? Either you contribute to make it better or you don't and then why bother being a part of a group at all?
Message edited by author 2007-11-11 00:06:40.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 12:55:24 AM · #202 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
I know I've posted this a thousand posts ago...
Why not limit the number of entries and close submissions after a certain quota has been reached? Who wants to go through 500 - 800 images per challenge? |
You would also have to limit the entrants to only one upload, otherwise you could just upload anything to save a spot.
If we are to limit entries I think I'd rather see it done by shortening the submission period.
Message edited by author 2007-11-11 00:55:49.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 01:31:13 AM · #203 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
You already know this after the first couple of days anyway, right? So what has changed? You still get a score, you still get a placement in the challenge, you just end up with fewer votes than before.
R. |
The only way I will go with this idea is if my "cut" entry is deleted and not added to my record of challenges and has no effect on my average received vote. I wish to have the full experience of the votes I might receive. I don't think it fair to base my score on a partial vote. In the last few months I've pared down the number of online photographic sites I financially support to one. With such a change here it would be none.
Message edited by author 2007-11-11 01:34:50.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 01:50:34 AM · #204 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
You already know this after the first couple of days anyway, right? So what has changed? You still get a score, you still get a placement in the challenge, you just end up with fewer votes than before.
R. |
The only way I will go with this idea is if my "cut" entry is deleted and not added to my record of challenges and has no effect on my average received vote. I wish to have the full experience of the votes I might receive. I don't think it fair to base my score on a partial vote. In the last few months I've pared down the number of online photographic sites I financially support to one. With such a change here it would be none. |
I truly do not understand the gist of your argument.
If an image does not make the cut, then it stands to reason that the score it received did not meet the criteria established by the voters, and if anything the scores doled out at the onset would (under the proposed scenario) be better than they would be at the end of the voting process.
I can't speak for you, but after the first 100 or so vote, I can usually tell what the final score of my image will be, and will not have gained or lost anything if the image was removed from further consideration.
I could be proven wrong, but the only group that might see a growth in score would be those reaching the final plateau. The impact on the remainder or us would be negligeable at best.
Ray
Message edited by author 2007-11-11 01:50:56. |
|
|
|
11/11/2007 02:04:30 AM · #205 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I truly do not understand the gist of your argument.
|
I don't always communicate via the written word very well. In this instance I believe I was perfectly clear.
Originally posted by RayEthier:
If an image does not make the cut, then it stands to reason that the score it received did not meet the criteria established by the voters,
|
But not all the voters. If I wanted to enter a judged or tiered competition I'd do that.
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I can't speak for you, but after the first 100 or so vote, I can usually tell what the final score of my image will be, and will not have gained or lost anything if the image was removed from further consideration.
Ray |
Well, as far as further consideration, I'll try this out with my stipulation: If I'm cut, the image is deleted from my challenge record and the votes don't count toward my received votes average. If I'm not to receive the actual *REAL* votes that *ACTUALLY* select the ribbon winners, then my submitted image should disappear. Otherwise I think this would be a foolish change.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 07:11:12 PM · #206 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Well, as far as further consideration, I'll try this out with my stipulation: If I'm cut, the image is deleted from my challenge record and the votes don't count toward my received votes average. If I'm not to receive the actual *REAL* votes that *ACTUALLY* select the ribbon winners, then my submitted image should disappear. Otherwise I think this would be a foolish change. |
What would you gain by having your image disappear, or even by leaving the image within the contest, other than possibly a few extra views.
It can safely be argued that the score one gets on an image is determined within the first 100 or so votes... all of which are real. Leaving the image in or removing it will have little impact on the final outcome.
The fact that you might consider this change as foolish does not necessarily make it so... perception is indeed a personal thing.
Ray |
|
|
|
11/11/2007 07:44:21 PM · #207 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
... It can safely be argued that the score one gets on an image is determined within the first 100 or so votes... all of which are real. ... |
So you think there's going to be 100 votes on images before the "cut" is made after what, 2 or 3 days?
I don't like this tiered approach either. By putting an image up for only a couple of days it will not get exposure to a solid block of voters. I've noticed for example in several instances where an image in a challenge will fluctuate substantially with US voters vs European voters. The window for everyone to vote (provided they even want to anymore) will be way too short.
If a change is to be put in place on how Free Studies (that is the subject of this thread correct?) are handled, I would be in favor of the split formula of one per week going up for each editing rule type.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 09:47:19 PM · #208 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
perception is indeed a personal thing.
Ray |
Yes it is, and repeating yourself over and over does nothing to improve the quality of communications. You refuse to even try to understand what I write, so we'll just have to agree, to disagree. :)
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 09:58:15 PM · #209 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
I wouldnt mind seeing a quarterly FS. |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I like having a FS every month. There's always some shot that didn't work it's way into a challenge theme that I really like. The FS is perfect for that IMO. |
Originally posted by mark_u_U:
I think that's exactly the problem with the FS: people use it as a garbage can for anything they can not use in a challenge. Some pretty nice pictures in that garbage can, I admit. But how does it fit with the concept of a 'challenge'?
To me, the fun of DPC is having to shoot for a theme within a time frame, not just uploading my prettiest picture of the current month. Likewise, I think it's much more fun voting on themed challenges than on unthemed ones, despite the high quality of the latter. |
I don't see the Free Studies as a garbage can, or just somewhere to stash their junque.
Everybody knows that they're judged harder, and I sure as heck get a dose of the harshest judging in every one.
It is my ultimate barometer, and I don't fare well.
I am also in first place for scoring for the person who has not broken 6.0 once, in the Marathon, and I have participated in every one.
If you think for one second that I'm not trying my heart out and that the frustration level isn't really high, you're seriously mistaken.
I can flat guarantee that with the general trends that are being suggested, you'll lose a lot of people like me.
Maybe with my 5.26 average, you don't want to vote on my stuff, but I use the Free Studies to try and push myself, and for whatever reason, I just haven't been able to do well.
The tiers and the culling will stop me dead in my tracks. It seems to me that anything that takes away from participation in any form is a bad idea on a site that exists for, and by, participation.
Message edited by author 2007-11-11 22:24:28.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 10:03:13 PM · #210 |
Fir3bird I dont understand what you are worried about. These are your stats :
Challenges Entered: 17
Votes Cast: 17,102
Avg Vote Cast: 5.6113
Votes Received: 3,565
Avg Vote Received: 5.9074
Your highest score is 7.5593 (A blue ribbon). Your worst score was 5.1xxx. At this stage after this number of challenges a slightly lower score certainly wouldnt alter your overall average that much. On top of that your average vote cast is less than that received although it is a pretty impressive average, there are a lot of harsh voters on here LOL.
Lately I have only been able to enter the freestudies and like them the way they are. I was disappointed with the number of votes and my final score but that is how it goes. It is just going to make it too complicated to start splitting everything up. As I have said before, maybe 2 weeks for voting may help. Also maybe have 2 Exclusive Freestudies (the same as the open challenges), one with basic editing rules and one with advanced rules, that way it doesnt restrict people as much and will help to keep the numbers down in each one and enable more people to be able to finish 100% of the voting rather than just making the 20%. Another suggestion, as previously suggested, maybe with all this in mind make the minimum 30%.
JMHO once again. |
|
|
|
11/11/2007 10:10:48 PM · #211 |
Originally posted by L2:
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general? |
Cool!
I could way live with that.
Especially if it counts how much I blather in the forums.
Or......you could unclutter the forums by telling me I can't submit in the FS unless I shut up!.....LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 10:27:06 PM · #212 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I love Free Studies, and I vote them all. Keep the Free Studies! |
Yep!
Keep 'em!
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 10:32:43 PM · #213 |
we could just adjust the voting requirement to 10% for free studies
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 11:18:46 PM · #214 |
Would be nice to see a poll asking about the free studies (similar to the internet connection poll we were just presented with).
Cheers |
|
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: 04/24/2024 02:03:23 AM EDT.
