| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/27/2010 09:26:53 AM · #1 |
I feel it never hurts to bring attention to the obvious.
Why are the lunatics running the asylum? Why is voting here a given right and not a privilege? Why can anyone join and immediately start voting (and I am sure, in more than a few cases) and have absolutely no other site participation here than simply distributing sub-4 scores across the board in any challenge they like?
Yes, I know, there is a vote scrubber. Maybe it's time for something more.
These people don't care about photography. They don't have portfolios. They don't enter challenges. They don't contribute anything positive to the site. They are parasites, whose only purpose here is to ruin things for everyone else.
Look at the vast numbers of ghost accounts, there are hundreds if not thousands of them, set up and never used, or if they are used, only for malicious reasons like troll voting.
So, as I have done in the past, I suggest that voting be made a privilege and not an automatic right. Yes, I know, some site members will say they voted on challenges long before they began participating in challenges. Great!
So I will propose that only paid-up members be automatically given the right to vote. Registered users get to vote only after they have actually participated on the site, either by entering challenges and/or setting up a portfolio in the case of those that do have a camera. For those who do not have a camera, another form of active contribution to the site - posting in forums, starting threads etc.
Ok, those people just aching to insert the beating-a-dead-horse-icon, go ahead. Have fun.
Message edited by author 2010-01-27 09:27:25. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 09:32:07 AM · #2 |
| On the other hand, the reason I have not renewed my membership here is that this site does not encourage people who vote. Take a look at some of these photographers, regular high scorers - many do not vote very much at all. Contribution to this site comes in two ways, photographers giving their images to a challenge, AND voters voting 100% on a challenge regularly. No encouragement is given to voters here. I think that is a major failing of this site. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 09:52:08 AM · #3 |
There are certainly improvements that would make the site better. But it certainly is user-friendly and kicks JPG's website's butt in many ways in my opinion. Generally, I think individuals who try to mess up the voting probably make very little difference and are wasting their time and their lack of impact will result in them going elsewhere.
If this is a thread for complaints: I have my own gripes … mainly is that DPC Prints could be much better, cheaper, and much more huge (more like smug-mug or something) ... but that may not be a common gripe. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 09:57:00 AM · #4 |
| To counter your argument, all my challenge entry pics have a higher non-contributor average vote than the contributors. I realise that just means from people that haven't entered the challenge but still an interesting point as it's normally at least half a point different.... |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 10:11:34 AM · #5 |
I still think the best solution here is just keeping track of voting history, with a graphical breakdown (like those used for images after the challenge ends).
Basically that enables us to identify those users who do vote disruptively, and ask that action be taken if it is desired, but quite frankly, the more important aspect of this is that it will make that information public, so people will be much more likely to think about how their voting reflects on them. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 10:32:32 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by bobonacus:
To counter your argument, all my challenge entry pics have a higher non-contributor average vote than the contributors. I realise that just means from people that haven't entered the challenge but still an interesting point as it's normally at least half a point different.... |
I noticed the same trend within the last year.
Participants tend to vote lower than non-participants. Now the ratio is not displayed, but I find it interesting as well |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 10:56:37 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:
Originally posted by bobonacus:
To counter your argument, all my challenge entry pics have a higher non-contributor average vote than the contributors. I realise that just means from people that haven't entered the challenge but still an interesting point as it's normally at least half a point different.... |
I noticed the same trend within the last year.
Participants tend to vote lower than non-participants. Now the ratio is not displayed, but I find it interesting as well |
Not just the last year, it's been like that, on average, since this stat has been displayed. There are a few rare exceptions... |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 11:21:47 AM · #8 |
For some reason these threads and comments about low scores and 'trolls' always remind me of the Spinal Tap sketch about the amp. If there are numerous trolls who tactically vote low right across the board then surely it is still a level playing pitch for 99.9 of us. 'Yea, but this goes up to 11.'
For those who don't have a clue what i am talking about.
Message edited by author 2010-01-27 11:23:31. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 11:28:12 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:
Originally posted by bobonacus:
To counter your argument, all my challenge entry pics have a higher non-contributor average vote than the contributors. I realise that just means from people that haven't entered the challenge but still an interesting point as it's normally at least half a point different.... |
I noticed the same trend within the last year.
Participants tend to vote lower than non-participants. Now the ratio is not displayed, but I find it interesting as well |
not displayed? I still see the split on my entries. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 11:29:25 AM · #10 |
nvm. misunderstood.
Message edited by author 2010-01-27 11:32:06. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 11:51:44 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
...Why are the lunatics running the asylum?... |
It's a democracy.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2010 11:57:28 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Registered users get to vote only after they have actually participated on the site, either by entering challenges and/or setting up a portfolio in the case of those that do have a camera. |
I'm only a registered user (although I plan to be a member within the next month or so) and new to the site as well. So as far as this suggestion goes you should know that registered users cannont setup a portfolio. (Or if they can I cannot figure out how.)
As far as the voting....well, I don't understand why you're not required to vote on every image. Seems to me that if you don't it messes up the averages of those that aren't voted on.
I've voted 100% in every challenge I've voted in and I plan to continue to do so. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:12:17 PM · #13 |
How would something like that be regulated? *(voting)
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing I'm asking sincerely. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:24:40 PM · #14 |
| The percentage thing would be easy enough. As it is now you have to vote at least 70% (I think) for your votes to count. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:31:46 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by Luci11e:
The percentage thing would be easy enough. As it is now you have to vote at least 70% (I think) for your votes to count. |
I think it's 20% |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:39:06 PM · #16 |
20%; 70% ....
if they can keep up with any percentage in order for votes to count the 100% thing shouldn't be a problem |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:43:19 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by bobonacus:
To counter your argument, all my challenge entry pics have a higher non-contributor average vote than the contributors. I realise that just means from people that haven't entered the challenge but still an interesting point as it's normally at least half a point different.... |
I've noticed this too, and I'm guess it's people who try to vote everyone else lower to improve their own odds.
Why don't we give a 3 month voting ban to anyone whose average vote given reaches as low as 4.5?(or make choose a number that we can agree on to be the troll's constant) I think that would take the blame off of the new, registered users still have a chance to learn and participate, which I thought was one of the main aspects of DPC. I would also suggest that this rule be applied to members as well. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:44:18 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Luci11e:
20%; 70% ....
if they can keep up with any percentage in order for votes to count the 100% thing shouldn't be a problem |
Are you saying requiring 100% voting will discourage the troll voting? I don't follow. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:45:07 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Luci11e:
20%; 70% ....
if they can keep up with any percentage in order for votes to count the 100% thing shouldn't be a problem |
100% requirement would end up losing a lot of votes at rollover. If someone starts voting on a large challenge and gets past 20%, but never makes to all, then the scrubber would dump those votes (if 100% is required). Secondly, some people may not even start voting if they don't think they can finish...why waste your time if it doesn't count. And lastly, some times it's not ethical (or at least difficult) to vote on 100% if you know whose entry you're voting on (ex, assisted someone with making a selection). |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:45:59 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Luci11e:
20%; 70% ....
if they can keep up with any percentage in order for votes to count the 100% thing shouldn't be a problem |
Are you saying requiring 100% voting will discourage the troll voting? I don't follow. |
No, I'm not saying that at all! Just saying that not voting on all the pictures isn't fair to all the all the entries. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:47:10 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by mBastin:
I've noticed this too, and I'm guess it's people who try to vote everyone else lower to improve their own odds.
Why don't we give a 3 month voting ban to anyone whose average vote given reaches as low as 4.5?(or make choose a number that we can agree on to be the troll's constant) I think that would take the blame off of the new, registered users still have a chance to learn and participate, which I thought was one of the main aspects of DPC. I would also suggest that this rule be applied to members as well. |
Now you're trying to influence the vote in the positive?
Ask yourself, are the 10s you get on an image any more valid than the 1s? I don't like low votes any more than the next guy, but seriously, while no image is totally garbage and deserving of a 1, can't you also say that no image is perfect and desrving of a 10? |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:50:09 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by Luci11e:
20%; 70% ....
if they can keep up with any percentage in order for votes to count the 100% thing shouldn't be a problem |
100% requirement would end up losing a lot of votes at rollover. If someone starts voting on a large challenge and gets past 20%, but never makes to all, then the scrubber would dump those votes (if 100% is required). Secondly, some people may not even start voting if they don't think they can finish...why waste your time if it doesn't count. And lastly, some times it's not ethical (or at least difficult) to vote on 100% if you know whose entry you're voting on (ex, assisted someone with making a selection). |
Ok, I get what you're saying and that makes sense. Especially with the last sentence about when helping someone choose and entry....which brings up another point! Should DPC'rs get other DPC'rs to help choose entries? I've seen those thread and it may just be me but I'm not sure that is ethical in itself.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:51:22 PM · #23 |
The images are presented randomly to the voters, so if everyone voted the first 20% of the entries they encountered, then all the entries would get very close to an equal number of votes, as in fact happens.
Voting on 100% of the entries is too much of a time burden for many/most people, especially since we want to encourage "thoughtful" voting, not speed-voting; people complain far more about a lack of comments than a lack of votes. Require 100% voting and I think the number of voters will fall off dramatically. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 12:57:17 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by mBastin:
I've noticed this too, and I'm guess it's people who try to vote everyone else lower to improve their own odds.
Why don't we give a 3 month voting ban to anyone whose average vote given reaches as low as 4.5?(or make choose a number that we can agree on to be the troll's constant) I think that would take the blame off of the new, registered users still have a chance to learn and participate, which I thought was one of the main aspects of DPC. I would also suggest that this rule be applied to members as well. |
Now you're trying to influence the vote in the positive?
Ask yourself, are the 10s you get on an image any more valid than the 1s? I don't like low votes any more than the next guy, but seriously, while no image is totally garbage and deserving of a 1, can't you also say that no image is perfect and desrving of a 10? |
I agree with you, but consider the fact that if someones average is lower than 4.5 that means that on average they give out a 4 which is a 40%. I'm not in anyway saying that it's wrong to give out 4's but when it's the majority of your votes, I'd consider it trolling. Also, no one ever gets upset about a ten, and it's obvious why. I was just suggesting my idea as a means to stop trolls from low voting, as thats what everyone seems to be mad about. |
|
|
|
01/27/2010 01:01:18 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The images are presented randomly to the voters, so if everyone voted the first 20% of the entries they encountered, then all the entries would get very close to an equal number of votes, as in fact happens.
Voting on 100% of the entries is too much of a time burden for many/most people, especially since we want to encourage "thoughtful" voting, not speed-voting; people complain far more about a lack of comments than a lack of votes. Require 100% voting and I think the number of voters will fall off dramatically. |
Thank you for explaining that; I didn't know they were presented randomly.
Even so, would you have to "speed vote"? Doesn't the system save the votes for you so that you can go back and finish voting?
And you're right about the comments. I know they are like a treasured commodity around here. |
|
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: 04/18/2024 08:43:58 AM EDT.
