Activity
Mosaic
Map

Your Opinion Matters

"What if..."

  • ...We remove the voting system all together? (this means the "Top Rated" would go away)
  • ...We kept Voting and "Top Rated", but it was selectable by Skill Level (Happy Snapper, Advanced Amateur, Happy Snapper, etc) Would this help anything?

Important:

  1. The "Opinions" link is going to be moved to the footer in near future to make room in the top navigation for...well, you'll see...



What others are saying...

(@scottmiller) Scott Miller said:March 19th, 2012 (3:57pm) PDT
@Giuseppe GrimaldiThe problem with relying only on the number of favorites is that not everyone views them.For example, I really will never go back and look at most of the photos a second time, so why fav them?If I score it a 9 or a 10 I have already indicated I like it, and I see no need to indicate that feeling in two different ways.Pretty much the only time I hit the fav button is when someone has voting disabled on their image and I want to indicate that I liked their photo.
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 18th, 2012 (4:00pm) PDT
What if... we could set the clock to our own time zones?
(@72dpi) 72dpi said (72dpi Admin):March 17th, 2012 (10:30am) PDT
@Self (72dpi): Nice job with the buzz kill! (grins)
(@mezzoduomo) Jeff Morley said:March 17th, 2012 (6:24am) PDT
....crickets chirping, tumbleweeds blowing across a barren landscape.
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 16th, 2012 (3:58pm) PDT
@72dpi You killed the thread :D
(@72dpi) 72dpi said (72dpi Admin):March 16th, 2012 (7:52am) PDT
@Everyone: What an amazing thread! This has got to be one of the best threads yet, and we applaud you all for keeping the 'Rants" in the "Get in the Ring" forum :) Makes it far easier for us to glean the valuable ideas that are presented.
We have been making some tweaks to the voting system, under the hood, and by some of the bug reports, some of you have noticed. These bugs aren't actually bugs, rather additional logic to better define what is "Top Rated". There is a loooooooooong way to go to getting this "better". We can't say "get it right" because we've concluded there just isn't such a thing. (We'll elaborate in a new topic thread soon)
Keep the ideas flowing -- we have some ideas in the works that you guys are either going to love, or hate :)
TGIF!
(@jaykay72) John Kortland said:March 16th, 2012 (6:37am) PDT
Agree Sten, that title bar is a pain in the you know what sometimes, always seems to mask an important part of the picture. Can we please have the titles shown not overlaying the photographs.
Can't see point 2) working in the comment below, why should photograph miss out just because some people are not on line or viewing at the time, does not mean it's a bad shot just because it takes time to gather votes. Get rid of votes all together and have a comment based system, would eliminate most of the comments in all these threads and I don't think you can tactically comment !
(@Giugrim) Giuseppe Grimaldi said:March 16th, 2012 (2:55am) PDT
1) Any system that would favour top commenters it's not a good system for me. People who spend most of their time commenting photos with 1 2 words like (great, excellent photo, superb, etc.) only to get commented and voted back should not be favoured.
2) Top score should be given to photos which get the highest number of favs and the highest number of visits in the shortest time. The latter should be enough to show that it is a great image if many want to see it and fav it.
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 16th, 2012 (12:15am) PDT
@Dave - yeah, I know.Hahaha.
Another suggestion would be to get rid of that annoying black title bar on thumbnails as it frequently obscures an important bit of the picture.Maybe the title bar could be added above the snap, so's not to get in the way.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 16th, 2012 (12:13am) PDT
@Stention House, that's a big can of worms you've opened there!! LOL!!
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 16th, 2012 (12:00am) PDT
What if...HDR had its own section, to differentiate it from ordinary photography.I was going to say 'proper photography', but thought I'd better not ;)
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 15th, 2012 (11:55pm) PDT
Yes, Charlie, you're probably right.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 15th, 2012 (6:03pm) PDT
@sas,
I'm simply saying I don't have time to reply to every single comment. That doesn't mean I'm not grateful.
Just the sort of nit picking and petty mindedness I left the other site for.
I apologise sincerely that I don't meet your moral standards.
Dave.
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 15th, 2012 (4:14pm) PDT
I'm also not speaking clearly because it seems that what you are suggesting is what we have in our government, a committee making a decision to "kick the can down the road" by not really making a decision but telling all the voters that they have great ideas and they can't decide. Vote for me and perhaps we will make a decision "next term".
I have worked for companies large and small and the best run were small companies with one very strong decision maker at the head that decided decisively. He made mistakes occasionally and adjusted rapidly with the new information he then had.
I have every confidence that 72dpi has strong management that will make a decision. I also believe from things they have already done that it will be a good one. I believe a decision is necessary not testing.
Charlie
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 15th, 2012 (3:37pm) PDT
I think you are possibly referring to my statement about agreeing with every view, Charlie, but I think you may have inadvertently missed the point which I was trying to make. My fault entirely - my apologies for not being clearer - so let me explain with (hopefully) a bit more clarity what I meant: the fact that I agreed with just about every viewpoint meant that, taken INDIVIDUALLY, they were all perfectly valid and perfectly reasonable. However, taken COLLECTIVELY, they were a fairly good indication of the virtual impossibility of devising the "perfect" voting system which solved ALL the problems of fairness, accuracy and vulnerability to trolling - and, furthermore, which pleased everybody. I then went on to suggest that the only way of finding out what worked and what didn't, with a view to reaching a compromise solution which solved most of the problems and kept most of the members happy for most of the time, was for 72dpi to do a bit of live testing and see what happened. Hope that's clearer now.
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 15th, 2012 (3:36pm) PDT
ermmm I was taught that it was good manners to say thank you - but them I'm ancient so I expect the world has moved on
(@davidmcmahon) David McMahon said:March 15th, 2012 (3:35pm) PDT
I'm OK with the basic concept of the voting system, as I have no problem with my work being judged numerically by anyone, anywhere.
Yes, I realise that some people will give me a 10 while others might give me a 7 or a 6 or lower. That's part and parcel of life.
There's no vote-based algorithm that is perfect, is there? However, I do appreciate the fact that we have a forum to discuss this. Thanks, 72dpi.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 15th, 2012 (3:01pm) PDT
Charlie,
I agree with your comments about leaving pointless notes to say thanks for comments/votes, etc. it was the main reason I left RedBubble - 'you won't get featured in this group until you start saying thanks for comments' was the feedback I got.
If others have that much time that they can leave comments in return for every piece of activity then fair play to them but don't expect me to do the same. I can't and won't!!
Cheers,
Dave.
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 15th, 2012 (2:50pm) PDT
All the talk about 10 and 9 and fav and comment counts. There is also the fact that some "campaign" with "thank you for your vote and comment's" and other's do not, and politics is a major factor. I've had messages say "I'm waiting for you vote".
An awful lot of this stuff is pure Bullshit.
Charlie
(@pietflour) piet flour said:March 15th, 2012 (2:31pm) PDT
Steven, the suggestion of a critique only pool is already made several times, and i supportit.
For the rating,
as the tsunami of 10 continues, and probably all of them being honest in their perception,
but the best of is to shown what a lot of people in the community think is good stuff
I suggest a solution.
A section "today", shown with all there is now, but chronologic
the section "best of" starts only after 1 or 2 days
if not more than 20 favs, and 30 comments ... all the 10 are downgraded to a 9
if not more than 10 favs, and 20 comments ... all the 10 are downgraded to a 8
if not more than 5 favs, and 10 comments ... all the 10 are downgraded to a 7
probably these numbers will have to be fine-tuned, but it's about the idea "the best of ..." can be supported by "the community"
a stone in the lake to make some waves ... chocking ??? just take some time to reflect about it
(@BerndKinghorst) Bernd Kinghorst said:March 15th, 2012 (12:32pm) PDT
how about a voting system that shows the average of votes after the amount of 5 votes....so the voters are more free about their votebehavior.....
and how about a system where the pics get into an anonymous voting for a kind of "best of" gallery after they reached an amount of 10 votes with the averrage of maybe a "9"....?
just my 2 cents.......
(@mezzoduomo) Jeff Morley said:March 15th, 2012 (12:22pm) PDT
I like Steven's critique pool, as an additional feature of the site.
(@EyeoftheStorm) Steven Maguire said:March 15th, 2012 (11:26am) PDT
My suggestion, If you make a critique only pool like the new photo's with no votes pool.I think that would work out better for those of us who don't want any scoring on our images, but want feedback to get better.Just an idea.
(@jaykay72) John Kortland said:March 15th, 2012 (9:16am) PDT
My quick ten cents worth would be to get rid of the voting system, have comments and favourites only, the most favoured will be shown in each category as they are now. Any numerical voting system will, owing to human nature, inevitably end up being influenced and/or abused by those whose sole aim in life is to be at the top of the list, to massage their fragile ego's.
I think the comment and favourites system works very well on Flickr, I have found that the constructive critiques I recieve there most helpful, and sometimes a necessary reality check when you get a bit up yourself ! I have now used up my 10 cents so I will get my coat !
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 15th, 2012 (8:41am) PDT
How can anyone be in agreement with every view, when the proposed views for voting system changes have been all over the place from eliminating voting to leaving everything as it is now.
NCambre's post here is a real example of the phoneyness of what the troll AND YES THOSE WHO BENEFIT from the trolls does to honest posters.
It doesn't take a genius to see that since the troll has gone underground some of the formerly high scoring posters have settled significantly lower in the scoring.
While IMO the scoring is still not yet believable it is closer than just a few days ago. If this site is to become fair I suggest to many who were friends of the "troll", think about whether supporting him is really the best thing for peace and honesty here.
Charlie
(@ncambre) Nicole Cambré said:March 15th, 2012 (8:13am) PDT
I am fairly new to this site and am already honoured with an anonymous 6 vote on my latest photo, while that photo up to then only received high votes. As I seem to get a good few of those on the other site many photographers on this site are/have used in the past I am getting some experience with dislikers. I do not want to wrongly accuse those disliking as some of them may have a good reason to dislike a photo but most of the time it happens when a photo is higly rated and seldom with any feedback. The person on this site that voted the photo as a 6 may well have a very good reason for doing so and the photo may indeed need some serious improvement but I would like to know where. I am very open to constructive feedback on my photo's from fellow photographers of whom many have superior images compared to mine. I do not photograph to score votes and whether a photo is scoring high or low does not make or break my day, therefore I would be as happy with this site if the voting system is totally removed as long as there remains some way to comment sincerely on the photo's published. On the other hand I would also be happy with a simple system Like/favorite/comment only or even with a dislike but then with a motivation requirement why that particular person thinks that photo is in need of improvement. Cheers
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 15th, 2012 (3:02am) PDT
Another +1 from me for Karl's suggestion.
Cheers,
Dave.
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 15th, 2012 (2:36am) PDT
Well said Karl
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 15th, 2012 (2:20am) PDT
I've just had a squint through the various posts in this forum and find myself in agreement with just about every view that has been advanced - even if those views are, in many cases, directly contradictory. It's not stretching the imagination too far to suggest that 72dpi are probably having similar thoughts (provided they haven't already thrown up their hands in despair and have disappeared to Outer Mongolia without telling us!). Essentially, what is coming through loud and clear is that no voting system (however complicated and fine-tuned to the nth degree) will ever be 100% fair, no voting system will ever be 100% accurate, no voting system will ever please ALL the members ALL the time, and no system will ever be 100% troll-proof.
There have been a number of cogently-reasoned suggestions here, but the fact remains that nobody will ever know whether or not they will have the desired effect until they are live-tested individually or in combination - and that's where 72dpi come in. Perhaps a "Darwinian" approach to testing might be suggested here: make small individual changes (based upon the views expressed here) and see what effect they have; if the effect (i.e. the reaction from us) is generally "positive", keep them and build on them; if the effect is generally "negative", ditch them and try something else. That way, there's a fair chance that we'll eventually arrive at the "least worst" solution, namely a system that is "reasonably fair", "reasonably" accurate, one which pleases most of the members most of the time, and one which results in a "reasonable" reduction in the troll problem.
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 15th, 2012 (1:13am) PDT
@Dave
I think we're on the same tracks.I was thinking more along the lines of points system - for example, every 25 views earns 1 point.But every fave gets 5 points.A score of 1-6 earns no points.A score of 7-9 earns 1 point.And a 10 earns 4 points.Each comment by a different person earns 1 point.A happy snapper or hobbyist would get a 2 bonus points for each fave or 10.An advanced amateur would get 1 bonus point for those.And the pros and semi-pros none.
So a fave remains the most important thing to achieve, followed by a 10 score.
These are just example figures.To make the system work effectively, someone with more brain power than me would have to fine tune it.But I think something along these lines would work and be, if not foolproof, certainly a large improvment on the current system, which most people agree is flawed and open to abuse.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 15th, 2012 (12:29am) PDT
@Stention House, aren't we saying more or less the same thing?
The only thing I would say is that the score needs to be divided by the number of views - otherwise you could get an image with, say, 100 views and no likes or faves that scores more than an image with 50 views and 30 faves. That would be a bit silly (IMHO).
And I also apologise if I'm repeating myself (or monopolising this discussion).
Cheers,
Dave.
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 15th, 2012 (12:13am) PDT
At the risk of repeating myself, I will reiterate my own idea which I think would work and pretty much overcome the troll issue.
Combine vote score, views, favs and skill level weighting to achieve one figure.This method encourages participation and promotion, and makes the score number less important or relevant than it is a present.
The short term anonymity idea is been forwarded before and is a good one.Though many snappers have a style so distinctive that it would be obvious who had taken the shot, even their name wasn't appearing with the picture.
(@Photobarx) Simon Barker said:March 14th, 2012 (11:47pm) PDT
Interesting idea, Dave. I quite like it as it would put everyone on an even plane, at least initially. Hopefully people would take the time to go through the page. I know that I would.
Cheers.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (11:25pm) PDT
Hi Simon,
I've thought long and hard about your last point all day as I was thinking along the same lines. The way I think is the best way to overcome it is to have all new images appear anonymously on the New Photos page. Let that page have maybe the last 48 hours worth of submissions but with no details of who they belong to. During that time they don't even appear on the owner's 'home' page. They stay on there for 48 hours no matter how many views/votes/Faves they get. If all the images on that page are constantly rotated then every single submitted image gets the same exposure.
After the 48 hours, the image would revert to 'normal' with the owners details and appear on the owners page.
Just an idea but would appreciate views/opinions!
Cheers,
Dave.
(@Photobarx) Simon Barker said:March 14th, 2012 (11:12pm) PDT
I think Carl, Dayne and Dave all make very good valid points. There has to be a happy median in there somewhere.
From Daynes point of view, and also from mine, most of the problems that are now on the site only came to the surface in the past 3 weeks or so. That happens to be the same time as a large growth in 72dpi members. The old days that he mentions, were days when we could vote without fear of retribution. They were days when a photo could be posted and there was a good chance that it would be viewed for a fair amount of time before going to the next pages. They were days without much argument. They were days without trolls. It was a fun site.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for growth and a need for change. But, let's try to do things with honesty and respect. Perhaps I'm also guilty of being too idealistic.
Dave, I think your suggestion does have merit, but bear in mind that unless a person has a large number of followers( perhaps in their snaplist, or perhaps from those following from other sites), then it will very hard to gather enough views and votes. The work likely wouldn't be seen.
Great idea to have a pop-up box to say critique or not.
Sorry for the long post, but let's all try to work through this and make 72dpi the great site that it deserves to be.
Cheers!
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (10:34pm) PDT
@Dayne. You're right - we're in violent agreement!!
My suggestion below is to basically keep a voting system but have 3 levels - 0 for view only, 1 for like and 2 for fave. If the images score is a function of points divided by views won't we all be happy?
Cheers,
Dave.
(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:March 14th, 2012 (10:20pm) PDT
@Dave - what you say sounds essentially the same as what I am saying. I don't see where you are disagreeing with me. I am also horrified at so many of the photos that get given 10's.
However, it is not the voting system that is faulty, but the way people are voting 9 or 10 only that is destroying the system (and that is partly caused by the trolls, or fear of appearing as a troll, or fear of hurting someone's feelings). My point was that all 9 or 10 basically makes all votes almost the same (and unable to distinguish good from not so good), which is what I meant by levelling the playing field.
While only a victim of trolls once as far as I can tell (a 2 score), I was essentially accused of being a troll after reasonably suggesting that voting 7 or 8 was not bad. But, now, I have tended to fall into the same pattern as everyone else. I just want to see a return to sanity.
The only area where we appear to disagree is that I think that the voting system can be made more rugged to protect against abuse, while I get the feeling you think we need to get rid of it. If we do that, we end up giving in to the trolls, rather than doing what is best. Maybe I am just being too much of idealist?
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (10:00pm) PDT
Sorry, I missed my important summary comment which is basically that having such a high score for so many images makes single low voting so much more damaging.
A single vote of 7 can reduce an image score by 0.4 points. That's about 10 pages of images!!!
Sorry to harp on but I just don't think the current system is working and expecting everyone to just be fair is a bit naive.
Cheers,
Dave.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (9:52pm) PDT
@Dayne. I respectfully disagree. I don't know whether you have been targeted by the so-called trolls but if you had you would have seen how and why voting has changed in those last few weeks.
The current voting system is open to massive abuse. The aim is not to level any playing field but to make things fair and remove the effect of the trolls so they have no reason to join/participate in the site.
Look at the number of current photos rating over 9 - literally 1000's. Are they really all that good? I'm including mine in that question too - are they really more than 90% perfect?? Of course not!!!!
As a number of other people have quite rightly said before, the current voting system is basically 8, 9 or 10. And even votes of 8 are becoming rare.
Cheers,
Dave.
(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:March 14th, 2012 (9:15pm) PDT
I agree with just about everything Carl says below. Well said! This sums it up so well to me (although I don't know Buck, so cannot comment on that).
Following the theme of this section, how about "What if ... we all started voting sensibly again"? Wouldn't that be great?!? It used to work so well a couple of months ago, and everyone was happy. Now look at it!
It seems to me some people have decided they don't like the voting system for whatever reason, and so determined to destroy it and to level out the playing field so that we all get the same score. I miss the old times.
(@carlparow) Carl Parow said:March 14th, 2012 (8:44pm) PDT
1. VOTING should stay because it adds interest and excitement and is the best way to get a collective, averaged and comparative agreement on the value of your image over time. It should always be anonymous because that helps to make the process more honest. The only question is how it can be made more honest. I'm sure Stephen and Co. are wise enough to get it as good as it can be.
2. COMMENTS should always be optional. Forcing a comment on low votes means most will avoid voting low and the voting will simply drift upwards to the 9s and 10s, or the image will be ignored. You can easily see evidence of this. Forcing a comment on all votes means less honest commenting and far less votes and comments. The idea of forcing a comment from someone is just so wrong. A forced comment is rarely an honest one. I actually always comment when I vote, and mostly favourably and lengthy.
3. CRITIQUES. Giving a critique without being asked can be rude and insulting to some and often get you into trouble. They should only be given if asked to do so. Therefore, the solution is to provide a pop-up box at upload time, and at edit later, to choose if you want a critique or not, which will say directly under your image in bold font something like, "The photographer has requested critique on this photo." Then you asked for it and there should be no problems for all involved.
4. BUCK SHREK seems to be a very open an honest man with a wealth of experience which he is willing to share, especially if asked. He can contribute a lot to this site and should be valued. We could all learn something from him. I regard Buck as a "Tribal Elder" who should be given due respect. And, no, we are not friends. I never heard of him till I got here and don't think we have ever voted or commented on each other's photos. I just recognise the man as a good member. Of course, there are many more. It's just that he stood out recently.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (7:35pm) PDT
How about this for a suggestion;
1 point for a like, 2 points for a 'fave' and no points for just a view only. The image score equals number of points divided by number of views. Images can only get onto the 'leaderboard' after a certain number of views (maybe 10).
I can't see any way this system can be trolled and it removes all of the issues with having to comment when giving a low score.
Of course, the number of views representunique views by unique members.
A person creating multiple user accounts will still be able to influence the score but it would be a massive hassle.
Maybe, also, likes and Faves can be (initially) anonymous so there's no tit for tat back-slapping behaviour.
What do you think?
Cheers,
Dave.
(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:March 14th, 2012 (5:45pm) PDT
@Jeff & Sas.IP addresses can all be monitored for # of accounts, and can be restricted or banned completely.I am on a large hunting & fishing forum and when someone gets out of hand, they just put a block on not only his user name, but also his IP address.That person no longer can access the site, from that computer.
Yes, we need to know that it is not a husband and wife or a parent and child type situation before doing anything like this....
@ Corrie & Charlie - I have quit voting myself.Not for the reasons that Charlie stated, but because I was tempted to hit the trolls pages and down grade their pics.So I quit altogether.I do still look at photos, and comment on the ones that intrigue me,I actually gave someone some criticism that may or may not have been appreciated, since the picture was deleted & re uploaded a few days later.I have also quit uploading new photos.I want to grow as a photographer, not deal with trolls.
The biggest issue I have with flickr and photobucket is the sheer mass of photos.I know of people that have been on flickr for over 2 years, and have only 2 views on SOME of their pictures.The rest have 0 views.For those of us that are trying to learn, and grow in our hobby, that will not work so well.
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 14th, 2012 (5:03pm) PDT
Corrie, we already have what you want, in a way. I have already stopped voting a number and only vote "Fav" for things I like and nothing for the others. I, like you, got to the place where I did not know how to vote that was honest. It is tempting to continue to vote friends high just because they are friends but if we are ever to "get real", I feel we have to stop doing that. Opting to not have ones own photos voted upon makes that easier.
Charlie
(@CorrieWhite)  said:March 14th, 2012 (3:32pm) PDT
I agree with a Like and Fave system.Like for "good" and Fave for "exceptional".Right now, I'm not sure how to vote here anymore.I see so many 9's and 10's on what I consider to be mediocre pictures.I just voted an "8" on a cute picture, but when I saw it got a lot of 9's and 10's, I got out of there because I didn't want to be a "poop".I like critique on my own because it keeps me on my toes, but I don't consider myself a proper judge of great photography.I reserve 10's for exceptional attention to light, composition, sharpness, etc., etc.
I also don't want this site to turn into a "pat my back, I'll pat yours".I see a lot of this.I like to return visits, but I don't want to tell you that your picture deserves a 10 when it's over processed and just crap.I guess this should be on the Rant page.
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 14th, 2012 (3:13pm) PDT
@Jeff I know there is at least one husband and wife team here so admins have to be careful of multiple same domain blocks, having said that more than two from the same domain woudl be a bit suspicious
(@Photobuck) Buck Shreck said:March 14th, 2012 (2:49pm) PDT
@ Stention House ..... for once I agree with you on most of what you said and the part that I don't agree with is not that impotent anyway to make anything from it. But still I think that if this voting rank doesn't work out like it should then we need to go to a like system like Paul Komarek has suggested, ..... which is the way I would like.
"BUCK"
(@mezzoduomo) Jeff Morley said:March 14th, 2012 (2:43pm) PDT
Admins:Regarding Dayne's comment about phony names, can multiple accounts/identities all originating from the same IP address be prohibited?I'm not a tech expert.
(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:March 14th, 2012 (2:37pm) PDT
@John, if it is any consolation, the one user I knew who was using phony names no longer appears to be on the site. Although, some of his pseudonyms still exist (I assume he had so many phony names that he forgot them all!). Not sure whether this is the same that you know, but a sign that reporting the abusers (whether public or in private) does have a desired affect.
(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:March 14th, 2012 (2:13pm) PDT
@ Dave, I told Admin, I had names, I would provide if asked.
As for challenging them about it, I would just be cutting my own throat, since it is a "pro" with a huge following brought over from the other site.And another Hobbyist did challenge him and all that happened was denials..However, I know what I have seen, with my own eyes, not hearsay, and it is damning to say the least.
I have had several private messages asking if it was a certain name, and when I confirmed it was, was told this was happening over on the 500px site and this person and his numerous phony names, was suspected there as well.
As for the Fav'd thing, that is fine.Again, I do not care about numbers, I want the CONSTRUCTIVE critiques from other photographers so I can improve.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (2:04pm) PDT
@John, if you know someone who is definitely abusing the system have you (a) challenged them about it or (b) reported them to the site admin?
I don't know what I think about rating/scoring any more but I would hate for this site to become like Flickr with it's phoney awards and rating system.
Maybe just having a 'fave' button only is the answer. Nothing for the trolls to use/abuse and the people who want league tables will still be happy. A user could get aggrieved at being given a 6 but not at being 'not faved'. If that makes any sense!!
Cheers,
Dave.
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 14th, 2012 (1:58pm) PDT
I'm by no means convinced the trolls, if such there are here, are among the top rated posters.Most of the people with high scores deserve them, to my amateur eye.Most of those people seem to vote fairly.I haven't seen many pictures on here with a high score that I thought really should have much lower, so it would appear that the voting system does mostly work OK.
However, there are quite a lot of shots uploaded a few weeks ago, when voting seemed to be more accurate (ie, decent shots getting a 7, not automatically a 9 or 10), that now seem undervalued and somewhat neglected.
Much as we'd all like to get high scores, the fact is that some people will give a 6 or 7 and it will be a truthful reflection of what they think the picture is worth.Personally, I think I've probably taken three or four pictures ever that deserved 9.Most would get 4 or 5 if we were all being brutally honest.At the same time, many here upload consistently outstanding work that you can't really give anything but a 10 to.The vast majority of us don't manage that standard and should be more honest with ourselves and not take offence at getting a 6 or 7, which is still a decent enough score.
(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:March 14th, 2012 (1:43pm) PDT
To improve my photography, I want to know what other photographers have to say about my work.I originally liked the scoring system.Then realized that some people are cowards and will vote you down so they can be on top, especially when they can do it anonymously.Sort of Guerilla tactics.
If you are going to have a voting system, it can not be anonymous.I should be able to see who gave me a 10 or a 5.Even without comments.Or make the comments mandatory, which means NON DELETABLE, and the score is attached to the comment, so again, I know who gave me what and why.
Otherwise take the voting system away, and become another photobucket or flickr and move on...I really liked this site because it was not those sites, but
that seems to maybe be as good as it gets.
I think it is really sad that a couple of people and their minions are causing all this....because they feel they NEED to be on top no matter what the cost.It is also funny that the one person I have found to be involved with every troll I have discovered has never posted a thought on the voting process..... does seem very interesting.I will just keep blocking them as they pop up, and eventually will quit posting my work for votes, because like I said over and over, the number means nothing to me unless the constructive criticism comes with it.I am not vain enough to think my work deserves to be in the "top rated" so no worries there.
(@Paul) Paul Komarek said (72dpi Admin):March 14th, 2012 (11:34am) PDT
@sas astro - I agree with you completely about the bad photos, I was simply explaining what is going on, not whether it is right or wrong. And what is going on is, because of the new voting system where comments are mandatory below 6, those bad photos are being skipped over completely because people would rather just skip them rather than to have to vote them negatively and explain themselves... ultimately creating risk of retribution if the photographer thinks we're being too harsh. Like Buck, I will critique a photo if asked, but otherwise I skip it and move on.
All of this has caused the 1-10 system to become a 6-10 system, and now some folks want a 1-5 system which in reality will end up creating a 4 to 5 system which is even worse. It's easy to see how the separation of great photos from good, and good photos from bad will simply be a blur. Removing the vote system, having a simple "like" system, or, a "Most Favourited" system, is the solution. Egos remain intact, and the great photos will ultimately be at the top of the "Most Favourited" section. Breaking it down further to "Most Favourited" by skill level (Happy Snapper, Amateur, Semi-Pro, etc.) would make it fair for all skill levels. It has its downsides, yes, but all-in-all, it solves 99% of the problems people are complaining about.
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 14th, 2012 (11:08am) PDT
First @ Paul, why shouldn't we skip looking at what we perceive as bad photos? Life is Short.
Second: I like the idea Stentionhouse mentioned of a rating based on score plus views and comments, seems to me that would average out votes deemed too high or too low
(@Photobuck) Buck Shreck said:March 14th, 2012 (11:06am) PDT
I could not of said it better Michael & Paul .... I agree with everything both of you said .... BRAVO!!!!!! I think we have a winning solution here ....
"BUCK"
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 14th, 2012 (10:18am) PDT
That's FAVORING. Gotta be careful of these spellcheckers.
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 14th, 2012 (10:16am) PDT
I could be very contented with Michael's and now Paul's thought of no vote, just flavoring.
(@Paul) Paul Komarek said (72dpi Admin):March 14th, 2012 (10:03am) PDT
Also, reducing the available vote choices from 10 to 5 will only do what is already being done with the current "6 to 10" system everyone's using. Now it will simply be a "4 to 5" system. Same thing with requiring a comment for any vote lower than 7. You're again simply compressing the votes, now instead of a "6 to 10" system, it would be a "7 to 10" system. Does anyone else see how bad that would be? There will be literally no way to distinguish the great photos from the good photos, and the good photos from the bad photos. Look at the voting history of anyone who has joined at the end of February or later and you'll see what I mean. No one votes less than a 6 on any photo, they just skip the bad ones. There have been some really bad photos in the "Not Yet Rated" section that have sat there for days because people would vote on the GOOD unrated photos and vote around the bad ones.
(@Paul) Paul Komarek said (72dpi Admin):March 14th, 2012 (9:56am) PDT
I agree with you Michael that the voting should be removed, or, replaced with a simple "like" system. Or, just leave it so photos can be favourited and then have a tab for "Most Favourited Photos". That solves everyone's issues with anonymity because you'll see who favourited it. Of course you would still leave the comment section open for critiques for those who wish to receive them. Seems like an easy way to eliminate the voting problem, yet still give a way for great photos to be showcased. Perhaps take it a step further and have it broken down by skill level. "Most Favourited Happy Snaps", "Most Favourited Amateur Photos", "Most Favourited Pro Photos", etc.
(@EyeoftheStorm) Steven Maguire said:March 14th, 2012 (9:55am) PDT
I'm just looking for an honest critique on my images.The only problem is when I don't send them up for votes nobody even knows that they were even posted.I do not vote any more.If I see something I like I fave it, or leave a comment about what I like about it.I'm not here for competition, but to learn some new things and ideas.I know most of my subject matter is not quite mainstream, but I still would like someone to least tell me if the images I take could be better. Are there any taker's out there to give some honest critiques and advice.That's all I ask for.I'm wondering if that's just too much to ask for.
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 14th, 2012 (9:47am) PDT
Re Michael's posts, I would have no objection at all to there being no voting system, like Flickr.It's worked perfectly well for them - they are far and away the biggest and most successful photo sharing site anywhere.But then you have people trying to get most views and most comments.The competitive element seems to be a trait inherent in most of us.
For someone like me, who will never make top lists or have swathes of 10 rated snaps, the lack of a voting system is ideal.If there has to be one, as per my previous post on this thread, it should be based on more than just a 1-10 scale, and also include views and comments, plus carry a weighting for pro snappers, so their shots can get less bonus points than amateurs.
(@DarthCharlie) Carlos Rocha said:March 14th, 2012 (9:25am) PDT
Karl, i'm sorry if i didn't make myself clear. My 2nd suggestion was, and i quote myself "a vote under 7 must be explained, that's another way. " ence 6 is considered almost a dislike.
But them i read your suggestion, and she seems more accurate.
(@Michael) Michael D. Friedman said:March 14th, 2012 (9:24am) PDT
I see that no one in this thread agrees with me that voting should be eliminated, nor has anyone commented on my suggestions for alternatives to the 'top rated' pages (see below).OK - so obviously (and sadly in my opinion) competition seems to be the only motivation for people to post their best work.
So, if voting is necessary I would prefer the 5 point system that has been suggested.But to separate the photographers by category would be a disaster!Already there are those who call themselves 'happy snappers' whose work is obviously superior to some who consider themselves 'pro.'To me the term 'pro' means that one gets paid - an amateur doesn't - this has little to do with the quality of one's work.
Any voting system is subject to, and WILL BE ABUSED.As it stands now, the voting is hardly anonymous , particularly if you vote and comment at the same time.Perhaps individual votes should not be immediately posted, but rather could be compiled and then posted at the end of each day.
(@Paul) Paul Komarek said (72dpi Admin):March 14th, 2012 (8:53am) PDT
FAIR WARNING: I talk too much. Sorry for the long post! :-)
I still think the idea of a simple "like" system would be fine. Unfortunately, as I had suspected, the voting system has turned from a 1-10 system to a 6-10 system which compresses all of the votes into 5 possible choices instead of 10. This makes it very difficult to distinguish the great photos from the good photos.
If you look at anyone's voting history who has joined since these changes have taken place, ALL of their votes are compressed in the 6-10 range. If they see a photo that looks really bad, they simply skip it and move on. That's what I do now and that's what many people are doing. It's so obvious that I actually saw a really bad photo sitting in the "Not Yet Rated" section and that photo sat there for days until it was finally knocked down the line. The reason, of course, is that people would rather "not get involved" with that photo so they vote on the other new photos. Then some more new photos get posted and the bad one is still there. People are voting around the bad photos.
The system now is a bit invasive I think in regards to all of your comments, votes, "engagement level", etc. all being public. When you go to vote in an election, you don't publicly state who you vote for, you don't leave public comments about what you liked or disliked about the candidate that determined your vote. So, because that's the way it is here now, people are becoming more private and "politically correct" if you will. If it's a great photo, they have no problem screaming it from the rooftop (or at least the comment section) and giving a good vote to go with it. But if it's a bad photo, they'd rather be "politically correct", leave it alone, and move on.
So my 2 cents will be: Implement a simple "like" system and let everyone have fun, enjoy the site, etc. I think this will encourage more comments, creativity, and community, and that's what it should be. Hard core critiques should be saved for PPA competitions and venues like that where reprisals can't take place after constructive criticism is given. Let's face it, some people like it, some can't handle it. Buck Shreck summed it up nicely the other day when he talked about how he won't comment on a photo unless asked to simply because many people just can't handle the constructive criticism. There are many "pros" on here that are not pros, just as there are many "amateurs" on here that are really pros but just don't realize it.
Now on the site overall, you're doing a great job, Stephen. The site is absolutely amazing. You're listening to what the community is saying and trying to adapt accordingly and most of us understand, that's no easy task. I'm sure everything will iron itself out soon and we all expect great things for 72dpi. Keep up the great work dude! (P.S. - I need your email! I sent you an email but it bounced.)
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (8:26am) PDT
Sorry Charlie - mandatory commenting is not what you suggested - my eyes are obviously shot to hell! What you were suggesting is that each vote, no matter what, should be "source identified" - which is different.
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (8:07am) PDT
Regarding the “knock the top and bottom votes off” suggestion - I’m playing Devil’s Advocate here so bear with me:
If it was proposed that this should be done every time a person votes, imagine this:
You have a cracking image with a few 10’s, a few 9’s and the odd 8. Along comes Troll #1 and wacks in a 2. His 2 will vanish – but so will one of your 10’s and your rating will go down. Now Troll #2 gets in on the act with another 2 – that goes, along with another one of your 10’s and your rating goes down again – and so it goes on. Any half-decent troll worth his salt will have already figured this out.
OK – the obvious solution is not to do the “knocking off” every time a person votes. So when DO we do it? Every hour? Every 6 hours? Every whatever? It doesn’t really matter, because if it’s done at any time after the two 2’s have been awarded, you’ll lose one of the 2’s and one of the 10’s – but the other 2 will still be there, dragging the image rating down.
It seems that nothing is entirely troll proof – and it’s looking more and more that the only effective way to combat them is to make voting and commenting inseparable below a certain level of vote. Maybe we'll even have to go as far as Charlie suggests and make a comment mandatory with any level of voting - after all, how high can you lift the cut-off point before it becomes largely meaningless?
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 14th, 2012 (7:30am) PDT
I also feel that each and every person who votes should be identified with *what* they voted. I think it would have a tendency to cause each of us to vote more sincerely. Rather soon it would be apparent who is voting all high or all low. I think it may well bring scoring closer to the truth.
Charlie
(@DarthCharlie) Carlos Rocha said:March 14th, 2012 (7:29am) PDT
A 5 points scoring with mandatory explanatory comments, under Karl's suggestion, is a great idea too.
I vote for that ! 10 ! Or 5, in that case !
(@DarthCharlie) Carlos Rocha said:March 14th, 2012 (7:25am) PDT
@Karl
I agree with you, but, just but, imagine this : a "pro" or "semi-pro" who is not happy with his results, can always open another account, under a differente name. I'm mot a conspiracy theorist, but believe me, i've seen a lot of strange things happen in photography sites.
The bottom line is, there's always ways to influence scoring, no matter what administration say or do. Is up to them to figure it out a way to make voting as fair as possible. Obligation of a comment in case of voting, that may be a way; a vote under 7 must be explained, that's another way.
I'm here to improve, to learn, and all the critics are welcome, but i want a sincere opinion, not someone who writes "great photo" and vote 4.
(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:March 14th, 2012 (7:19am) PDT
Karl has a suggestion that would have immediate simplification to scoring.
***
Recommendation: a 5-point scale with benchmark guidance (i.e. Excellent, Good, Average, Below Average, Poor) and mandatory explanatory commenting for a "Below Average" or "Poor" vote.
***
Mark me as for that simple clean change.
Charlie
(@jisn1964)  said:March 14th, 2012 (7:13am) PDT
I think that voting must remain as we have the option to choose if we want or not to be voted. So, let people to be voted if they want. About the "level-based" voting system... I agree with previous comments: not necessary. I believe that most people doesn't pay too much attention to that "label". And in fact, I've seen many "amateurs" that could compete with "professionals".
(@pandora) pandora said:March 14th, 2012 (7:09am) PDT
after thinking and reading and talking about the matter for a long time my opinion is that there has to be scoring system. reason one: we want to improve ourselves within a fair competition. to look at and talk about the most impressing images helps us to find our individual ways. reason two: all of us beeing here decided to open an account because we looked at gorgeous pictures. scored pictures. newbies will do the same.
but: keep the voting system simple and transparent. i agree with karl in "a 5-point scale with benchmark guidance (i.e. Excellent, Good, Average, Below Average, Poor)"and with piet and so many others in a COMMENT OBLIGATION.
to select between the individual skill sounds fair but i expect a misuse to switch into a scoring list where it is much more simple to get on top. and by the way: who can prove the placement either way?
in addition to these most important decisions i would like to have this great "I want critique"-button with karl's gorgeous explanation behind :o)
I want critique" button
(@mezzoduomo) Jeff Morley said:March 14th, 2012 (7:08am) PDT
I like Mauro's suggestions.
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (7:03am) PDT
@Carlos - that occurred to me also! However, picture this: an egotistical, self-obsessed Pro or Semi Pro suddenly becomes a "Happy Snapper" overnight and rockets to "top dog" status in that category - how long do you think it would take before he found himself playing a starring role in a rant in one or other of the forums? About 3 minutes, at a guess! It was a valid point - but I'm not sure that we need to worry too much. I could be wrong, mind you - stranger things have happened ...
(@mauropasquero) mauro pasquero said:March 14th, 2012 (6:59am) PDT
I think that the voting system is really a good feature to be maintained.
However I believe that it should be modified.
- make it simplier: TEN votes is too much. Nobody uses them. We limit our vote to the higher notes, unless wewant downgrade somebody. IMO three is good enough.
- make it transparent. The anonymous vote doesn't allow you to understand the reason why you get a good or bad vote. Yuo can't really understand if a pro or happysnapper has appreciated or not your work and you remain confused about the rason os the vote. IMO the vote should be always commented or signed.
I would like really contribute to improve this great site, that I like very much, in oredr to create a free open minded place where we excahange our honest opinionsand we express WITH VOTES our levels of appreciation in a frank and transparent way.
(@wolfademeit) Wolf Ademeit said:March 14th, 2012 (6:28am) PDT
I think it 's not nessesary to remove the voting system. It's more importend to delete this doupble, tripple or multi accounts, only used for anonymous, strategical voting. During the last 3 houres I am attacked by this voting troll(s) again. All pictures are downrated by a 7. Last week they vote with a 2 or 3 and deleting the required commend.
I think the admins are able to detect this member(s) very easy (if they like to do). That was my reason for uploading pictures with the voting option.
(@mezzoduomo) Jeff Morley said:March 14th, 2012 (6:28am) PDT
So many interesting ideas!'Perfecting' the voting could get messy and very complicated very quickly.I trust the admins to keep things SIMPLE.There will never be anything that everyone likes, and if 72 dpi is to continue to grow, it must retain mass appeal.
(@DarthCharlie) Carlos Rocha said:March 14th, 2012 (6:10am) PDT
Maybe, just maybe, a good idea ! Picture this : a "professional" or semi-professinal photographer is not getting as much attention to his pictures as he tought he/she deserve. So, change his/hers profile to Hobbyst or Happy Snapper and by some kind of magic, all his/hers pictures are now in the most rated, most favourite, most anything !
That's not an issue for me, i don't comment pics based on the profile, but there are (you know there are, c'mon...) people who gets his/hers ego inflated if they have 20 or more comments, even if those comments are nothing more than "great", "nice", etc etc etc.
Top rated should NEVER go away ! They help us to improve, no mather what people say ! So as the votes !
That's not a easy or pacific decision, but, bottom line, something has to be done to keep voting as fair as possible. Maybe if, under 7, commenters have to explain why such a vote, things will be more transparent.
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (3:18am) PDT
Great idea about the "I want critique" button, Dave. Perhaps a health warning: "Only press this button if you're prepared to accept fair criticism without taking offence"?
Perhaps it might also be an idea to consider a "critique privilege" for individual members - to ensure that critique can only offered by people who know (or at least appear to know) what they're talking about. Before you all jump down my throat with righteous indignation oozing from every pore, I don't mean this disrespectfully. What I'm getting at is that critique emanating from someone who can, and does, produce the goods is always likely to be more readily accepted than critique from someone who plainly doesn't. By way of avoiding a lot of argument and/or discontent I suggest that 72dpi be the sole arbiters of this - based on any criteria they think fit - since they can then retain the right to withdraw said privilege if deemed necessary.
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 14th, 2012 (2:20am) PDT
Sas, great idea for a poll!!
Also, 2 people have already suggested a 'I want critique' tick box. Maybe put that to a poll also!
Karl, I can't fault a single word in your posts.
Cheers,
Dave.
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (1:58am) PDT
An afterthought (yeah, I know, but afterthoughts happen in the best regulated families ..): Top rated shot/photographer by status - good idea - apart from the fact that it gives everyone a chance to be a top dog of some sort (always a good motivator), it makes things a bit more meaningful for comparative purposes.
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (1:39am) PDT
Issue 2: What sort of voting system do we want?
Firstly, an immutable fact of life: ALL voting systems create winners and losers: with the winners thinking that the system is perfectly fair, and the losers complaining bitterly that it's totally unfair. Change the voting system and all you do is change the winners/losers demographic, resulting in a new set of people complaining of unfairness.
In terms of the voting system itself, it is generally recognised that (subject to obvious limitations) "coarser" benchmark voting systems provide more objective results than "finer" benchmark systems. For example, using a 5-point scale, most of us can easily differentiate between an "average" (i.e. 3) image, a "good" (i.e. 4) image and an "excellent" (i.e. 5) image. It becomes slightly harder with a 10-point scale because you then have to make a distinction between “average” (6), “quite good” (7), “good” (8) etc. – which is not as easy. With a 100-point scale, meaningful differentiation becomes virtually impossible. At the other end of the coarse/fine scale, a simple Like/Dislike is largely meaningless and, more to the point, is subject to abuse.
Recommendation: a 5-point scale with benchmark guidance (i.e. Excellent, Good, Average, Below Average, Poor) and mandatory explanatory commenting for a "Below Average" or "Poor" vote.
(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:March 14th, 2012 (1:08am) PDT
There are, to my mind, two distinct (but related) issues here - which, for clarity, I'll deal with in separate comment boxes.
Issue 1: Do we want or need a voting system?
For a site to grow, it needs to attract new members. In order to attract new members, it must provide some means by which prospective new members can take an overall view of the site and decide whether or not it's for them - and the most obvious (and, I would contend, ONLY) way of doing this is via the "show" pages - "top shot", "top photographer" etc. etc. etc. If you want "show" pages, then you have to have some "OBJECTIVE" (the quotes are deliberate) means of deciding which shots appear on them - and that means a voting system. It's a simple call!
(@ChrisO) Chris Oliphant said:March 14th, 2012 (1:06am) PDT
Just my two penneth worth - if you don't want critique , ( some people don't accept criticism easily, others may really feel that they like their images or they wouldnt be uploading them, and really aren't interested in critique) then possibly have a button available on upload specifying " I do not want critique on this image" , comments could still be made, but clearly the viewer would understand that a more in depth critique is not what the poster wants.It would also ensure that those members wanting honest , polite critique so that they can improve, will get that critique.
The emphasis here is on the word POLITE. Critique is often received better if the person giving it, also mentions what is good about the image before politely saying what, in their opinion, they would change, a bit like an opt out of voting button, perhaps look into an opt out of critique button.
As for the voting system, I don't know how, without it, a lot of work would be seen, flawed as it is, it does bring some portfolios to the attention of the viewer through ' top rated' that would otherwise be missed.
On a side note, I also use the " people online tab" , it has taken me to some superb portfolios , I know I wouldn't have found otherwise.
(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:March 14th, 2012 (12:53am) PDT
OK, another idea re scoring.What about if vote average, views and comments were accumulated into a single figure, and that was the overall score for a picture.Those who like to appear on top lists would be encouraged to promote their work to get more views and comments.More views means more people visiting the site.A cumulative total would mean a higher level of participation is necessary to make those top lists.It would also mean that someone with only three or four pictures wouldn't be listed as the top snapper on the whole site (as was the case a couple of days ago).
Perhaps the skill level could be added in too.A 10 score for a happy snapper would gain a certain bonus points figure.A 10 score for an advanced amateur would earn less.And a 10 for a pro would earn the lowest bonus score.It might seem a bit convoluted but I think this would work, once set up.
The key here is participation and quality.The more you upload, the more votes and views and comments you get, thus the higher your overall score.So for those who care about the numbers, there's a way to 'compete' and compare.And those who don't care can carry on as before.Maybe there could also be a 'photo of the week' vote in each category, with the top X number of pics going on to their own list, to give everyone a chance of being showcased, in addition to Spotlight.
(@pietflour) piet flour said:March 14th, 2012 (12:37am) PDT
glad you bring up the idea of the selectable skill level i already proposed earlier.Makes it possible to keep everyone of the community together, and allows people to search and compare their work within smaller sub-groups with the same attitude towards photography.
As for removing the voting system ???Not sure at all it will ad a more-valure to the site, making it much more difficult to search the better photos ... Yes I know ... the 10 are often not the best, just the newest ... but the last changes made by the management team already and progressively should bring a more accurate selection.
To avoid more discussion, I can only repeat my opinion there could be an implementation of a news section for the people stepping out of the voting system to get visibility
AND
I would - and with me, a lot of others for all kinds of reasons - very warm welcome a section for people who are asking clearly in search for comments helping them to improve.The possibility to include visual support certainly could help a lot to make things clear in a space where people start not only with different photographic background, but also with different basic knowledge of English.
Hope I stayed within the theme theme-limitation of this "what if ..."
piet
(@sasastro) sas astro said:March 14th, 2012 (12:30am) PDT
There's been various ideas put forward re scoring/voting. Why not find all those suggestions that are possible and have a poll?
(@MikeThompson) Mike Thompson said:March 14th, 2012 (12:10am) PDT
Now that I have said what I said; I still believe that we should be able to see who voted what. I know that it may cause some issues; but anything is better than the secret low voting that goes on now.
Mike
(@MikeThompson) Mike Thompson said:March 14th, 2012 (12:07am) PDT
I'm really not sure what the solution is. I suppose that I have this fantasy of being on a site where the members are interested in photography and people all vote sincerely. Just a fantasy I suppose. There really doesn't seem to be any way to escape trolls. Pity.
Mike
(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:March 13th, 2012 (9:26pm) PDT
I agree with Dave. How will we find the good photos without top-rated?
(@davercox) Dave Cox said:March 13th, 2012 (8:45pm) PDT
If you were to remove voting and thereby remove Top Rated then how would great photos ever get seen by more than a member's Snaplist? Effectively, people would look at the Most Faves page and it automatically becomes a closed club (because naturally the members with huge Snaplists would get the most views and ultimately the most Faves).
What I'm saying is supposing a brand new member comes onto the site. Let's suppose he/she submits a mind blowingly good image. That image would sit on the first page of new photos for maybe 2 hours and then disappear wIthout a trace.
My opinion is keep voting but reduce the number of categories. As Piet Flour (please excuse the spelling) says in the other thread, the voting system is now basically 3 categories. 8 is crap, 9 is good and 10 is very good. People are scared to vote 8 and less due to possible recriminations/retaliation from aggrieved members!
I think maybe 3 or 4 scoring categories would be good and then discard the highest and lowest individual scores. This would not only dissuade the tactical low vote but also the 'friends' artificial high vote.
I also support the idea of photos being anonymous when first submitted. This prevents a member being specifically targeted with low votes. Once the image has 20 or 30 votes the low votes have little effect anyway.
Cheers,
Dave.
(@Michael) Michael D. Friedman said:March 13th, 2012 (8:02pm) PDT
I have mixed feelings, but on balance I'd be in favor of eliminating voting.I think it would promote much more constructive criticism without the pressure of affecting someone's rating and we could all learn a great deal from each other.There might be several options to replace the 'top rated' pages - perhaps a 'featured' page where all members' recent work is displayed on a rotating basis.Another idea would be to have a juried page of the best images in the various categories - this might satisfy our need for competition and motivate us to keep trying to improve our work.




About    •    FAQs    •    Search    •    Privacy Policy    •    Contact Us


72dpi, Inc. © Copyright 2014 • All Rights Reserved