|
edge
Nov 4, 2003, 5:53 PM
Post #1 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
Doesn't it defeat the purpose of having a "Top Photos" page, when it's filled up by mediocre (or worse) pictures that have a single vote of 10? Shouldn't it be a prequalification for that page that a picture have a minimum of at least 3 votes before it can appear?
Just a thought...
|
|
|
|
|
mattdog
Nov 4, 2003, 6:16 PM
Post #2 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2003
Posts: 1523
|
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
mtclmb
Nov 4, 2003, 6:17 PM
Post #3 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 11, 2003
Posts: 54
|
I second that, I think that the top voted pictures in descending order should be posted there. (just my 2 cents also)
t
|
|
|
|
|
cryder
Nov 4, 2003, 6:22 PM
Post #4 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
I sense a bit of a conspiracy with todays photo page. It went from "a few photos that stink", to "hey! look at me!!! A page full!!!" Maybe it would be better to have a dynamic voting talley, as apposed to an overnight.
|
|
|
|
|
leaverbiner
Nov 4, 2003, 6:24 PM
Post #5 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Posts: 482
|
Edge I agree completely. . . . and this whole having to recalculate votes overnight thing has really screwed it all up . . . now if you know when to post your photo, you gte one vote done at the right time and you can have your photos rated at a 10 for the entire day and appear on the front page when it reality your photo isn;t very good . . . I miss the ability to vote and have it calculated right away . . . I also think that the limitations on voting suck . . . in that, if a photo has a rating of say 9, if you vote it a 4 or below, your vote is completely discounted!!
|
|
|
|
|
tucsonalex
Nov 4, 2003, 6:24 PM
Post #6 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 11, 2002
Posts: 1689
|
If you think the top photos stink then rate them what you think they deserve, I just did. A three vote minimum is a good idea though.
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Nov 4, 2003, 6:34 PM
Post #7 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
In reply to: I sense a bit of a conspiracy with todays photo page. It went from "a few photos that stink", to "hey! look at me!!! A page full!!!" Maybe it would be better to have a dynamic voting talley, as apposed to an overnight.
A conspiracy? No way. There is absolutely no corrolation between those pictures, recent events, and geographic regions what-so-ever.
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
cryder
Nov 4, 2003, 6:45 PM
Post #8 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
A conspiracy? No way. There is absolutely no corrolation between those pictures, recent events, and geographic regions what-so-ever.
Travis
Oops - my bad, forgot to mention that it was planted there by a vast right wing conspiracy to drag down democracy. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
poppasmearf
Nov 4, 2003, 6:50 PM
Post #9 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 77
|
Three vote minimum!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Nov 4, 2003, 7:03 PM
Post #10 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
Agree with the 3 vote minimum. Users who give thier own, just-posted photo a 10 are pathetic attention-whores. You shouldn't be allowed to vote on your own photo. Now we have all these single-vote 10's up there, but if anyone gives it a 4 or 5 (which they more likely deserve) that vote is discarded because of the silly 3 point rule (or whatever it is).
|
|
|
|
|
polarwid
Nov 4, 2003, 7:07 PM
Post #11 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 22, 2001
Posts: 3608
|
THe top photos page is where the votes are seen and tabulated, but they do not LINK to the FRONT PAGE. To be displayed on the front page, there is a criteria that must be met... it is as follows...
The new version (just instituted) uses the following criteria by default:
- Submitted less than 30 days ago
- Minimum rank of 8
- Minimum of 5 votes
THis is the criteria that all photos displayed on the FRONT PAGE must meet...
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Nov 4, 2003, 7:15 PM
Post #12 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
In reply to: THe top photos page is where the votes are seen and tabulated, but they do not LINK to the FRONT PAGE. To be displayed on the front page, there is a criteria that must be met... it is as follows... THis is the criteria that all photos displayed on the FRONT PAGE must meet...
Yes, my original post only mentioned the Top Photo page, not the Front Page. I just thought that if it was to be titled Top Photos, it could be a little more indicative of the best shots, not just one person's vote.
|
|
|
|
|
tucsonalex
Nov 4, 2003, 7:20 PM
Post #13 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 11, 2002
Posts: 1689
|
In reply to: Agree with the 3 vote minimum. Users who give thier own, just-posted photo a 10 are pathetic attention-whores. You shouldn't be allowed to vote on your own photo. Now we have all these single-vote 10's up there, but if anyone gives it a 4 or 5 (which they more likely deserve) that vote is discarded because of the silly 3 point rule (or whatever it is).
3 point rule? Could someone explain? I guess all of the votes I just submitted don't count. How do we get these terrible shots off of the top photos. When I click on top photos I expect to see something good, not blurry, underexposed, bad ground-up back and butt shots.
|
|
|
|
|
polarwid
Nov 4, 2003, 7:22 PM
Post #14 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 22, 2001
Posts: 3608
|
The main reason the recalc every night was instituted is that people are LESS likely to BOMB a photo if they can not have INSTANT GRATIFICATION of seeing the picture drop of the top photos page. This also allows people to vote what they think with out being affected by others votes. Actually, you should go look at the NEW photos, and vote on those, There are many pictures buried in there with NO votes that are much better than the "TOP" photos. I will start a discussion among the ADMINS and MODS about changing the name of TOP photos to something else... :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 4, 2003, 7:26 PM
Post #15 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: The main reason the recalc every night was instituted is that people are LESS likely to BOMB a photo if they can not have INSTANT GRATIFICATION of seeing the picture drop of the top photos page. This also allows people to vote what they think with out being affected by others votes. Actually, you should go look at the NEW photos, and vote on those, There are many pictures buried in there with NO votes that are much better than the "TOP" photos. I will start a discussion among the ADMINS and MODS about changing the name of TOP photos to something else... :wink:
Note to polarwid: Also see my thread in M and E re: weighted averages.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
tucsonalex
Nov 4, 2003, 7:34 PM
Post #17 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 11, 2002
Posts: 1689
|
In reply to: The main reason the recalc every night was instituted is that people are LESS likely to BOMB a photo if they can not have INSTANT GRATIFICATION of seeing the picture drop of the top photos page. This also allows people to vote what they think with out being affected by others votes. Actually, you should go look at the NEW photos, and vote on those, There are many pictures buried in there with NO votes that are much better than the "TOP" photos. I will start a discussion among the ADMINS and MODS about changing the name of TOP photos to something else... :wink:
I don't think I bombed any photos, but there is lots of stuff in the top photos that was VERY average so I gave them a 5. If the first vote on a photo is a 10, and then it gets a ton of 5's does that mean the rating is still a 10?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 4, 2003, 7:46 PM
Post #18 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Actually, the link is not titled, nor is there any reference to "TOP PHOTOS" anywhere,just simply In reply to: Showing photos added in the past month by Rank (1 to 25 of 1321) . So it is accurate to a point. Jay, I read your weighted average post, and it gave me a headache... :wink:
That's my daily life, Man.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Nov 4, 2003, 8:03 PM
Post #19 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: Edge I agree completely. . . . and this whole having to recalculate votes overnight thing has really screwed it all up . . . now if you know when to post your photo, you gte one vote done at the right time and you can have your photos rated at a 10 for the entire day and appear on the front page when it reality your photo isn;t very good . . . I miss the ability to vote and have it calculated right away . . . I also think that the limitations on voting suck . . . in that, if a photo has a rating of say 9, if you vote it a 4 or below, your vote is completely discounted!!
So *shrug* no biggie after a day or two.
|
|
|
|
|
cryder
Nov 4, 2003, 8:09 PM
Post #20 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
I think people are feeling that it does make a difference, as it happens everyday, with today being a good example. The bigger problem, having a buddy "10 up" a photo, is the nature of the beast and will effect photo scoring no matter when the votes tabulate. I think a quiker turn-over, maybe every 2 weeks, would help freshen the pile.
- Nicholas
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Nov 4, 2003, 8:09 PM
Post #21 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: In reply to: Jay, I read your weighted average post, and it gave me a headache... :wink: That's my daily life, Man. -Jay |
|
|
|
|
alwaysforward
Nov 4, 2003, 9:27 PM
Post #22 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 979
|
If you look RIGHT NOW it is the worst collection of pictures to have ever been on the first page of photos.
|
|
|
|
|
crackup
Nov 4, 2003, 9:38 PM
Post #23 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2003
Posts: 26
|
Clean up the whole smelly pile.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 4, 2003, 9:44 PM
Post #24 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Clearly we need more rules and more matrix coding. That is the only solution, rules and code.
Oh, and moving posts and locking threads.
What else is there?
Perhaps a "Hey Mom, HE CHEATED!" button?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
hangdoggypound
Nov 4, 2003, 9:55 PM
Post #25 of 49
(5084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2002
Posts: 169
|
In reply to: If you look RIGHT NOW it is the worst collection of pictures to have ever been on the first page of photos.
I'd like to submit that it's a form of photo-trolling, so to speak; that is, submitting a rather weak or uninteresting photo and getting your buds to vote a 10 before the daily tabulation just so that it ends up on the top of the "by rank" list for - dear god shall I utter the words? - a whole day.
With that, it ain't no big deal. climbnow1, or climbsomething, or jut, or orangeoverhang will most likely post something that makes us all squeal with joy and we'll be clicking away with our votes of 10s and 9s by tomorrow morning.
And we'll live happily ever-after. :D
|
|
|
|
|
lexmark
Nov 4, 2003, 9:57 PM
Post #26 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 90
|
I give tens to photos that I like.
You can all give appropriate ratings also.
Get over it.
|
|
|
|
|
crazygirl
Nov 4, 2003, 10:03 PM
Post #27 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2003
Posts: 595
|
EVERY single picture has comments "wow great shot, great rock, nice rack", whats next - nice a$$? Here is an idea: if the picture is nothing special, just don't rate and don't comment on it.
Stop giving high ratings to every single picture on the board, and maybe the bad ones will make their way down.
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Nov 4, 2003, 10:12 PM
Post #28 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
quote]EVERY single picture has comments "wow great shot, great rock, nice rack", whats next - nice a$$? Here is an idea: if the picture is nothing special, just don't rate and don't comment on it.
Stop giving high ratings to every single picture on the board, and maybe the bad ones will make their way down.
....better yet ....just vote for my photos...but only a 9 or 10....
MR 8)
|
|
|
|
|
celticelement
Nov 4, 2003, 11:07 PM
Post #29 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 205
|
I humbly offer my own brainstorming (not such a pretty thing eh) on the subject. I have not thought this all the way through. (I was constantly adding or modifying things as I wrote it.) But I think my rough draft of an idea could solve some of the problems you are looking at. It may, though, be overly complicated and unwieldy.
Maybe you could solve your problem - to a degree - by making three separate photo sections.
The first section, or New Photos section, would be a section where the photos were arranged without regard to rating. It would be cool if you could make it so that a person coming into this section would see all the entries in this section arranged by date, but could then rearrange the entries by 1) Author to see new photos from particular people (Jorg, Photon, Alpinist), 2) Area to see new photos of a specific area (J-Tree, The New, Yosemite), 3) Category to see the new photos submitted to each category (Trad, Sport, Artistic), and possibly 4) Rating.
The second section, or 'Top Photo' section, would be a place where after a period of time, - say 30 days - and enough high votes, - say 15 votes and an average of 7.5 and above - and maybe some comments, - say 5 or more - the photo would go to be viewed as a 'top photo.'
Photos would stay in the first area until qualified to move to the second area or until they qualified for the third area.
The third area, or Archive section, would be a place where photos from the first area after a certain amount of time - 35 days - if they did not make the cut for the 'Top Photo' section would be put. It would preferably have the search capability now available in the photo section and/or an arrangement capability like what I described for the New Photo section. You could make it possible for a photo from the Archive section to qualify for the Top Photo section - though it would probably be good to make more rigorous qualifications for a move from Archive to Top Photo.
Or maybe you could just make an 'Arrange By:' feature in the photo section so we can bypass the rating game.
Whatever,
|
|
|
|
|
hangdoggypound
Nov 4, 2003, 11:15 PM
Post #30 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2002
Posts: 169
|
In reply to: I humbly offer my own brainstorming...Maybe you could solve your problem - to a degree - by making three separate photo sections...Or maybe you could just make an 'Arrange By:' feature in the photo section so we can bypass the rating game. Whatever,
As a matter of fact, I believe this already exists. Go the the New Photos page and there are some drop down boxes at the top of the page that allow you to sort by date added, rank, photographer, AND even number of votes. You can also see just a given category - such as trad, or artistic for instance. Check it out.
While your ideas are good, I think the photos page already does most of what you suggested. I guess that's what makes your ideas so good. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
trapdoor
Nov 5, 2003, 12:27 AM
Post #31 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 27, 2003
Posts: 183
|
The photo page ranlings are junk!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
rockclimbr
Nov 5, 2003, 12:43 AM
Post #32 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 132
|
I agree with the three point rule too, i just need to get in one of my photos so i can vote too.
But i was wondering, if some attention whore voted theirs a ten, can some person vote that (lets say its a crappy pic) an 8, and then another come along and vote it a 5?? or does the system keep the vote of 8 and null-and-void the vote of 5?? just a thought....(If it did work like this, some photos raitings would severely drop)
|
|
|
|
|
celticelement
Nov 5, 2003, 3:06 AM
Post #33 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 205
|
hangdoggypound:
I had not seen the 'sort by' function. Cool deal. Yet another strike for me. :?
I still like my three section idea.
I think Joe's thumbnail idea is really good.
|
|
|
|
|
hangdoggypound
Nov 5, 2003, 3:38 PM
Post #34 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2002
Posts: 169
|
In reply to: hangdoggypound: I had not seen the 'sort by' function. Cool deal. Yet another strike for me. :? I still like my three section idea. I think Joe's thumbnail idea is really good.
Totally- Joe's thumbnail idea is good because he's right that so many great shots get buried back 2-3 pages. But I think that the link on the left of the screen under PHOTOS that says By Rank is just a quick way to Sort By Rank. (this is what we mean by "TOP PHOTOS PAGE", right?)
Proposition: What if that by rank link also sorted by number of votes or something like that? Would that work? Joe said this:
In reply to: again, i'm just throwing those out. biff's probably tearing his hair out reading this, going "wtf does it take to please these imbeciles?". sorry dude. bang up job your doing. |
|
|
|
|
photon
Nov 5, 2003, 4:05 PM
Post #35 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 31, 2002
Posts: 543
|
Mods could you please move this to the whiny bich forum?
|
|
|
|
|
cryder
Nov 5, 2003, 4:27 PM
Post #36 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
Whiny bitch section or not, it seems to need addressing... Maybe a three vote minimum would cure a bunch of the front page problems. I don't know about having more thumbnails - it seems clutter is already a problem.
Webshots.com handled this similarily by giving pros there own section, and created a general community section... and it worked. The quality of the work is consistently high. Oh yeah - and what exactly does voting do besides encourage photo trolls anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
vanny37
Nov 5, 2003, 5:11 PM
Post #37 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2002
Posts: 83
|
I think the point is, there needs to be a place where people can view the best photography of the past month. That would be the Top Photos page except with restrictions like there are on the Front Page. But the restrictions should maybe a little less like 3 votes and any score seems to be a good idea. Then of course there needs to be the New Photos page where anything can go up.
I like to come to the site and see awesome photos... not have to sort through 50 bad ones to find the one good one... thats why I usually go to the New Photos page. Not every photo posted is magazine or better quality, but some still have pictures of climbers and other areas and thats why photos are archived and given a chance to be seen when posted (New Photos Page). I certainly wouldn't want people to have to stare through my photos on the Top Photo page, but its nice they are linked to the data base to give others a picture of the area in the photo and the climbers in it. However, the Top Photos page should be reserved for just that... the best!
|
|
|
|
|
gblauer
Moderator
Nov 5, 2003, 6:00 PM
Post #38 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 4, 2002
Posts: 2824
|
why are you all so bitter? Who cares about the "top" photos ("top" is in the eyes of the beholder anyways). Live and let live.
|
|
|
|
|
swollenmember
Nov 5, 2003, 6:42 PM
Post #39 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 19, 2003
Posts: 57
|
I hear that. im new and already im sick of seeing gym pic's... whats that about?
|
|
|
|
|
biff
Nov 5, 2003, 8:39 PM
Post #40 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2001
Posts: 851
|
In reply to: Edge I agree completely. . . . and this whole having to recalculate votes overnight thing has really screwed it all up . . . now if you know when to post your photo, you gte one vote done at the right time and you can have your photos rated at a 10 for the entire day and appear on the front page when it reality your photo isn;t very good . . . I miss the ability to vote and have it calculated right away . . . I also think that the limitations on voting suck . . . in that, if a photo has a rating of say 9, if you vote it a 4 or below, your vote is completely discounted!!
We are always looking for ways to improve the photo voting thing. The original Idea behind the overnight calculation thing was to stop people from voting a good photo down .. now we can clearly see that although that problem is somewhat fixed, it has brought on the other problem of photos that suck getting what looks like a good rating for a day. .. oh the joy.
BTW only photos with more than 4 (I think ) votes will appear on the Front Page (aka rockclimbing.com home page).. where as the number of votes doesn't affect the placement of photos on the First Page in the Photo Gallery.
As far as your vote being completely discounted .. that is untrue .. if there are enogh people who think the photo sucks, the 4's will count and ratings of 9 will get ignored. by ignoring votes that are far from the average, the photo rating is based on a "Common consensus" rather than a "total average"
|
|
|
|
|
xcire
Nov 5, 2003, 8:43 PM
Post #41 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 275
|
Well look at mine and rate them again so they get off the top. I agree i like my pictures but a 10 some on please visit my pic and let me know what you think.
remember not a proffesional just like to share my crag
|
|
|
|
|
biff
Nov 5, 2003, 8:48 PM
Post #42 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2001
Posts: 851
|
In reply to: again, i'm just throwing those out. biff's probably tearing his hair out reading this, going "wtf does it take to please these imbeciles?". sorry dude. bang up job your doing.
Thanks for the excellent suggestions. I am not pulling my hair out .. I am actually supprised that it took about a moth before somone found a new way to abuse the system. No worries... things will be fixed.
You are giving me far too much credit. Eric is a very smart guy, and did alot of coding for this photo gallery. I am sure he and I (and whoever else wants to participate) will be able to come up with a new way to quash this minor problem.
I like the Idea of calculating the rank every few hours. Also re-working the page layout and viewing options.
We do pay attention to the concerns of all users, hopefully we get more good suggestions.
|
|
|
|
|
thrasher
Nov 6, 2003, 4:50 AM
Post #43 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2002
Posts: 603
|
This whole photo voting thing is dumb anyway. What does a highly rated photo get you? Nothing! Except maybe an erection or something when it gets voted high for a few minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 6, 2003, 5:01 AM
Post #44 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
rrradam moved this thread from Climbing Photography to Suggestions & Questions.
|
|
|
|
|
popol
Nov 10, 2003, 7:22 PM
Post #45 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2003
Posts: 390
|
3 vote system is a good start. But according to me, the only way to avoid photo trolls, is a kind of fixed website jury selecting the "real" top photo's (i.e. rate the incoming photo's themselves) and submitting them in a separate forum, like once a week or so. By consequence, some other cool pics that can't please some jury members don't make it to the top. :cry: Choose what you like: pre-jury or trolls...
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Nov 10, 2003, 10:40 PM
Post #46 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
tucsonalex wrote In reply to: When I click on top photos I expect to see something good, not blurry, underexposed, bad ground-up back and butt shots.
It took me 45 minutes this evening (for me) to cruise through the top and new photos! The popularity of the pic gallery is becoming incredible, but it's hard to vote for all the pics!!! I need more time! Or elss pics...
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Nov 10, 2003, 10:47 PM
Post #47 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
In reply to: The second section, or 'Top Photo' section, would be a place where after a period of time, - say 30 days - and enough high votes, - say 15 votes and an average of 7.5 and above - and maybe some comments, - say 5 or more - the photo would go to be viewed as a 'top photo.' Photos would stay in the first area until qualified to move to the second area or until they qualified for the third area
not a bad idea celticelement.
Maybe all New Photos should appear on the Front Page, close to the Top Photos, for 2 or 3 days, so they all could get ratings, and not be burried to early?
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Nov 10, 2003, 10:49 PM
Post #48 of 49
(4584 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
In reply to: again, i'm just throwing those out. biff's probably tearing his hair out reading this, going "wtf does it take to please these imbeciles?". sorry dude. bang up job your doing.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I think us imbeciles just want to be the only ones to have 10 rated pictures and figure on the FRont PAge!!! Could you do this for us, pics mods???
|
|
|
|
|
joemor
Nov 18, 2003, 12:06 AM
Post #49 of 49
(4370 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2001
Posts: 609
|
How about for a start you just make it that the person who posted the photo cant vote on it.... this would at least stop the "give it 10 cos its my photo" crap!
|
|
|
|
|
|
