|
phil_nev
Oct 25, 2002, 2:22 PM
Post #1 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2001
Posts: 361
|
What do you think. I sometimes get the feeling people are deliberatly voting my photos low. Now i know there not perfect, but someone voted 4 for what i thought was a bloody good photo. I have also seen some of JMlangfords photos given a 1. Why i have no idea as they are great.
So how about a poll of the users on this site??? This has been dodged for too bloody long!
Who wants the photos votes displayed.
Who dosn't want the votes displayed?
Who dosn't care?
|
|
|
|
|
xcel360
Oct 25, 2002, 2:58 PM
Post #2 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2002
Posts: 481
|
i say show who voted what. if someone's too scared to show people what a low score they gave someones great photo then it served its purpose. if someones gonna give a low score to such a great photo they should tell why in the comments section. otherwise they are yellow..
|
|
|
|
|
edgelounger
Oct 25, 2002, 3:05 PM
Post #3 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2002
Posts: 109
|
yeah, show who voted and what they voted.
|
|
|
|
|
jhundrup
Oct 25, 2002, 3:11 PM
Post #4 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2001
Posts: 410
|
The only problem that I see with that is then users will start getting angry at each other and asking people to justify why they voted how they did.
I can see personal attacks coming out of it pretty easily. I think that is part of the reason that the qvote system is now gone.
Jared
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Oct 25, 2002, 3:13 PM
Post #5 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
This happened with the Q-ratings... not a great idea.
|
|
|
|
|
jules
Oct 25, 2002, 3:22 PM
Post #6 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2001
Posts: 3099
|
If photo votes were visible, then all of the photos would be rated highly.
Your photos are presented to the same audience as every other photo on the site. If your photos have low ratings, chances are it's not the voters.
The only complaint I have about the photo rating system is that the votes should be recalculated daily, not after every vote... this way, one early low vote won't put a good photo in the 5.x's or so, where no one will see it. It'll have all day to get a wide range of votes from a wide range of people.
|
|
|
|
|
gilthanass
Oct 25, 2002, 3:23 PM
Post #7 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2002
Posts: 99
|
we would have all tens (if we did this) because people want to avoid confict, have people stop voting, or everyone would start hating each other. I think we should keep the rating anonymous, and just turn the other cheek to the people that wanna stir up trouble. (the low ratings)
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
w6jxm
Oct 25, 2002, 3:30 PM
Post #8 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2002
Posts: 792
|
If the photo is a true 10 then it will eventually get a ten
Theoriticaly at least
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Oct 25, 2002, 3:32 PM
Post #9 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Why vote at all? Why not just submit and display all the photos? If you want some sort of indication of what people think of the photo, then track "views" -track how many times a thumbnail of a photo is blown up to full size by people who visit RC.com.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Oct 25, 2002, 3:37 PM
Post #10 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
This has been discussed before, numerous times.
Basically... My view is that while not perfect, confidential votes encourage users to vote, and is more accurate of the true vote, than puplic votes.
Q-Ratings were much lower, but reflected a truer rating of the users voted upon until they went public.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Oct 25, 2002, 3:40 PM
Post #11 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Quote:
...then track "views" -track how many times a thumbnail of a photo is blown up to full size by people who visit RC.com.
How many users do you think will relentlessly click on their pic to drive the rating up ???
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Oct 25, 2002, 3:50 PM
Post #12 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
JDS is right... if you don't like the votes your getting on your photos then submit them as not being able to recieve votes. If that isn't enough then don't submit them at all.
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Oct 25, 2002, 3:51 PM
Post #13 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
If a picture looks good to you why do you need a vote to tell you that???
|
|
|
|
|
eric
Oct 25, 2002, 3:56 PM
Post #14 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2002
Posts: 1430
|
It all works out in the end. I've had my photos knocked down a bit by a low vote, as has probably everyone else. But usually the impact of the one or two low votes is more than outweighed by the overly generous votes. Think about that. The average of 10 or 15 8's plus one 4 is what? That's right, 7.6. Ain't the law of averages wonderful?
I really think you need to get over this. Photographs are like your children. Not everyone thinks they're as wonderful as you do.
I recently said I thought showing the votes would be a good idea, but after reading the arguments pointed out here, I've changed my mind. People like you would undoubtedly be hounding others asking why they voted in a certain way. That happened with Q-ratings and it would certainly happen with photos.
[ This Message was edited by: khanom on 2002-10-25 08:59 ]
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Oct 25, 2002, 4:05 PM
Post #15 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
I am the second most sabotaged person on this website after rrradam, according to Trevor.
Why do people sabotage our photos? Is it personal, or are they sick of seeing the pictures?
I know *I* get sick of seeing the same damn photo all the time on the front page! I have been tempted, but never HAVE, voted one down just to get rid of the damn thing!
Are other people actually DOING this? It would not surprise me if they are.
Here is my suggestion:
ROTATE MORE PHOTOS MORE FREQUENTLY!
Instead of seeing the same photos over and over again til we get sick of 'em, put on MORE fricken photos. That way more people are satisfied.
Also, this needs to be done in the sections and areas.
Right now, only the top photo appears at the top of the page.
And while I really do love the photo of Tom in his portaledge on the Southwest Face of El Cap section [like, because I took it, eh?] I really would like to see the top ten photos rotated through that section.
As far as the front page goes, HOW MANY PHOTOS are currently rotated and over what time period?
When I know what the numbers are, I can suggest how that ought to be changed.
My request - more photos on the front page for less time.
Cheers,
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
eric
Oct 25, 2002, 4:11 PM
Post #16 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2002
Posts: 1430
|
Yeah yeah. I have code that rotates photos in a saner way, but it's part of a more general re-write of some of the backend that's a ways off from seeing the light of day.
I too am mighty sick of the same photo(s?) on the FP day after day. Maybe I should implement that now. Hmm...
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Oct 25, 2002, 6:05 PM
Post #17 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
Yeh I agree. Photos on the frontpage should be rotated in shorter durations. It would be more pleasant. There are tons of excellent photos on this site to choose from to do that, even the ones that are rated low
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Oct 25, 2002, 8:21 PM
Post #18 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
As stated before...
The top 6 (with more than 3-5 votes) "New" (less than a month) photos are randomely rotated to the front.
I think this should be changed to the Top 10, and change "New" to less than 2 weeks. This will give us 2.66 times the amount of photos in the same period, with none staying on the FP for longer than 2 weeks.
If we go less than two weeks, then the quality of the pics on the FP will go down drastically.
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Oct 25, 2002, 9:36 PM
Post #19 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
I am with Adam and Pete (hey whatayaknow, they sort of agreed on something. someone check the temp in hell:lol:) on this one. I also like Juliana's suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
krillen
Oct 25, 2002, 10:10 PM
Post #20 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2001
Posts: 4769
|
One: there are enough great photo's on here to use the top 20-25 and still not see a major drop in quality.
Two: I don't think it's so much taht people want to see who voted what, it's more WHY people voted what. You gave my shot a 4 while everyone else gave it a 7. Why? Sometimes they have a logical excuse, often though it's something stupid or petty.
Anonymous voting doesn't foster more true votes it fosters more "revenge" or "attack" voting. DO you see any hackers/pain-in-the-a$$ types using their REAL names on here? or their REAL emails? It's free reign on being a dick. No concequences.
What about making it so that you can't vote unles you put a comment. Even if it's a cheap as "Great!". Then at least you get some feedback, and only those with an actual INTEREST in the photos, and stuff to say are voting.
Jody has gone out of his way to put comments on a LOT of photo's here, and I know his constructive criticism has helped me. So by instituing public gradings with manidtory comments, maybe we can all gleam more of this from the voters?
|
|
|
|
|
cloudbreak
Oct 25, 2002, 10:31 PM
Post #21 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2002
Posts: 917
|
Krillen has had the best ideas yet!!!! Especially using the top 20-25. Look at the first page of photots posted by rank. Almost all great photos. And, Hellz yes on the required comment in order to vote for one of them!!
|
|
|
|
|
hornj
Oct 25, 2002, 10:44 PM
Post #22 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 4, 2001
Posts: 22
|
Is it possible to have the photographers name not show up on a photo until after a person has voted. This would have people voting more on the merrits of the photo rather than how much they liked or disliked the photographer.
|
|
|
|
|
alexinmilton
Oct 25, 2002, 11:30 PM
Post #23 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2002
Posts: 56
|
show the votes,
I know I look at what others think to find cool pics. If your going to rate something you should have to put your name behind it.
|
|
|
|
|
pbcowboy77
Oct 26, 2002, 12:00 AM
Post #24 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2002
Posts: 574
|
I say show them.
|
|
|
|
|
pushfurther
Oct 26, 2002, 12:21 AM
Post #25 of 55
(3968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 2112
|
with regards to not showing the name of the photographer until a vote is cast, you can tell who took which picture by the style of it..i mean, jmlangford's pics are different from orangeoverhang's pics..
i say don't show the votes, remember the q-rating deal?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
