DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> uP For discussion
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 50, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/10/2017 01:30:30 PM · #1
... and I know it's been discussed before (some say ad infinitum so feel free to ignore), but I bring it up again because I LIKE this place and IMO things are not panning out well ....
Also, please note that this is NOT A COMPLAINT ABOUT MY SCORE. Here we go -

For the challenge that rolled over last night, that was Pattern VI, here are the statistics on MY Entry Only:
Place: 40 out of 69
Avg (all users): 5.4651
Avg (commenters): 10.0000 (thank you!)
Avg (participants): 5.0769 Please note that the word participant used here refers to those who entered.
Avg (non-participants): 6.0588
Views since voting: 10
Views during voting: 75
Votes: 43
Comments: 3 (one during voting though all are appreciated)
Favorites: 0

From this information clearly there were 69 entries overall and a total of 43 votes. But using this information we can also tell that 26 votes were tallied from the 69 entrants, and 17 were made by those who did not enter.
The 26 people who entered thought my image was worth 5.0
And the other votes averaged to 6.0

So what do we make of this?

edited to correct the numbers I reversed (thank you to 21_F.gif PennyClick for noticing my error)

Message edited by author 2017-04-10 19:53:48.
04/10/2017 05:12:19 PM · #2
abysmal
adjective
extremely bad; appalling.

Message edited by author 2017-04-10 17:12:41.
04/10/2017 05:23:15 PM · #3
Originally posted by PennyStreet:

So what do we make of this?

That people who submitted to this challenge tended to vote a point or so lower than those voters who didn't? I expect there are several possible explanations for that, not all of them nefarious.

04/10/2017 07:20:29 PM · #4
Originally posted by PennyStreet:

From this information clearly there were 69 entries overall and a total of 43 votes. But using this information we can also tell that only 17 votes were tallied from the 69 entrants, and 26 were made by those who did not enter.
The 17 people who entered thought my image was worth 5.0
And the other votes averaged to 6.0

So what do we make of this?


I don't know if this will change your reaction one iota, but by my calculations you switched the numbers for votes tallied from entrants and from those who did not enter. You also truncated the scores rather than rounding them which makes both scores seem slightly worse. The difference between the two is still about a point.

There were 26 votes from people who entered (participants), and they gave an average score of 5.1.
There were 17 votes from those who did not enter, averaging 6.1.
04/10/2017 07:23:58 PM · #5
not sure an explanation can be described as nefarious. or not.



Message edited by author 2017-04-10 19:25:07.
04/10/2017 07:50:44 PM · #6
Originally posted by PennyClick:

Originally posted by PennyStreet:

From this information clearly there were 69 entries overall and a total of 43 votes. But using this information we can also tell that only 17 votes were tallied from the 69 entrants, and 26 were made by those who did not enter.
The 17 people who entered thought my image was worth 5.0
And the other votes averaged to 6.0

So what do we make of this?


I don't know if this will change your reaction one iota, but by my calculations you switched the numbers for votes tallied from entrants and from those who did not enter. You also truncated the scores rather than rounding them which makes both scores seem slightly worse. The difference between the two is still about a point.

There were 26 votes from people who entered (participants), and they gave an average score of 5.1.
There were 17 votes from those who did not enter, averaging 6.1.


You are correct and I thank you for that. We have been running, on average, at about 50 percent participants voting for some time now and I likely would not have posted this if I knew the number were 26, but even at that it's lower than usual.
04/10/2017 08:02:54 PM · #7
Originally posted by tnun:

not sure an explanation can be described as nefarious. or not.


Nefarious is certainly not a word I would use to describe anything I know about DPC.
04/10/2017 08:14:42 PM · #8
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by PennyStreet:

So what do we make of this?

That people who submitted to this challenge tended to vote a point or so lower than those voters who didn't? I expect there are several possible explanations for that, not all of them nefarious.


Generally, and I do review my votes and have entered lots and lots of challenges, the discrepancy is not so large.

But also concerning is that so few people vote, even the entrants! Or comment... I admit that even I have lost most of my incentive to comment. The top ten images these days sometimes rollover with no comments!

It just feels like, starting around the beginning of this year, things have been sliding faster. I don't want it to be that way but don't know what we can do to turn it around.... maybe write PMs to all the new members and encourage them to vote and comment? Explain that it's more fun that way? IDK, I just thought maybe we could come up with an idea to make this place livelier again.
04/10/2017 08:27:14 PM · #9
Originally posted by PennyStreet:

Originally posted by tnun:

not sure an explanation can be described as nefarious. or not.

Nefarious is certainly not a word I would use to describe anything I know about DPC.

I almost changed my username to "Nefarious A-R-T".

Originally posted by PennyStreet:

It just feels like, starting around the beginning of this year, things have been sliding faster.

So, about the time I returned. Hmm...
04/10/2017 08:30:25 PM · #10
nefarious wins! -oops, wrong thread.

say, d'ya think we are keeping this whole shebang afloat with our weavings? what does your spidey sense tell you?
04/10/2017 09:23:50 PM · #11
Originally posted by tnun:

say, d'ya think we are keeping this whole shebang afloat with our weavings? what does your spidey sense tell you?

To be honest, I've considered this place an alternate universe for many years now, so I'm not sure it really is still afloat or that we even exist here.

dpc-404.jpg
04/10/2017 09:55:06 PM · #12
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by tnun:

say, d'ya think we are keeping this whole shebang afloat with our weavings? what does your spidey sense tell you?

To be honest, I've considered this place an alternate universe for many years now, so I'm not sure it really is still afloat or that we even exist here.

dpc-404.jpg


Hahahaha... glad you're back
04/10/2017 10:58:25 PM · #13
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by tnun:

say, d'ya think we are keeping this whole shebang afloat with our weavings? what does your spidey sense tell you?

To be honest, I've considered this place an alternate universe for many years now, so I'm not sure it really is still afloat or that we even exist here.

To be even more honest, that's sort of depressing when you consider the amount of time I (and others) spend behind the scenes making sure it DOES stay afloat :-(
04/10/2017 11:46:06 PM · #14
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

To be even more honest, that's sort of depressing when you consider the amount of time I (and others) spend behind the scenes making sure it DOES stay afloat :-(


Indubitably.
It's been a whole lot of years since I spent time on SC, but I can tell you from experience that the job is *way* under-appreciated. In addition to the invaluable contribution of the SC, there are numerous members that make the site what it is. We are, no doubt, the tightest-knit photographic community on the web. We pull together for members of our community, whether it be a member lost in the desert (literally), someone valiantly fighting cancer, or simply someone needing support in a difficult time. We are there, as a community. I'm proud to call myself a DPC'er.
04/10/2017 11:55:01 PM · #15
Originally posted by PennyStreet:

.... maybe write PMs to all the new members and encourage them to vote and comment? Explain that it's more fun that way? IDK, I just thought maybe we could come up with an idea to make this place livelier again.


I think there is merit in this idea. But I think that older members should reach out to the newer ones, and mentor them to the old ways
04/11/2017 01:51:26 AM · #16
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by tnun:

say, d'ya think we are keeping this whole shebang afloat with our weavings? what does your spidey sense tell you?

To be honest, I've considered this place an alternate universe for many years now, so I'm not sure it really is still afloat or that we even exist here.

To be even more honest, that's sort of depressing when you consider the amount of time I (and others) spend behind the scenes making sure it DOES stay afloat :-(

No disrespect or disregard for the efforts of the SC. We're obviously still "afloat" thanks in most part to those efforts. My hat's always off to you and the rest of the volunteers on the SC.

Originally posted by tanguera:

...I think that older members should reach out to the newer ones, and mentor them to the old ways

I like this idea, but it works better if we allow hazing and boot camp style "mentoring".
04/11/2017 08:21:18 AM · #17
Humor is good. Healing. I'm happy to see Art here once again.

The people not voting are probably not reading the forum threads either.

And if they are, people not voting probably can't be shamed into voting anyway.

Positive reinforcement works--start by reinforcing the positive benefits of voting.

And commenting.

At least you will feel better.
04/11/2017 08:40:05 AM · #18
Originally posted by pixelpig:

The people not voting are probably not reading the forum threads either.

Good point!

Originally posted by pixelpig:

Positive reinforcement works--start by reinforcing the positive benefits of voting. And commenting. At least you will feel better.

Fine, but I still think hazing would work and make me feel even better.
04/11/2017 09:34:57 AM · #19
It is ironic, I think, to say " too bad we don't have enough people to restrict voting to non-participants." Because, if we had that many people, participants scores would have less impact.

When you mix subjective things and contests- you get weird results, or at very least people become very self-serving, contest-conscious, and downright human.

Message edited by author 2017-04-11 09:35:32.
04/11/2017 10:05:33 AM · #20
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by tnun:

say, d'ya think we are keeping this whole shebang afloat with our weavings? what does your spidey sense tell you?

To be honest, I've considered this place an alternate universe for many years now, so I'm not sure it really is still afloat or that we even exist here.

To be even more honest, that's sort of depressing when you consider the amount of time I (and others) spend behind the scenes making sure it DOES stay afloat :-(


I think you know that I would never disparage the efforts of our SC members.

And Annie is correct that the people not voting are also not reading this.

Art, please initiate hazing process.
04/11/2017 10:25:11 AM · #21
Originally posted by blindjustice:

It is ironic, I think, to say " too bad we don't have enough people to restrict voting to non-participants." Because, if we had that many people, participants scores would have less impact.

When you mix subjective things and contests- you get weird results, or at very least people become very self-serving, contest-conscious, and downright human.


On the contrary, if I made the rules I probably would lean more towards asking all participants to vote. I feel we are our best judges and it should be part of the process of entering that we judge our competition. As is, I feel it's a shame that it's up to grabs whether it gets done or not and by whom because in the end the competition isn't really a fair competition. And when the numbers get reduced to as low as they are now, it really matter who the voting population is.

04/11/2017 10:49:32 AM · #22
I don't know if this has been suggested before, but what if there was a minimum number of votes required to end the challenge voting. It could be equal to the number of entries (or one less than). So voting could potentially go on for weeks, but most likely participants will vote just to end it.

Frankly, I'm agnostic about the voting issue, but suggesting solutions that I know will never be implemented because they would require coding changes will inspire others to make futile suggestions as well and THAT seems like an acceptably mild form of hazing. :P
04/11/2017 11:29:34 AM · #23
Many of the new members have never voted (ribbon winner in this FS) or if they do vote, vote exceptionally low, possibly thinking that they
are increasing their chances at a better score. Maybe, mentoring or hazing is the answer. Sending a friendly pm to a person encouraging them to
vote or to vote fairly cannot hurt.
ps. I'm glad that Art is back too. Even though we are limping along at least we're laughing while we fade out.
04/11/2017 01:12:56 PM · #24
Originally posted by MeMex2:

Many of the new members have never voted (ribbon winner in this FS) or if they do vote, vote exceptionally low, possibly thinking that they
are increasing their chances at a better score. Maybe, mentoring or hazing is the answer. Sending a friendly pm to a person encouraging them to
vote or to vote fairly cannot hurt.
ps. I'm glad that Art is back too. Even though we are limping along at least we're laughing while we fade out.


yes and yes. And no codes necessary.
04/11/2017 02:37:11 PM · #25
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

I don't know if this has been suggested before, but what if there was a minimum number of votes required to end the challenge voting. It could be equal to the number of entries (or one less than). So voting could potentially go on for weeks, but most likely participants will vote just to end it.

Frankly, I'm agnostic about the voting issue, but suggesting solutions that I know will never be implemented because they would require coding changes will inspire others to make futile suggestions as well and THAT seems like an acceptably mild form of hazing. :P


Sounds like a great idea, but you would at least need a few days. Like, 2 days and 50 votes needed stops the competition rule. If you don't set a time you could wake up with it over. Half the fun of DPC is hitting the refresh button...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/18/2017 08:12:07 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2017 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/18/2017 08:12:07 AM EST.