| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/15/2005 03:16:10 AM · #76 |
I'm with Falc. Once people have entered and voted on a challenge theme one week, seeing it *again* the next week would most likely just cause apathy more than anything. Certainly would in myself.
Just have to set aside that gnawing feeling that you *have* to enter every challenge you see, and pete forbid you miss one every week.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 03:29:40 AM · #77 |
another idea is to limit the entries to 400 pics in an open challenge
Message edited by author 2005-09-15 03:34:08. |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 06:22:01 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by visaksen:
another idea is to limit the entries to 400 pics in an open challenge |
I think that would just cause people to rush their entries which would reduce the quality of the challenges :(
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 06:29:46 AM · #79 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by visaksen:
another idea is to limit the entries to 400 pics in an open challenge |
I think that would just cause people to rush their entries which would reduce the quality of the challenges :( |
or everione would rush to enter a bogus image and change it after.. |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 07:44:31 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by notonline:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by notonline:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I'm not big on notonline's idea, though...I really wouldn't want to vote on two identical challenges for a month straight |
How do you get a month straight???
|
Nevermind, I'm not sure what I was thinking...I'm still not big on the idea for several reasons...voter fatigue, a better idea for the 2nd challenge entries of what to expect, etc. |
But thats the beauty of it as you can only enter one out of the 2 challenges. |
Yeah, but you would be voting on both versions of the challenge.
And you eventually would divide up dpc into two groups...especially those that enter every challenge they can. You would either be in the group that enters a challenge the first time or the group that enters a challenge the second time... |
But you don't HAVE to vote on both versions. The choice is yours. As for dividing dpc, If you've entered a challenge once then you would not be able to enter it again during week 2.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 08:55:05 AM · #81 |
notonline's idea is an interesting one, and I think with a little bit of tweaking, might work in some form.
As presented, though, the problem I see that is when the "pattern" of challenges gets established, people will say, two topics -- "B" is next week, so I will do "A" this week and "B" next week, because that way I have two weeks to think and execute it. Then, next week, he will say, "B" this week, two weeks to think on and execute "C."
Now, the good side to that is that the quality may or may not go up (there will always be those of us that procrastinate).
BUT, the purpose of this experiment (and please remember that it is an experiment for September) we were wanting to see if it reduces the number of entries for a given challenge.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 12:48:58 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by visaksen:
another idea is to limit the entries to 400 pics in an open challenge |
I think that would just cause people to rush their entries which would reduce the quality of the challenges :( |
right .... a bad idea |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 12:49:36 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by visaksen:
another idea is to limit the entries to 400 pics in an open challenge |
I think that would just cause people to rush their entries which would reduce the quality of the challenges :( |
or everione would rush to enter a bogus image and change it after.. |
right ... as said a bad idea |
|
|
|
09/16/2005 12:56:57 PM · #84 |
| Another reason why this site thrives. Good solutions to difficult problems...Yay! |
|
|
|
09/16/2005 01:05:34 PM · #85 |
Fantastic decision guys! WTG Thank you for keeping this site the best on the Web! :-)
<--- Doing the happy dance...
|
|
|
|
09/16/2005 01:56:15 PM · #86 |
sorry if this has been asked before but being i a member can i participate in all three challenges or do i have to choose between one of the open challenges?
onec again sorry if this has been anwsered but the thread is already to long to go over it.
|
|
|
|
09/16/2005 02:01:51 PM · #87 |
| You can enter only one of the open challenges, and also the member challenge. |
|
|
|
09/26/2005 07:00:04 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by langdon:
...
Through the end of September, we will be running two Open Challenges per week; however, you will only be able to enter one of those challenges each week. You may choose which challenge you prefer. This experiment only affects the Open Challenges. Members may enter any and all Member challenges available
.... |
this should have been put in the site news on the front page when this was deciced. A little better now with the Exclusive Open Challenge.
very happy with this idea and it seems to work OK, or what?
Many ppl will shoot for a particular challenge, others will pick photos that fit into one or the other, while yet others will shoot for the one that seems to have fewer entries in hopes of better placement.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2005 12:06:08 AM · #89 |
|
|
|
09/29/2005 10:15:30 PM · #90 |
I didn't read the whole thread, so I may be suggesting something that's already been suggested. I like the idea of having a choice in the open challenge but I think if you enter one you should only be permitted to vote only on the other one (or both if you didn't enter either). Try it for a week. If I were a betting man I'd say the odds are that most people won't be so keen to vote on something in which they didn't enter; then those who actually vote would be less biased and the score would become more meaningful. That's just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
09/29/2005 10:35:56 PM · #91 |
I'm not sure on the 2 challenge thing. I have noticed there has been a dramatic decrease on voting. There just hasn't been as many votes. But, what does this say when I can't think of a reason to fix the problem?
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 11:23:24 AM · #92 |
Originally posted by SCI 009:
I'm not sure on the 2 challenge thing. I have noticed there has been a dramatic decrease on voting. There just hasn't been as many votes. But, what does this say when I can't think of a reason to fix the problem? |
But not everybody has time to vote on the challenges even if they did enter. Perhaps a forgivness of 1 challenge if you do not vote and the second time you enter you'd have a manditory 100% voting or a DQ. This way you'd force people to at least make the 20%. Now that the challenges are smaller in size/entries I might even suggest a manditory voting of 25% unless it hits over 300 or whatever.
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 11:46:16 AM · #93 |
I don't think there should be any restrictions on voting (except for the 20% rule).
Some people like to vote on the challenge in which they have an entry. Personally, I only like to look and maybe comment when it's a challenge I'm participating in. With the two challenge (opens at same time) venue I'm voting more because I feel free to vote without any preconceived notions or bias when I don't have an image in the challenge. I doubt that I'm alone - but perhaps one of the few that will share that thought openly.
I would hazard a guess that if this double open challenge format remains, you will see higher scores overall for open challenges.
Just my 2 cents for what it's worth. ;^)
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 11:58:31 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by SCI 009:
I'm not sure on the 2 challenge thing. I have noticed there has been a dramatic decrease on voting. There just hasn't been as many votes. |
there have been a number of posts from people more mathmatically-inclined than i that show your score changes very little after the first 50 (or so) votes, so i don't think that a decrease in the number of votes matters all THAT much. it does reduce the number of comments and the amount of exposure you get, though.
i do like at least TRYING the concept of only getting to vote in the challenge in which you did not enter. if you didn't enter either, you could continue to vote on both challenges. that might eliminate some bias, as was suggested. it would be an interesting experiement, nonetheless. |
|
|
|
09/30/2005 12:01:17 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
...i do like at least TRYING the concept of only getting to vote in the challenge in which you did not enter. if you didn't enter either, you could continue to vote on both challenges. that might eliminate some bias, as was suggested. it would be an interesting experiement, nonetheless. |
Yeah, what he said... that's what I've been trying to say in other threads. I hope you won't get crucified for it muckpond!
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 12:03:12 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by ldowse:
I hope you won't get crucified for it muckpond! |
wouldn't be the first time :/ |
|
|
|
09/30/2005 02:58:31 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
... i do like at least TRYING the concept of only getting to vote in the challenge in which you did not enter. if you didn't enter either, you could continue to vote on both challenges. that might eliminate some bias, as was suggested. it would be an interesting experiement, nonetheless. |
Not crucifying, just voicing and oppossing view -- but, would you also be interested in TRYING the concept of only being allowed to vote on the challenges entered. Let me give my pitch before tuning me out.
First, although there is a lot of discussion about troll voters (can't remember a time there wasn't at least one active thread), I am yet to see any solid indication they exist. Just because someone could do something does not indicate someone is doing it. But I suppose it is more comfortable for some to assume there are evil intentions behind low scores on images they like, than to accept the opinion of others do differ.
Second, even if someone does have the voting method of looking at their image, deciding what score they would give it, and then using that as the ruler to measure all other images from -- it is as valid a voting method as any other I have seen presented.
Third, currently there is no minimum level of knowledge or sophistication required to place a vote -- the voting process is a polling of opinions, and even if an opinion is formed by viewing the world thru rose-colored glasses, it is still an opninion. I feel placing restrictions on the type of opinion that is desired also raises the level of knowledge required for voting. That is fine, there is nothing wrong with juried competitions -- which is the end result of such thinking. In my opinion, DPC would loose a lot of what makes DPC what it is if opinions were to become regulated.
And finally, given a choice between two challengs with differnet topics, it is safe to assume an individual will enter the one they are more interested/knowledgable at. By requiring them to vote only on the challenge they were less interested/knowledgable about, not only are they less likely to vote at all -- and if they do, I fail to see how doing so would make their vote more valuable.
Not at all opposed to trying either out -- or anything else for that matter -- I just don't see how trying it will answer questions raised by the baseless accusations of troll voters that is constantly raised in the forums. The votes given will still be unjustified anonymous opinions -- and no substantial conclusions can be drawn from such blind data.
David
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 04:50:30 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by Britannica:
... And finally, given a choice between two challengs with differnet topics, it is safe to assume an individual will enter the one they are more interested/knowledgable at. ... |
David - In principle I agree with much of what you've said. I have to disagree with your assumption on deciding which challenge people enter.
Rule of Thirds (ROT) vs Bubbles: I chose Bubbles because I felt ROT was going to be more of a free study (subject matter). I like using the rule of thirds, but I felt that an entry in ROT was going to get lost easier because of the number of entries. So in this case I went against interest/knowledge.
From the Ground Up II (FGU) vs Beverages: Similar case here. I thought FGU would be fun, but overpopulated because of the ease of subject.
I don't know if I made my point very well here.
Originally posted by Britannica:
... By requiring them to vote only on the challenge they were less interested/knowledgable about, not only are they less likely to vote at all -- and if they do, I fail to see how doing so would make their vote more valuable. ... |
Because of what I mentioned above the interest/knowledge POV may not apply. I agree that if I was forced to vote on the challenge not entered there would be times I wouldn't vote (i.e. - Darkness challenge), but most of the time it wouldn't be an issue. And as I stated earlier, I find it easier to vote objectively on the challenge not entered anyway. ;^)
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 04:53:46 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by Britannica:
...it is safe to assume an individual will enter the one they are more interested/knowledgable at. By requiring them to vote only on the challenge they were less interested/knowledgable about, not only are they less likely to vote at all -- and if they do, I fail to see how doing so would make their vote more valuable.
... |
Actually this is a very interesting point I had not considered. Personally I'm in favor of muckpond's suggestion (mainly because I had suggested it earlier ;-P ), but I must admit that your theory does have merit.
I propose both trials as well as a third option that provides a choice (which I also had suggested earlier). That is the "update option" choice. It is as follows:
If you enter a challenge, you may only vote on that challenge if you are not able to see your own score in that particular challenge.
If you opt to have the "update" button, then you waive your right to vote on that challenge. This will essentially eliminate one's score from having a direct impact on his/her voting strategy. The decision to vote or not vote (update or not update) would be made at the time the photo was submitted to the challenge with the option to change your mind up until voting begins.
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 07:23:20 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by ldowse:
I propose both trials as well as a third option that provides a choice (which I also had suggested earlier). That is the "update option" choice. It is as follows:
If you enter a challenge, you may only vote on that challenge if you are not able to see your own score in that particular challenge.
If you opt to have the "update" button, then you waive your right to vote on that challenge. This will essentially eliminate one's score from having a direct impact on his/her voting strategy. The decision to vote or not vote (update or not update) would be made at the time the photo was submitted to the challenge with the option to change your mind up until voting begins. |
To me this seems like it would discourage voting even further. It seems like almost everyone here is obsessed with their update button. I don't envision them giving it up in order to vote. I would wager that doing this would cause votes per image to drop drastically.
In my opinion limiting the way people vote is a bad idea. The more votes an image gets, the more representative the score is, so I think it's best to encourage people to vote on as many things as possible regardless of which challenge they enter, as it's really hard for one person to skew the system in favor of their image anyway. The brave souls who are willing to vote on all 500+ images within both challenges should be applauded, not discouraged. One of the main goals of this site (it seems to me) is learning and getting feedback on your photos (and feedback includes a numeric score), so limiting the amount of feedback people can recieve seems contrary to the site's mission. |
|
