| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/01/2010 12:29:00 AM · #276 |
| I just feel the need to say at some point there needs to be values placed on members. Now favoritism is something that should be avoided, but in these circumstance when the accusations are shaky and seen by the general public as unjust there needs to be a change made. I'm glad the SC is doing this for a good cause and working very hard at it as well, this may be biasing their thought process at the moment though. Think about it, [user]Post Humorous[/user] is one of the biggest contributors to the site, he leaves detailed helpful comments, is sociable in threads, and has his own set of awards that help add a level of competition for those who have a unique style of photography. The threat of losing him and apparently a lot of other outstanding photographers, but more importantly site contributors should be enough to spur the attention of SC. It appears that cheating was not actually involved, just a cycle of voting, but its hard for people who just spend many hours sorting through data to acknowledge this or even acknowledge the terrible ramifications these actions could entail from a business standpoint if something is not done soon to reconcile with important contributors like [user]post Humourous[/user] they will leave, with others with them. What comes next? Decrease in member quality, in site quality, and soon in membership. These ideas are not outrageous and should always be accounted for in circumstances like that, especially with the backing of the majority of the community or the majority of the vocal community, which as I stated before should be valued higher because of their helpfulness to the site as a business. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:29:45 AM · #277 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Melethia:
And really, Richard ( Scarbrd), the Abstractists aren't collusionists.
|
My name is David.
Carry on. |
LOL! Ooops - I knew that. I was responding to another post in my head at the same time. Yeah, that's it. Or I'd just seen a post from Yanko elsewhere. (Really, I do know you're David!) |
I thought so! ;-) I'm glad it wasn't what MattO was suggesting.
You know you're my favorite abstactionist, right? |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:30:46 AM · #278 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Melethia:
And really, Richard ( Scarbrd), the Abstractists aren't collusionists.
|
My name is David.
Carry on. |
LOL! Ooops - I knew that. I was responding to another post in my head at the same time. Yeah, that's it. Or I'd just seen a post from Yanko elsewhere. (Really, I do know you're David!) |
I thought so! ;-) I'm glad it wasn't what MattO was suggesting.
You know you're my favorite abstactionist, right? |
Heh - chocolate's in the mail. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:32:19 AM · #279 |
| finally I am feeling some love in this thread!!!! |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:32:28 AM · #280 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Melethia:
And really, Richard ( Scarbrd), the Abstractists aren't collusionists.
|
My name is David.
Carry on. |
LOL! Ooops - I knew that. I was responding to another post in my head at the same time. Yeah, that's it. Or I'd just seen a post from Yanko elsewhere. (Really, I do know you're David!) |
I thought so! ;-) I'm glad it wasn't what MattO was suggesting.
You know you're my favorite abstactionist, right? |
Heh - chocolate's in the mail. |
Is this bribery? Will this come to be known as the "Chololate For Votes" scandal? ;) |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:33:12 AM · #281 |
.
Message edited by author 2010-04-01 00:55:17.
|
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:33:45 AM · #282 |
| No, I have a set group of folks to whom I send chocolate in exchange for virtual ribbons (and, I might add, it does not work.) I have also been known to send chocolate for simple purposes of goodwill. However, now that I no longer reside in Europe, I will have to come up with some other form of barter, as the chocolate just isn't quite the same here. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:38:40 AM · #283 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
No, I have a set group of folks to whom I send chocolate in exchange for virtual ribbons (and, I might add, it does not work.) I have also been known to send chocolate for simple purposes of goodwill. However, now that I no longer reside in Europe, I will have to come up with some other form of barter, as the chocolate just isn't quite the same here. |
You got that right sister. I'l be in France in a couple of weeks, land of cheese and chocolate! Looking forward to that. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:39:46 AM · #284 |
I prolly should let this go, but I'll prolly be leaving soon anyway, and maybe this will broaden everyone's understanding. Posthumous, pointyshooty and I were identical triplets - quite a handful for our parents really, so we were adopted out. The reason pointyshooty has more 10's from Don is that I lost a few brain cells when I had the sex change. Well, I did get some great boobs, but Don wasn't having any. Actually I should have been called pointy, but pointyshooty was adopted into a military family. He's come a long way don't you think? (Apart from the goat thing). But Don is the eldest, cause we kicked him out. Say, does this sound familiar? Actually, I kicked him out because he liked pointyshooty better than me. It just wasn't fair.
|
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:45:08 AM · #285 |
Originally posted by tnun:
I prolly should let this go, but I'll prolly be leaving soon anyway, and maybe this will broaden everyone's understanding. Posthumous, pointyshooty and I were identical triplets - quite a handful for our parents really, so we were adopted out. The reason pointyshooty has more 10's from Don is that I lost a few brain cells when I had the sex change. Well, I did get some great boobs, but Don wasn't having any. Actually I should have been called pointy, but pointyshooty was adopted into a military family. He's come a long way don't you think? (Apart from the goat thing). But Don is the eldest, cause we kicked him out. Say, does this sound familiar? Actually, I kicked him out because he liked pointyshooty better than me. It just wasn't fair. |
You had me at "goat thing." ;-)
And you called ME ridiculous? |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:45:44 AM · #286 |
Very lovely family story.
Originally posted by tnun:
I prolly should let this go, but I'll prolly be leaving soon anyway, and maybe this will broaden everyone's understanding. Posthumous, pointyshooty and I were identical triplets - quite a handful for our parents really, so we were adopted out. The reason pointyshooty has more 10's from Don is that I lost a few brain cells when I had the sex change. Well, I did get some great boobs, but Don wasn't having any. Actually I should have been called pointy, but pointyshooty was adopted into a military family. He's come a long way don't you think? (Apart from the goat thing). But Don is the eldest, cause we kicked him out. Say, does this sound familiar? Actually, I kicked him out because he liked pointyshooty better than me. It just wasn't fair. |
|
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:47:49 AM · #287 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
Very lovely family story.
Originally posted by tnun:
I prolly should let this go, but I'll prolly be leaving soon anyway, and maybe this will broaden everyone's understanding. Posthumous, pointyshooty and I were identical triplets - quite a handful for our parents really, so we were adopted out. The reason pointyshooty has more 10's from Don is that I lost a few brain cells when I had the sex change. Well, I did get some great boobs, but Don wasn't having any. Actually I should have been called pointy, but pointyshooty was adopted into a military family. He's come a long way don't you think? (Apart from the goat thing). But Don is the eldest, cause we kicked him out. Say, does this sound familiar? Actually, I kicked him out because he liked pointyshooty better than me. It just wasn't fair. |
|
A modern day DPCish twist on The Brothers Karamazov ;) |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:53:24 AM · #288 |
| hey t- lay offa the moldy rye ;-) |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 12:57:30 AM · #289 |
| (Probably a bit off topic, but I never knew that was where boobs came from.) |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:07:51 AM · #290 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Melethia:
And really, Richard ( Scarbrd), the Abstractists aren't collusionists.
|
My name is David.
Carry on. |
LOL! Ooops - I knew that. I was responding to another post in my head at the same time. Yeah, that's it. Or I'd just seen a post from Yanko elsewhere. (Really, I do know you're David!) |
You're suppose to ignore my posts per the rules. Oh and I'm Robert now.
R. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:20:36 AM · #291 |
For consideration, Don's voting pattern on Pointandshoot from the beginning of 2009 to present:
This sort of consistency is practically unheard of on entries that vary so widely in placement. Such a narrow, high range is historically indicative of voting on the photographer rather than the images. For comparison, here's Melethia's votes (with permission) on the same group. Melethia doesn't give out as many 10's, but notice how the votes vary considerably from challenge to challenge. While Don's pattern could be attributed to an appreciation of this particular style, it seems unlikely when the votes stand out as aberrant both among his own favorites and among others voting on pointandshoot who might share a similar appreciation. So what were we supposed to think?
Message edited by author 2010-04-01 01:22:33. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:28:24 AM · #292 |
An aside: Note that I don't give out many 10s at all - not sure why, but I don't. So my top three usually get 9s, top 15 or so get 8s - that may help distinguish a bit more of my personal voting style. I also tend to vote based on the overall quality of a challenge as I see it - high quality challenges (my personal opinion, of course) get more 8s and 9s, for instance. And smaller challenges (or those I'm not as fond of) get fewer.
Also, from my statistics, I've given Steve an average of 6.85 over 95 challenges. I've also given  RKT an average of 6.95 over 108 challenges, and have given Nixter a whopping average of 7.83 over 42 challenges.
Message edited by author 2010-04-01 01:33:04. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:34:17 AM · #293 |
I just looked at my "pattern" and noticed I have only voted on my wife's entries 15 times out of her 37 entries. Only five of those in the last 6 months and none of those over a 8. The last two tens I gave her were in October and in one challenge there was 11 given and the other only 2. Where does this constitute a suspension for both of us? FYI her ticket for removal of her profile is in...maybe you could answer that one faster than you're answering our inquiry that we sent out 12 hours ago...
edit...my wife has voted on my entries 17 times out of my 112 entries, average vote of 7.47.
Message edited by author 2010-04-01 01:40:43. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:42:18 AM · #294 |
Whiskey
Tango
Foxtrot
I remember when this site was the shit ...
:-(
|
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:43:33 AM · #295 |
| Heida -> 9.25 average. Only 4 challenges though. I guess I should thank Heida for not entering in more challenges I voted on. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 01:43:43 AM · #296 |
lets do some math here...
Suppose we have a challenge where 200 people will vote...
Suppose that the 199 people will give to 1 specific shot an average of 6 out of 10
Suppose that 1 guy will give this vote a 10 instead of lets say 6
How this could change the average of this shot? huh?
((6*199)+10)/200=6.02 not a critical change in my opinion.
Somebody would need 10 buddies to get a 0.1 average change in the examble... Dont get crazy people...
Hope you get my point cause my English are not perfect I am afraid.
|
|
|
|
04/01/2010 02:06:18 AM · #297 |
| Site Council has my full support for the hard work and honest effort they put into all of this. It's a thankless job, and I admire each and every one of them for it. Thank you. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 02:10:56 AM · #298 |
Originally posted by grgkopanas:
lets do some math here...
Suppose we have a challenge where 200 people will vote...
Suppose that the 199 people will give to 1 specific shot an average of 6 out of 10
Suppose that 1 guy will give this vote a 10 instead of lets say 6
How this could change the average of this shot? huh?
((6*199)+10)/200=6.02 not a critical change in my opinion.
Somebody would need 10 buddies to get a 0.1 average change in the examble... Dont get crazy people...
Hope you get my point cause my English are not perfect I am afraid. |
The impact could be bigger than you think. I see for instance some blue ribbon winners with average score of 7+ that have as many as 10% of the votes at 1-3. I also see a similar patten with low scoring shots (3-4.5) that get up to 10% of scores above 7. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 02:12:08 AM · #299 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by skewsme:
You know darn well he hasn't cast any votes for my images since the last friend-voting witch hunt. Evidently husbands and wives aren't allowed to share an aesthetic either. |
Sure he has: 14 times, to be exact, but they didn't show any suspicious trends. However, before that last roundup you received 36 votes of 7+ in a row, hence the high statistical rating. Lots of people share an appreciation for the same style, but it's exceedingly rare to all be consistently high (nobody's perfect). Interesting that he apparently hasn't shared the same aesthetic since then... |
...for the same reason that he didn't vote pointandshoot's images that LOOKED like pointandshoot's usual entries 10s. You accused him of voting his wife's entries too high, so he forced himself to vote them lower; then, he tried hard not to vote pointandshoot's entries high by voting ones that he thought may have been pointandshoot's lower.
Don't you see, you're telling people not to let knowing someone's entry impact their votes... and to protect themselves, users are voting entries that MAY be their friends' entries down? When you threaten to let the hounds loose to protect users, that's what happens... you hurt the very users you were protecting trying to protect.
Damn, that's very incoherent. I hope you understand it, cause I sure as hell don't.
Message edited by author 2010-04-01 02:29:20. |
|
|
|
04/01/2010 02:17:58 AM · #300 |
Holeee Sh*t!
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
This thread has spanned 10 pages already and not one comment from Art!!!! Am I the only one that finds this unusual? |
So the first day in awhile that I decide to stay away and get some work done. I was going to check in this evening and then go back to work - so much for that. Popcorn? I went through 3 family size buckets! It was all I could do to refrain from impulsively respond before I finished reading.
On one hand, I am hugely dismayed at this whole fiasco. On the other hand, I see an overwhelming amount of material to have fun with here. For now, all I can do is utter some thoughts (in no particular order because that's how my thoughts are).....
- Why??
- Hey Waz, wassssup??!
- I am not now, nor was I ever a member of the posthumous party
- posthumous and  skewsme are married?? Seriously, I had no idea.
- I might quit this place but I kind of feel like it's a game of "Last Man Standing" and I have a good chance of winning.
- I wish I still worked for the DPC Enquirer!
- trying to remember what the road to hell is paved with...
- wondering if this thread shouldn't have been titled "There will be blood"
- I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue
I have to get myself another beer or three. I'll be back later. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/10/2025 09:35:03 PM EDT.
