I think it is misleading to have the "Highest Ranked" photo list show your highest scores, rather than your highest places. The scores are really meaningless, if the average score for a challenge was a 4, but you got a 5, your percentage ranking would be much higher than if you recieved a 5 in a challenge with an average of 6.
Is there a reason the photos are not listed by highest percentage rather than highest score?
My guess is that when they originally wrote the code, there wasn't that much of a difference. : )
There's a lot of suggestions in line for when they are done with the Prints site update and can take up DPC revisions; this will be added if it's not already there : )
I think it is misleading to have the "Highest Ranked" photo list show your highest scores, rather than your highest places. The scores are really meaningless, ...
Highest places are also meaningless. What about a challenge of 300 submissions compared to one of 25 submissions?
Percentile is perhaps the most accurate measure, although that's a reasonably new addition. I suspect score is just because in an older less pedantic site it was considered a reasonable measure, and as GeneralE said: it's all legacy.
Percentile is the way that I would judge whether I'm happy with my results or not...I agree that this should be the way that the 'highest ranked' are ordered.
Good idea. So the three options are really: score, places, and percentile.
I think it should be made an option that each user can choose for themselves. For instance, many people's ribbon-winning photos are pushed off the top 5 by a non-ribbon-winning but higher-absolute-score challenge entry. Sometimes I think the ribbon winners just have special significance.
Also, is there a way to view all of a user's challenge entries in a thumbnail listing? Some users have entered hundreds of challenges and it would take me a long time to actually load each challenge entry page just to see what it looked like (dialup connections suck).
