Overall I'm happy with my score. However, I'm baffled that 10 people gave me a 2. I'd like to hear why. Are your monitors dark???
Even ribbon winning shots with tons of favorites get low votes of 1, 2 and 3. What makes a good photo is entirely subjective, and some people either vote really hard, or try to vote low on shots they think are good. Either way, focus on the good scores and on how you can improve.
Oh and I like that shot. The ripples in the water are very nice.
Overall I'm happy with my score. However, I'm baffled that 10 people gave me a 2. I'd like to hear why. Are your monitors dark???
Even ribbon winning shots with tons of favorites get low votes of 1, 2 and 3. What makes a good photo is entirely subjective, and some people either vote really hard, or try to vote low on shots they think are good. Either way, focus on the good scores and on how you can improve.
Oh and I like that shot. The ripples in the water are very nice.
Thanks - I never thought about voting low on shots you think are good so that you might do better... sneaky!
I'm thrilled to finish 4th in the challenge, my best finish yet. But am I the only one who noticed that 3rd place mentioned he spot edited? It makes me wonder if I had burned my hot spots if I would have finished even higher.
I'm thrilled to finish 4th in the challenge, my best finish yet. But am I the only one who noticed that 3rd place mentioned he spot edited? It makes me wonder if I had burned my hot spots if I would have finished even higher.
Personally, I don't get why 70 people thought that image was a 4 or lower. It's not too dark on my end so I'm guessing because the bridge isn't straight?
Personally, I don't get why 70 people thought that image was a 4 or lower. It's not too dark on my end so I'm guessing because the bridge isn't straight?
Yeah, its about .3 degrees off. I would change it if I could. I think straightness is a silly criteria, but I ranted about this in another forum...
I'm thrilled to finish 4th in the challenge, my best finish yet. But am I the only one who noticed that 3rd place mentioned he spot edited? It makes me wonder if I had burned my hot spots if I would have finished even higher.
Wow - have you reported this?? Can't be valid.
Who would think you'd need to report it when the photographer mentions it in his notes? Anyway, he/she definitely mentioned editing out a dust spot.
I'm thrilled to finish 4th in the challenge, my best finish yet. But am I the only one who noticed that 3rd place mentioned he spot edited? It makes me wonder if I had burned my hot spots if I would have finished even higher.
Wow - have you reported this?? Can't be valid.
Who would think you'd need to report it when the photographer mentions it in his notes? Anyway, he/she definitely mentioned editing out a dust spot.
I'm sure the admins don't have time to read every description.
I'm thrilled to finish 4th in the challenge, my best finish yet. But am I the only one who noticed that 3rd place mentioned he spot edited? It makes me wonder if I had burned my hot spots if I would have finished even higher.
Wow - have you reported this?? Can't be valid.
Who would think you'd need to report it when the photographer mentions it in his notes? Anyway, he/she definitely mentioned editing out a dust spot.
I'm sure the admins don't have time to read every description.
True, although the top five shots will be reviewed for validation.
I was gonna say something but I think I will just go to bed before I say something I will get banned for. It has nothing to do with my score either. It got what it got.
Overall I'm happy with my score. However, I'm baffled that 10 people gave me a 2. I'd like to hear why. Are your monitors dark???
Even ribbon winning shots with tons of favorites get low votes of 1, 2 and 3. What makes a good photo is entirely subjective, and some people either vote really hard, or try to vote low on shots they think are good. Either way, focus on the good scores and on how you can improve.
Oh and I like that shot. The ripples in the water are very nice.
Thanks - I never thought about voting low on shots you think are good so that you might do better... sneaky!
We can prevent this kind of sneaky people from doing things like that, just suggest a rules modification - Any one who submitted to a specific challenge can not cast any vote on that challenge, but have to cast votes on another challenge to build your power. Voter's accuracy should be considered as one of the factor for building his/her power. For example, if you vote a very low score for a picture and that one become a ribbon, your power should be decreased.
What do you think? Is this a good method to make the challenges more fair?
Voter's accuracy should be considered as one of the factor for building his/her power. For example, if you vote a very low score for a picture and that one become a ribbon, your power should be decreased.
What do you think? Is this a good method to make the challenges more fair?
Power? What power? A vote is a vote. Good for one vote. Unless you don't vote 20% of the challenge, or you vote some weird pattern, then your votes is no vote. Why would someone have more power than someone else?
As to the original question...I've only entered 30 challenges over the last two years, but I gave up on trying to figure out why people vote the way they do a long time ago. Just take photos that you like and smile.
We can prevent this kind of sneaky people from doing things like that, just suggest a rules modification - Any one who submitted to a specific challenge can not cast any vote on that challenge, but have to cast votes on another challenge to build your power. Voter's accuracy should be considered as one of the factor for building his/her power. For example, if you vote a very low score for a picture and that one become a ribbon, your power should be decreased.
What do you think? Is this a good method to make the challenges more fair?
This has been suggested a few times here. I'm against it because I don't think that popular vote necessarily means "right" vote. That system essentially penalizes anyone who doesn't think in the mainstream way, regardless whether or not they have good intentions.
We can prevent this kind of sneaky people from doing things like that, just suggest a rules modification - Any one who submitted to a specific challenge can not cast any vote on that challenge, but have to cast votes on another challenge to build your power. Voter's accuracy should be considered as one of the factor for building his/her power. For example, if you vote a very low score for a picture and that one become a ribbon, your power should be decreased.
What do you think? Is this a good method to make the challenges more fair?
What you call "power" some sites call "karma"; the further your voting pattern deviates from the norm, the worse your karma gets. High-karma votes carry more weight than low-karma votes. End result: everything converges to the level of the group's taste. As mk has pointed out, this is a bad thing.
Imagine the same principle being applied to political elections... The more often you vote for the losing candidate, the less weight your vote carries in future elections... In other words, "Don't bother voting unless you agree with us!"
Proposals like this essentially are advocating an insidious form of totalitarianism, be it in the political arena or in DPC.
