I've not been asked to validate my submissions often but for me the validation process is a scary time and you can wait days for SC to make their decision (I think my record was 16 days). I'd like to see the SC sign up to an SLA and give feedback as to where they are in the validation process every 24 hours.
I fully understand that the SC are a voluntary group but many of us are paying members and as such I think SLA's would be a good thing, maybe even have a SC member (in the same time zone) assigned as your contact during the validation process?
Yeah... Validation Time is always a problem for me...
Even if I know that I've followed the rules set, still I hold my breath until The Email comes.
It's like... even though I know I have more than enough money in the bank to cover the grocery bill at checkout, still I hold my breath at the debit card reader until it says, "Approved". *sigh*
Maybe there is a longer time for validation in one case vs another due to complexities of the image or the panel trying to make interpretations of the rules. I had my first ever validation request just this week. I was a bit annoyed but also worried about the outcome. I received my answer in 24 hrs. So I think there are many factors that go into the validation process. No doubt the longer the wait, the more difficult it is for the owner of the image in question. BTW what is an SLA?
Service Level Agreement. And what I'm saying is yes, some validations will take longer than others but the submitter should really be updated at least every 24 hours. I have an image currently in validation, its a basic challenge and my (rough) editing steps where posted with the submission so can't understand why it takes more than a day to validate or not. An SLA will (imho) help the submitter relax a little as they would get daily feedback as to where they are in the validation process.
I expect if it takes a long time, where they are is debating back and forth with each other. I've had one validation. I uploaded in the evening and got the validation back by lunchtime the next day. I think mine was pretty cut and dried, however. All I had to do was prove I didn't violate editing rules. I don't thing they had to interpret the rules.
I fully understand that the SC are a voluntary group but many of us are paying members and as such I think SLA's would be a good thing, maybe even have a SC member (in the same time zone) assigned as your contact during the validation process?
Don't hold your breath over that one. They are mainly in the USA area...I think one is in England. If you are in these time zones...you are in luck...the rest of us...well we obviously aren't good enough to warrant someone in our timezone!!!
I fully understand that the SC are a voluntary group but many of us are paying members and as such I think SLA's would be a good thing, maybe even have a SC member (in the same time zone) assigned as your contact during the validation process?
Don't hold your breath over that one. They are mainly in the USA area...I think one is in England. If you are in these time zones...you are in luck...the rest of us...well we obviously aren't good enough to warrant someone in our timezone!!!
Oh yeah ...
Besides, what do you expect us to do -- report on what other SC members are saying about your (disputed) photo? If a rule has been pretty clearly violated (or obviously not) then a decision will be posted pretty quickly. (My last DQ was posted so quickly they didn't even ask for an original -- some "special treatment", eh?)
If you pushed the limits of the rules to create an effect that some of us think legal and some not, or which we can't readily replicate from your editing notes -- the decision will (have to) take longer ... it seems to me that, in most situations, length of deliberations and fairness (and legitimacy) of results are directly proportional.
I fully understand that the SC are a voluntary group but many of us are paying members and as such I think SLA's would be a good thing, maybe even have a SC member (in the same time zone) assigned as your contact during the validation process?
Don't hold your breath over that one. They are mainly in the USA area...I think one is in England. If you are in these time zones...you are in luck...the rest of us...well we obviously aren't good enough to warrant someone in our timezone!!!
Oh yeah ...
Besides, what do you expect us to do -- report on what other SC members are saying about your (disputed) photo? If a rule has been pretty clearly violated (or obviously not) then a decision will be posted pretty quickly. (My last DQ was posted so quickly they didn't even ask for an original -- some "special treatment", eh?)
If you pushed the limits of the rules to create an effect that some of us think legal and some not, or which we can't readily replicate from your editing notes -- the decision will (have to) take longer ... it seems to me that, in most situations, length of deliberations and fairness (and legitimacy) of results are directly proportional.
Um...I am not sure if you were referring to my post or the previous post....but I was only speaking about more SC's to cover more time zones. If that makes sense LOL!
HA! In your dreams. The only reason the Kiwis come over to the mainland (Australia) is because they heard the Stock Route was an annual event!!!!!!! MUUUWWAAHHH!!!
Maybe I wasn't clear in my op. It is quite obvious that the longer it takes to validate (or dq) an image the less cut and dried the decision will be. Apart from the initial request SC have never contacted me for further information on for any dq requests. For many this is a paying site and we are bound by rules, I was just suggesting there should be an SLA where feedback is given to the submitter on a regular basis. imho if SC are discussing a specific part of an image they should involve the photographer rather than assume 'he/she' must have done it this way. Or, am I the only person that doesn't write down/record and send in every single step in the editing process?
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
I fully understand that the SC are a voluntary group but many of us are paying members and as such I think SLA's would be a good thing, maybe even have a SC member (in the same time zone) assigned as your contact during the validation process?
Don't hold your breath over that one. They are mainly in the USA area...I think one is in England. If you are in these time zones...you are in luck...the rest of us...well we obviously aren't good enough to warrant someone in our timezone!!!
Oh yeah ...
Besides, what do you expect us to do -- report on what other SC members are saying about your (disputed) photo? If a rule has been pretty clearly violated (or obviously not) then a decision will be posted pretty quickly. (My last DQ was posted so quickly they didn't even ask for an original -- some "special treatment", eh?)
If you pushed the limits of the rules to create an effect that some of us think legal and some not, or which we can't readily replicate from your editing notes -- the decision will (have to) take longer ... it seems to me that, in most situations, length of deliberations and fairness (and legitimacy) of results are directly proportional.
Maybe I wasn't clear in my op. It is quite obvious that the longer it takes to validate (or dq) an image the less cut and dried the decision will be. Apart from the initial request SC have never contacted me for further information on for any dq requests. For many this is a paying site and we are bound by rules, I was just suggesting there should be an SLA where feedback is given to the submitter on a regular basis. imho if SC are discussing a specific part of an image they should involve the photographer rather than assume 'he/she' must have done it this way. Or, am I the only person that doesn't write down/record and send in every single step in the editing process?
Here's my take on it.....
First, SC is all volunteer, which means they have families & lives. It's not going to take any less effort to take time out of their day to send you a note to say "Nothin' Happenin'", than it is to continue to review the image.
That's not a reasonable burden to place on them.
Also, I'm not sure what difference it makes between a paying member versus a registered user for rules.....AFAIK, same, same on rules.
Why all of a sudden the demands for a set time frame on DQs and reviews?
It's hard enough to come up with people who are willing to squander their time for a job with no pay and to be realistic, very little in the way of appreciation for the amount of work done.
Continually griping about the processes will certainly not make it any easier to obtain these folks.
Just out of curiosity, what is the reasoning for this time limit restriction?
ETA: It is definitely my understanding that the *LAST* thing SC is going to do is to assume how something was done.....they WILL ask.
It's hard enough to come up with people who are willing to squander their time for a job with no pay and to be realistic, very little in the way of appreciation for the amount of work done.
I doubt it, stick out a request for new SC members and I daresay they will get a load of replies. It needs a refresh anyway so not a bad idea.
It's hard enough to come up with people who are willing to squander their time for a job with no pay and to be realistic, very little in the way of appreciation for the amount of work done.
Originally posted by Simms:
I doubt it, stick out a request for new SC members and I daresay they will get a load of replies.
True.....and how many of those people would genuinely be qualified and reasonable enough to not be a loose cannon?
There are so many scary things in real life (job security, taxes, financial obligations, disease, divorce, bad breath, athletes foot, running out of cold beer) that a virtual DQ taking away a virtual ribbon seems trivial in comparison. And I would think that an email which arrives every 24 hours saying that the SC is still suspicious of the validity of ones entry will actually increase one's stress level rather than decrease it. So I favor letting the SC concentrate on the job at hand because if they have to spend half their time sending updates then the validation process will end up taking twice as long.
But having a Bear on the SC might be a good thing.
It's hard enough to come up with people who are willing to squander their time for a job with no pay and to be realistic, very little in the way of appreciation for the amount of work done.
Originally posted by Simms:
I doubt it, stick out a request for new SC members and I daresay they will get a load of replies.
True.....and how many of those people would genuinely be qualified and reasonable enough to not be a loose cannon?
I'm pretty sure that there were plenty of level headed and willing people turned away that applied for the SC positions available the last time volunteers to fill them were requested.
There are so many scary things in real life (job security, taxes, financial obligations, disease, divorce, bad breath, athletes foot, running out of cold beer) that a virtual DQ taking away a virtual ribbon seems trivial in comparison. And I would think that an email which arrives every 24 hours saying that the SC is still suspicious of the validity of ones entry will actually increase one's stress level rather than decrease it. So I favor letting the SC concentrate on the job at hand because if they have to spend half their time sending updates then the validation process will end up taking twice as long.
But having a Bear on the SC might be a good thing.
You say they would spend half their time giving updates? methinks your jesting, unless of course the validation process only takes 1 minute a day. I was making a suggestion that I still think is perfectly valid and would make the validation process a little slicker and informative. There is a page where you upload your orig too, surely that can be updated with a one line update on a regular basis? And, I did look but didn't see anywhere that fully explained the validation process.
btw, my image has now been validated - thanks SC :)
