 Posted 1/18/2008 11:40:30 AM
|
|
|
|
Tonka (1/18/2008)
Careful though, the author and voter might not be the same..I do not think it is in my case....
And the voter in my case has no piccies up.
Just my opinion, but, maybe unless you have photos up, you shouldn't be allowed into the voting process.
|
|
|
Posted 1/18/2008 12:17:39 PM
|
|
|
|
LAC (1/18/2008)
Tonka (1/18/2008)
Careful though, the author and voter might not be the same..I do not think it is in my case....
And the voter in my case has no piccies up.
Just my opinion, but, maybe unless you have photos up, you shouldn't be allowed into the voting process. That certainly makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Posted 1/18/2008 12:46:26 PM
|
|
|
|
| I feel that everyone's votes should be welcome. You should not have to have photos posted in order to join or vote. In fact, I think it would be beneficial to encourage more non-photographers to participate. The more varied the public opinions the better. . Besides, the weight system accounts for any outlier votes cast by non entry accounts. Without images, the most weight any voter could achieve would be a 2. That 2 weighted vote would have NO impact on Signature ratings and minimal impact on standard ratings. . Even a 2 weighted vote cast at a THREE would only effect an image otherwise averaging in the 7's about 5/100's (.05) of a point at 15 votes. After 15 votes, this THREE vote would be unlikely to be counted at all based on the current low outlier validation process. . I don't need to be able to play the guitar to appreciate Eric Calpton's skills, the same applies with photography. WE
_________________________
Profile - Top 24 - All Images Nikon D70 - Nikon N90 - Nikonus III - Nikkor 20mm - Nikkor 50mm - Nikkor 24-120mm - Nikkor 28-70mm - Nikkor 85mm - Nikkor 70-300mm - Sigma 400mm
|
|
|
Posted 1/18/2008 1:11:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/18/2008 1:23:42 PM
|
|
|
|
Tonka (1/18/2008)
The removal of, possibly a lot of, weight could certainly shift a lot of perspective here.
Though actual weight might be posted, it will not be counted. just a reminder... . That really will have no impact on low weighted votes. The only place that rolling weight will have any effect is with Signature ratings where newer members or lower weighted participants do not vote. . Tonka (1/18/2008)
there is quite a difference between getting a 3 as I did with the comment, another macro, big deal...and a 2 which I just received from another voter who's comment was "lacking interest" to a voter who gives me a 2 and says "there are many flaws here, oof, underexposed or technically inferior.. one can certainly be a voting/commenting jerk regardless of whether they post images in the contest or not. (maybe it is just that one can not retaliate against those with no images!!!) WE
_________________________
Profile - Top 24 - All Images Nikon D70 - Nikon N90 - Nikonus III - Nikkor 20mm - Nikkor 50mm - Nikkor 24-120mm - Nikkor 28-70mm - Nikkor 85mm - Nikkor 70-300mm - Sigma 400mm
|
|
|
Posted 1/18/2008 1:33:55 PM
|
|
|
|
chop chop and snip....
.
one can certainly be a voting/commenting jerk regardless of whether they post images in the contest or not. (maybe it isjust that one can not retaliate against those with no images!!!) WE
Wow , that is a negative thought  , didnt even occur to me....
I didnt mean that it was that exclusive..just that it seems there might just be an ill intent to vote irresponsibly "especially so " if someone did not have images up..just an implication not a fact, or highly probable or anything at all,,,just an observation.
My rolling weight observations are that it is totally possible for the highest weighted member to become the lowest weighted member all of a sudden. it can happen..just depends on the upload/win pattern of each member..albeit extremely technical, maybe not even probable .... but true.
I may not always be wRIGHTbut I am never wrong Profile -  Top 24 - 
|
|
|
Posted 1/18/2008 5:29:05 PM
|
|
|
|
This happens to be a site dedicated to people with a shared interest and most often deeply abiding passion for photography. We come to showcase our work and appreciate/evaluate the work of others. So when a member with no portfolio starts to vote erratically and illogically - alarm bells should start to ring. Personally I do not relish or indeed want any random members of the public voting on my images. For all I know they may not own so much as a point and shoot - and therefore their "opinions" carry no weight whatsoever. The inclusion of non-photographers in the voting process is like giving a poker virgin a hand in a big game. Pointless and dangerous.
http://www.dailyawards.com/myprofile.aspx?CID=2488
|
|
|
Posted 1/19/2008 12:00:37 AM
|
|
|
|
| I agree with Linda and Glynn on the point regarding voting with no images posted. Yes, we were all new to the site once and have to start somewhere and we all have different tastes and may admire different aspects of photography but someone who actually posts their work shows by doing so some seriousness and commitment to the subject. I feel that voting carries a certain amount of responsibility and at the moment anyone can sign up and "vote away".
|
|
|
Posted 2/3/2008 6:17:30 AM
|
|
|
| | |
