 Posted 1/6/2008 5:00:49 PM
|
|
|
|
| OK ... I've read the info over more than once. How is it that you can have a weight value that is 60% of awards won ? My vote ratio is now displayed in orange (bad ;>( but I'm not "allowed" to vote any more. How does voting effect weight ? I understand how weighted voting effects scores, but can't figure out how weighting is determined .... DUH ;>
|
|
|
Posted 1/6/2008 6:07:28 PM
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I am going to let the numbers people chime in here with more info. Here's what I can tell you...
Say I have been winning awards and I have a potential weight of 146. I was at 143. In order to earn these points to reach my potential weight I have to vote. For ever 75 votes I get one of the points. So, in order to reach my full potential I had to make 225 votes.
You get 1 weight point for daily category awards and 2 weight points for a daily signature award. Other than that (since I haven't won one...) I don't know! 
I am pretty sure it is on the information page somewhere if you have a wee lookie!!!
Susan
________________________________________
Find pleasure in the simple things!
Susan's Top 24
Susan's Profile
|
|
|
Posted 1/6/2008 8:23:38 PM
|
|
|
|
Lyn, your vote ratio is the number of votes you have received against the number of votes you have given. Your weight is defined by the value of the awards that you have won and to achieve that weight you must vote on 75 images to achieve each point towards your weight. If your eligible weight is 100, you need to make 7500 votes to achieve your full weight. Hope that helps. Some of the members here have very high eligible weights but are no where near having the votes to attain the weight. It's a bit daunting.
RoBMy Top Images My Profile
|
|
|
Posted 1/6/2008 9:14:30 PM
|
|
|
|
| Thanks Rob ... yes, it's rather frustrating when you are unable to advance due to no fault of your own ;>( Can't really say I like it much, suspect nobody does. There must be some solution ! (?)
|
|
|
Posted 1/6/2008 11:38:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Do you vote in the ALL category?
You should have images to vote on there, surely?
I could be wrong though! 
Susan
________________________________________
Find pleasure in the simple things!
Susan's Top 24
Susan's Profile
|
|
|
Posted 1/7/2008 5:53:20 AM
|
|
|
|
ScottyZoozie (1/6/2008)
You should have images to vote on there, surely?
. 4500+ images in about a month of voting would likely cover the field. Last figure I remember seeing is that there were ~2500 images in the active voting pool. . glottz - you can help to keep your voting ratio up by being a little more aggressive in archiving your images. I checked and a number of your posts are collecting votes beyond those required for awards based on their ratings. Archiving these images sooner will stop them from receiving unneeded votes and assist you in keeping a positive voting ratio.
_________________________
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 1/7/2008 1:55:25 PM
|
|
|
|
| Funny Scotty, I was just thinking that. I'm still getting used to the site and am realizing it's as much about numbers as photography, but that's OK, I like both ;> I'd like to hear members' reasoning as to when archiving is best. It seems safe to assume that if a photo doesn't have over 8 points after 15 votes in reg & sig that it probably will not win past category anyway. If it's a high 7, maybe go to 30 votes ? Shots running under 7, I usually just delete. If a "heavy-weight" lowballs something right off the bat, it's unlikely to be salvaged regardless of what others score it ... so delete it !! Are these reasonably safe assumptions ? It's a pretty interesting game ! Thanks for your help & suggestions.
|
|
|
Posted 1/8/2008 6:27:45 AM
|
|
|
|
glottz (1/7/2008)
Funny Scotty, I was just thinking that. I'm still getting used to the site and am realizing it's as much about numbers as photography, but that's OK, I like both ;> That speaks volumes. The more I read the forum, the more convinced I become that weight should be based on results not voting. The impression that glottz has gotten is not far off the mark when he/she said It's a pretty interesting game ! It makes me wonder if the site has a clear identity. Is this a game to be played like chess with photographic skill being only a moderate player in the outcome, a place to get valuable feedback and learn, or a contest of photographic skill? The answer to the question is irrelevent as it is what it is but it can't be all three. I can understand the confusion, in the past year and a half it's still not clear to me. The more I read the forum, the more convinced I become that weight should be based on results not voting. The requirement to vote on 75 images per point was the carrot and the ratios was the stick, do we really need both?
|
|
|
Posted 1/8/2008 7:05:02 AM
|
|
|
| | |
