 Posted 2/13/2008 12:24:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/13/2008 12:27:32 PM
|
|
|
|
| I've found that I've gotten lower votes on a photo after winning an award. How strange is that?
|
|
|
Posted 2/13/2008 2:04:53 PM
|
|
|
|
Where were you 8 months ago Zzzonka? As for now, It's an ever changing world but I can loan you a lovely white jacket so that you get seen in the dark! :; LOL
With so many more new members/voters then everybody is going to benefit - by way of a more diverse opinion. Most of us will gain from a more realistic opinion of our photos.
Regarding the statement about "when an image is doing really well...." - I think most of us have experienced this - perhaps some voters have a look at the top 100 list to see how well an image is doing before deciding to follow the Devil or the Angel on their shoulders!
It's so very obviously happening and too often so for it to be coincidental - it's a loophole in the system that some/maybe many, seem to be abusing and I reckon it should be closed asap!
I've been thinking about the weight thing and how easy/hard it is to determine where you are at times and whether it is indeed possible to determine one's advancement under the current system.
As Zzzonka has stated it's very hard to guage where you're at...as times are a changing - so.....perhaps the easiest and most operationally and hopefully community acceptable solution would be:
* Choose a date and then "everyone" starts at zero weight. (Obviously, we'll miss out on some Signature awards until we have Signature members )
* Do the same on that date each and every year ..........level playing field that so many desire!! - loads of new members would sign up each year knowing we were all starting from the same level.
* Existing members would retain their "overall" weight, gained from when their membership began within their profile - their current weight could only be seen by them within their Account Page. (No-Tit for-Tats possible)
* Goal for each member is to beat their previous year's accumulation of awards.
Can anything possibly be fairer to all concerned?
* It's fair to existing members ....surely?
* It's certainly fair to newer members?
* It's fair to the technological demands and marketing aspirations of DA......at "this" stage in its development?
It's maybe even worth considering releasing total potential weight - and publishing it in the member's profile under such a situation. (Glynn - I'd talk nice to Eric to try and get your total weight re-instated! )
Anyway, this seems easy to put in place compared to some suggestions and I feel as though it "may" be more acceptable to the majority.
If you want the rainbow - you gotta put up with the rain.
A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel sooooo good! 
|
|
|
Posted 2/14/2008 3:08:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/14/2008 7:16:18 AM
|
|
|
|
I hope you still have your ears Glynn. 
|
|
|
Posted 2/14/2008 8:03:51 AM
|
|
|
|
wemor (2/13/2008)
I think way too many people place way too much emphasis on any single vote in the Daily Awardsphoto competition. I do find it ironic that for the most part the majority of voting complaints come from those with some of thehighest rating averages. But please...
Every vote and comment is valuable, if it comes from a known source. There may be a very good reason those of us with the highest ratings are speaking out on the fairness and objectivity of DA.
wemor (2/13/2008)
Big deal... Like it or not it happens - nothing you can do about.
I refuse to accept injustice and malicious behavior as a fact of life. If we are doomed to live with bad behavior, then there are many other options. It's a marketing decision for Eric. He may have already made this marketing decision!
wemor (2/13/2008)
Well no, I'm wrong - you can complain - or quit and go home - or try to seek out whowronged youso they may be burned at the forum stake. None of which addsto anyone's experience at Daily Awards. Learn to let it go...
I refuse to vote in retaliation. It's not in my DNA. It's also a very psychologically negative and destructive behavior to enter into a tit-for-tat pattern. I have a consistent voting scale. And, I refuse to change my scale to match the malicious votes. I can learn to let it go.... but, that means I will choose to not participate much. I prefer to hope that the die has not been cast and will strive for ongoing improvements and enhancements.
wemor (2/13/2008)
Even better, try the shoe on the other foot. Imagine just starting out with images gettingall fives and sixes. All of a sudden, a NINE appears. Someone liked my photograph.Maybe I am improving. ...
Of course then youare told thatthe NINE you thought so highly of was not really a NINE at all. It was just someone's attempt to balance their ratings. They live in bazarro world andvote the weaker images high so they want get coughtvoting the better images low. WHEW...
If you don't think some high weighted voters are voting upside down, you are being naive.
wemor (2/13/2008)
I enjoy looking at the voting statistics as much (more!) than the next guy but sometimes I think the site would be much better off if all that detail were not available for consumption.
Less statistics mean this site is undifferentiated from dozens of other sites. It's a change in mission and style for the site. The unique niche has been lost. That's okay, but it will mean a change in membership and energy. Different demographics will emerge, which may or may not be interesting to some of us.
 My Top 24
|
|
|
Posted 2/14/2008 9:28:25 AM
|
|
|
|
Nice to know you didn't evict yourself, Glynn!!! We can just say you went on a "diet" and lost some weight After all, summer is just around the corner... 
|
|
|
Posted 2/18/2008 9:35:08 AM
|
|
|
|
I'm also looking forward to some fresh work from you Glynn. I'm not a high weighted photographer and can never achieve that due to the 75 votes thing also but I can learn a lot from other superior photographers like yourself.
My Profile
|
|
|
|
