| Author |
Message |
Oscar_
Moderator
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 20:42
Reply
Who want a NON ANONYMOUS rating system ? Leave your message here !
|
devish
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 20:57
Reply
Hi, This is a tough one: in theory it is wonderful, because it would stop downrating, my concern is that people will stop leaving constructive comments espetially to members that they don't know because they will be afraid of getting bad ratings from them. It is a difficult decision. I'd say that I am in favor, but I don't know if it's good effects would be more that it's bad ones.
In conclusion, I still have to think about it, I will awnser soon!
|
|
Oscar_
Moderator
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 21:10
Reply
Devish, could be, but we have to act as grown ups.
In other photosites this system works perfectly.
|
Ruud~
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 21:12
Reply
Anonymous rating does more harm than good. It has cost us too much already.
|
Aline
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 21:34
Reply
Oscar_
This was exactly the wish of John. He militated a long time for this, with good arguments.
I militated for something else. A rating system where the average value was calculated with the total amount of rates, and not with the average. By this way, each rate, even with a "1", would be encouragement, with or without (constructive) comment.
Aline
|
Christian C
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 21:37
Reply
Non anonymous rating could be a solution, but also could discourage the rating, and unfair people could create several accounts and still rate "anonymously" under different identities. This is the same problem than the cheater who create a new account after his previous one has been deleted.
Another solution could be to have only the choice of rating 3, 4 or 5, as most of the members don't use the rating 1 and 2.
|
|
Oscar_
Moderator
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 21:48
Reply
@Aline, I know, John has talked a lot about that with me. But I know this wasn't the only reason.
@Christian, I know people can use fake accounts, but in that case you know who did and you can use the abuse button.
|
|
Ruud~
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:00
Reply
Oscar is right. Fake accounts would have a much shorter life expectancy in a non-anonymous system, especially if they were set up for the purpose of down rating.
|
www.imagografie.ch
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:02
Reply
well, in the other fotowebside i am member, there are only comments. no ratings at all.
i'm not really for a non anonymous rating system. i for a NO rating system!
does anyone ever read all forum post? the most discust thing is rating. i think it is better to not rate at all. that earases a lot of stupid problems...
bunny
|
|
Oscar_
Moderator
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:10
Reply
@Bunny, that is also good with me. No rating at all. Just comments, but good comments. But for that we need a upload limit. I don't have the time to see all pics and I miss a lot of nice ones.
|
|
Christian C
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:11 - Edited by: Christian C
Reply
@Oscar: yes I can use the abuse button for fake accounts, but it needs a long time to have these accounts deleted. For example the account globetravel is still on woophy.
And immediately after deletion a new fake account can be created.
|
Nivad
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:17
Reply
I am strongly against if I may say so...
One reason is as christian already stated, people can use fake accounts. And you don't know who rated you just know an "alter ego" of who rated your pic without knowing who it really was. Woophy staff could take care of it by assembling a moderator team wich has to check how many accounts one ip-adress has... But is it worth so much effort? Besides what about family members wich are of course using the same computer and internet connection?
Another reason is that it would endanger democracy. Nobody wants to criticize a picture knowing that the artist is standing ready with a shotgun in your back.
I mean non anonimous rating could have the opposite effect... people who honestly and integerly give low rates could be given insults and undeserved critics simply because an artist thinks his works are worth much more. And only because the rater was being sincere.
@christian what use has a rating if the lower rates would be excluded? Besides wouldn't that have the effect that people already would feel offended when given a 3, the new lowest possible rate?
And about downrating... couldn't it be it is making good for uprating? Certainly also an existing abuse wich no one does complain about.
And there is also compensating rating... I'll explain:
At the moment one looks at a picture wich already has an average rate of 3. But the current viewer thinks it is actually worth a 4 so he gives a 5 OR he thinks its only worth a 2 so gives it a 1. In this case one does not give a picture a rate wich he thinks it deserve one is trying to alter the average towards the rating he thinks it deserves and gives a false image of the real average.
Therefor I would say hide the rating as long as one hasn't rated the picture himself.
After all I do not think there is a major problem with the rating system, it is more likely that it is our own pride wich is standing in our way...
Grtz
|
A.Miguel Oliveira
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:41
Reply
I agree with Oscar when he realizes that a rating system is needed, at least as an orientation to look for pics that other way we shouldn't have time to look for (this because an upload limit it's not the best way, imho). So, the question is to have the name of the voting member like when commenting (better than require a simultaneous action, as many people is lazier or has difficulties in the english language and would stop commenting/voting), in a larger rectangle, OR, as Aline proposes, a different way of measuring the votes, in which a 3 or 4 should be diluted in a certain number of 5's (i.e., each group of six 5's could break a 3 or 4) already done to that particular pic. This just a possibility, but maybe Ruud (mathematician... ;) ) could think of a different "model" to count votes with different weights to the "average". From these ideas I express, the easiest and quicker, I think, it's the one requiring the member's name when voting, even if without comment.
Anyway, there are great, great members at Woophy, as photographers, person, and friends!
It must go on! Thanks to all of those!
|
Martin de Rijk
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:44
Reply
Just an idea, the picture of the month topic is succesfull. Why not add some more competitions monthly, like portraits, nature, architecture, macro, divers etc. and skip the ratings. We could even honour the most commented picture.
|
|
Ruud~
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:45 - Edited by: Ruud~
Reply
Nivad,
Fake accounts can be made with or without anonymous rating.
I would really prefer an honest open faced rating from any member over an anonymous one. With anonymous low ratings I have no clue if the intentions of the rater are honest or not.
I'm convinced that the rate inflation from which the system suffers came into being because of the down rating.
Compensation rating certainly occurs. People have the power to drag an average any way they want. Especially if they are allowed to do so anonymously.
Anonymous rating is not helpful
|
|
A.Miguel Oliveira
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 22:50
Reply
Right, Ruud!
And think of that "model" ,or the other way I thought about!
|
Richt
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 23:01
Reply
I, I want a non anonymus rating system!. I will learn and learn and thats only possible with a comment and not with a anonymus 1, 2 or 3
|
|
Ruud~
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 23:15 - Edited by: Ruud~
Reply
Miguel,
Many alternatives to the rating system have been proposed. The nice thing about the non-anonymous plan is that it would be very easy to implement. One thing I would like to see extra is a small histogram that shows how the ratings are spread.
Martin,
The contest can't replace the rating system. Thousands of pictures are posted every month!
|
Nathan Servi
Member
|
# Posted: 23 Oct 07 23:44
Reply
Dear all,
I was thinking that another way of controlling this could perhaps be a more interesting one; Would it be possible to create a system where all votes and comments are recorded onto one's account. So that rather than limiting voting/comment or uploaded pictures, there would be a recorded chart with all the votes and comments left to other members.
This could allow for the webmasters to see exactly who writes what comments, and what votes are given, and it would also force the members in being careful whilst voting (or downrating) because it would be obvious who did what. (this would reduce vicious downraters with ficticious profiles and allow cancellation of the account and nullification of bad rating/comment)
Could work a bit like ebay's rating system where each feedback is signed, and motivated - only more simply with the name of the member attached to votes as well as comments.
What do you think about this? I do think it would be less invasive than mandatory comment or ulpload limit.
Hope somebody will take some measures on these regards, perhaps in the upcoming new version of woophy - still, we will always experience the imperfections of a democratic society and unfortunatly we will always have somebody that is here only to ruin the game.
Hugs to all,
Nathan
|
|
Martin de Rijk
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Oct 07 07:26
Reply
I don't think suggestions from our part to change the system will have effect, since the 2.0 version is comming soon (at least, this is what Marco stated). We can only hope that some of our ideas have been taken in account.
So I call upon Joris to inform us about the new version to, hopefully, end some of these discussions.
|
Online now: Guests - 2 Members - 3