| Author |
Message |
tiswas
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 15:13 - Edited by: tiswas
Reply
|
|
tiswas
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 17:32
Reply
I see the down raters have been out in force today ...its obvious by some of the comments by individuals on a number of shots...so why can't the moderators do something, its no good saying that it stops the overaters , surely the right to data protection gives us the right to see what ratings people put on our shots as well as comments and that should include any numerical number that is given ...its become a joke...AGAIN
|
Marja C
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 17:38
Reply
I thought this ..... you said ..... I agree with you!
|
zerega
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 17:59 - Edited by: zerega
Reply
Just a reminder of the site's founder Joris' recent notes on a similar forum thread on open rating, down rating, etc.:
"1. The past has shown [to] us what non-anonymous voting will bring: a lot of insulted people, fighting and 99,99999% of all votes [are] five.
"2. I get occasional complaints about down rating. When I see real down rating I fix it.
"3. 99% of the people who complain about down rating forget that they are uprated first (possibly by their friends).
"4. Even with anonymous rating, [more than] 90% of all rates are a 5.*
"5. We are working behind the scenes with a group of 28 Woophy members to improve the site. The rating system is also subject of improvements."
* Come on folks, in a soft moment, maybe after a drinky or two, we all can admit and agree that maybe a mere three or four percent of all uploads would deserve a 5er.
|
|
tiswas
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 18:10
Reply
@ zerega ...I cannot agree with you... when 3 shots out of 187 shown today only rated 5 and the rest below deflates the people who have put all their efforts into something ...you sail close to the wind my friend ..... I hope I speak for most ....its like taking the toy from the child ...for a down rater to do that late in the day then it takes a while for to get the motivation back up ...... this will be easy pickings for the down rater its taking tooo long to sort a system!!! Why
|
la rafale
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 18:34
Reply
@ tiswas : i must admit that i don't rate under 4 ( only to members i'm sure they won't be hurted by this rate) because noone does it or it is considerated as an outrage by lot of members ; so, the scale actually is between 4,9 and 5 * and the others are useless .... except 1 for downraters 
i must say too rate have absolutely no interest for me, so, maybe it's easy to speak as i do ? anyway, don't worry, be patient and upload good shots . as we say "
God will recognize his" 
|
|
zerega
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 19:28 - Edited by: zerega
Reply
Tiswas, I wonder how a 4 out of 5 mark can deflate people.
4 out of 5 is very good.
5 out of 5 would be outstanding. (Just let the meaning of outstanding sink in.) Today I think there are only two or three outstanding uploads that deserves a wow, have impact, hit the emotion button, are technically good, employ a pleasing composition, aren't over processed. They aren't very arty or stylish or made by professionals. This is not art-school.
My two uploads of today, which are some regular travel shots, nothing special, may deserve something between three or four. I don't complain.
|
|
zerega
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 19:34 - Edited by: zerega
Reply
The inflation of the 5 (or 6?). Everybody is outstanding (outstanding from what?). Everybody is wow. Supeeeeee.
(name of rating member substituted with Serial Rater, real screenshot, pre-timelimit days)
|
|
tiswas
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 19:45
Reply
@ zerega.....I am not on about the quality of my work I am on about the quality of the other 100+ whose work was good if not reasonable ..it was obvious that some one had gone along and not marked a 4 because the amount of votes that were there e.g say 23 when it was a 5 some one had to rate the shot a 1,2 or 3 to make it go down by one mark AS I SAID I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT MY SHOT THERE ARE BETTER SHOTS THAN MINE AND THEY WERE BEING DOWN RATED ...don't hide behind the administration ...its stupid VETO THE VOTE and we might get a result ... I prefer the comments myself ...its because the down rater is removing good shots off the front page they are not getting looked at properly ....come on guys sort it out
|
Tensionhead
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 20:42
Reply
i think a "deflating" part of it is when a person has photos that are rated 5's and suddenly are downrated without any constructive critizism.
|
Coffeejunkie
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 21:18 - Edited by: Coffeejunkie
Reply
... reading this thread makes me missing the 'old' times:
when everyone was already proud to receive a 3 or maybe even a 4, and we had only 3 members with a golden camera!!! the 5 was only for the top-top-wow-pictures.
at least then we had the possibility to find the eal good pictures by using the top rated button...
does anyone remembers those days? is there someone else who is missing it too?
|
|
tiswas
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 21:36
Reply
@Tensionhead ...well put a true statement
@ Coffeejunkie ..to be perfectly honest for me personally I would quite happily look at the comments ...take the ratings out we don't need them ...the reason I have brought this up is I saw in a number of comments today that people believe there is down raters personally I feel the system is being manipulated ..the subject comes up again and again
|
Laura C
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 21:46 - Edited by: Laura C
Reply
This is getting of of hands!
Where is the friendly and democratic community that Woophy used to be????
It has become a battle field, thanks to a few ones that spend 24/7 hours a day checking the uploads and using ONES as a weapon!!! It´s as dirt as giving 5 indiscriminately!
Get real...you are destroying Woophy!!!
You are acting on behalf of over 32.000 members...not alone!
Is Woophy still a DEMOCRATIC community?
Then let´s vote! All members, not just a few selected ones!!!
|
Nivad
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Aug 09 22:35
Reply
Every now and then a discussion about the rating system, especially initiated when someone feels there has been some downrating in play, is like the "good old days", isn't it coffeejunkie?
But I know what you mean but I do not think those times will return, regrettably but rules can be set to avoid abuse of the system. And I intentionally use avoid because in a virtual, such as woophy is, it is nearly impossible to banish any form of abuse...
But talking about rating, and I hope the 28 thinkers are reading, I came to this reasoning...
First of all I wondered what was(is) the reason of existance for the rating system? And that has been explained more then once, it is here to sort out the quality.
Knowing this,is there actually any reason to know the average rate of any particular picture? Or will it suffice to keep those averages in a hidden database only to be accessed for sorting functions?
I think the latter. It means there won't be any rates visible but still it would be possible to rate. Anonymous and invisible ratings could offer a partial solution to the uprating backscratchers and to the downraters as well. Since for both parties they haven't got anything to gain anymore by their behaviour, cause the reward for it will probably fade away (favor being returned, anger being summoned), so it would be reasonable to think there is a fair chance that the malicious behaviour could disappear.
Give it a thought before sorting this idea vertically
And Zerega I like your quote "Just let the meaning of outstanding sink in."
Grtz
|
Paulo Calafate
Member
|
# Posted: 7 Aug 09 01:03 - Edited by: Paulo Calafate
Reply
after long hours of woophy photos appreciation I conclude that for 83,79% of them, rating with 1, must be considered as an uprating, a gift ... an oblation!
please see:
http://www.jeremycowart.com/
http://www.tomhoops.com/
http://www.billhatcher.com/
so, think twice when you say that your pictures are downrated.
sincerely...
|
josecps
Member
|
# Posted: 7 Aug 09 02:22
Reply
you can downrate in a good or in a bad mood
if you think you have to give a 1 because a pic is over rating you think you have the right to punish - that's AWFULLY STUPID.
if you give a 1 because you think pic is really bad, that's different. I maintain you shoul show your rating, ever! what's the problem? another battle? ok . stop with rating: easy, not?
but señores senadores de la fotografia: great an woophy with two divisions. One for iluminated, the artists, the winners , but PLEASE open to the poor people so taht we can learn a little, at least... ;
and another for those poor ones who love flowers and cats and dragon-flies and puetas de sol and girls-enlarge-commentaires and are women-dear and so on. AND THEN?
if you're not able to mix with everybody create an woophy for elites and expulse the poor ones!
or... change! Jackfre was not the one to blame!...
and I promise this is my last post calling the oxes by its names, as POVO says in Portugal.
that's all folks!
|
|
josecps
Member
|
# Posted: 7 Aug 09 02:23
Reply
create in spite of great, of course...
|
Oscar_
Moderator
|
# Posted: 7 Aug 09 09:23
Reply
I see the down raters have been out in force today ...its obvious by some of the comments by individuals on a number of shots...so why can't the moderators do something, its no good saying that it stops the overaters , surely the right to data protection gives us the right to see what ratings people put on our shots as well as comments and that should include any numerical number that is given ...its become a joke...AGAIN
Moderators only keep the forums clean and correct. They don't do anything about downrating.
If you have complaints about downrating you can send a mail to info@woophy.com
With kind regards,
Oscar
|
|
zerega
Member
|
# Posted: 7 Aug 09 13:09 - Edited by: zerega
Reply
Nivad wrote:
"It means there won't be any rates visible but still it would be possible to rate. Anonymous and invisible ratings could offer a partial solution to the uprating backscratchers and to the downraters as well. Since for both parties they haven't got anything to gain anymore by their behaviour, cause the reward for it will probably fade away (favor being returned, anger being summoned), so it would be reasonable to think there is a fair chance that the malicious behaviour could disappear."
Good idea. Yes. Not showing an immediate response in sorting the Top Rated Today/Week/Month collection and not displaying any stars. I too believe, that this would take the wind out of this vanity thing.
Anyway, I'd show images sorted from best to worst in two cases only, when:
- doing keyword searches and a user wants to find the best photos about a topic. E.g. photos about salt. A good and broad collection covering almost all aspects of salt, with all photos connected to a place on the map, fun to watch, a feast for the eyes, showing all good things what woophy does offer.
- when pressing a dot on the map, so that the photos of this city are presented in such a way, that a casual visitor browsing the map has an enjoyable woophy experience. An unspoilt city (that is free of a downright excessive collection of obsessively uprated flower-greetings-to-my-100+ woophy-friends and 100 shots of my cute pet) is Labenne, France. Wants me to go there. The collection is interesting to me, even though i'm not a real or virtual "friend" of any of the photographers there. A quick 10 minute desktop holiday.
|
ortho158
Member
|
# Posted: 7 Aug 09 14:30
Reply
Ah, Serge Tardif. It's interesting, because even if a lot of his pics are similar, I don't have a feeling of 'déjà-vu'.
|
Online now: Guests - 2 Members - 0