ENOUGH IS ENOUGH - Ratings Abuse

who cares what people rate?! Any tom dick and harry can do that without looking.

 

don't take it seriously man, not worth your energy or effort.

 

ever wonder why those people who uploads ZERO photos and yet rate tens and thousands of photos? keep wondering pal.

I think this thread is losing it's way somewhat. The point was, and still is, about two people inventing fictional users to boost their exposure.

Dear AZ,

 

You have an interesting view on this issue. It's all a matter of opinion, regarding what one person thinks of one photograph compared to another. But when a photograph gets 5 and 6's, you kind of feel like you did something special. Then you get 1's and 2's for the same picture, with no critique, no explanation, and no constructive criticism. What can we learn from a very low rating with no comment?

 

There are many great photographers on this site, and those of us who consider ourselves amateurs, have allot that we can learn from their constructive criticism and comments.

 

Oh and by the way, thank you for your valuable comment:

 

"You mean that shot that's got no midtones, in which the TV set is burned out? I can see why it got a bad rating."

 

I'd be lost without your highly constructive criticism.

 

Thin Skin Danny ;)

Marcus, those 2 people are probanly in this thread. oh well..;)

 

take it easy man.

The abuse will continue no matter what action is taken short of ending all ratings. If you don't want to be victimized then don't post. I rate photos because people have gone to the trouble to post them and want honest opinions and I try to do just that. Yes, I have ZERO photos posted but unlike the advice I state above my reason is for the lack of a scanner. Hopefully someday I too can be abused! ;-)

<i>What can we learn from a very low rating with no comment?</i><p>

 

Whatever you want to learn. No one is owed explanations -- or even ratings. You take

what you can get, and if you disagree or agree, so be it.

Do yourselves a favour, take a few months off, post no images to the gallery, make no comments about the rating system. It worked for me. I can�t believe I used to get so uptight about it all, I�d even take my old chum AZ/BS for a beer if he were ever in this part of the world.<p>Kind of gets things into perspective. In the great scheme of things the Gallery/ratings system is of little importance, like a mosquito bite, irritating if you scratch it but leave it alone for a while and it doesn�t bother you any more :-}

Esteemed AZ,

 

Thanks for the wonderful insight. Everything makes sense now, ratings and comments don't mean anything, except whatever meaning we may decide to choose. Your wisdom is brilliant.

 

I will remain indebted to you for all of your invaluable ratings. I can't wait for your next 25,000+

 

No one is owed explanations -- or even ratings. You take what you can get, and if you disagree or agree, so be it.

 

4 years -> 25,000+ ratings per year -> 17+ ratings per day

 

And no one is owed rating or comments, man you got issues. Maybe a hobby like stamp collecting or Bingo may be helpful. But don't worry, if you agree or disagree, so be it. :)

Keith has made some good points, but it doesn't entirely solve the problem of community participation which has been stated numerous times by site administrators as a give and take relationship. Many of my mediocre uploads have received undeservingly high ratings and attention; why, I have no idea since I've not gone out of my way to solicit them. I feel an obligation to give something back, but given my limited expertise, time and command of the critique language, I restrict my participation to the occasional comment mostly to less frequently viewed images and limited to the technical domain.<br><br>I would agree that the rating system promotes an adversarial site culture which is truly unfortunate and perhaps the only obstacle to the site's success, so here's a suggestion. Abolish the rating system to all users except those handpicked by site administrators, or have a $50 level Patron-Plus where one pays for the privilege of ratings and critique by site appointed, respected members who can earn a hero's icon for doing the dog work.

Liked I said, any tom dick and harry can rate, but it takes a person who truly cares or truly wanna share to give comments, be it good or bad.

 

People who leave ratings for the sake of clicking are just that, clickers.

I don't think it makes sense to discuss AZ-BS. Historically s/he is one of major *attractions* on this site. Probably, nobody here takes her/his ratings (always without comments) seriously. Brian seems keeping that member just to lower overall increadibly inflated ratings. Don't waste your time, Marc is right.

Marc is among the few high profile and respected members, which makes the last paragraph of his comment all the more disparaging. There may never be a perfect solution to the problem, but as responsible site members (which number in the great majority), couldn't we influence the site culture however small the increment? Talking about the problem doesn't solve the problem; solving the problem solves the problem. We can solve the problem by uploading images without seeking to be a big fish in a small pond, participate professionally when appropriate, and in a positive manner, influence those less familiar with the spirit of community culture.

<i>man you got issues</i><p>

 

When what I said is wrote the people of photo.net themselves say about ratings,

Danny. If you can't discuss the issues without amateur psycoanalyzing, then it's time

for you to cool off. Or grow up.

<i>I don't think it makes sense to discuss AZ</i><p>

 

And an excellent example you're setting, Vlad. ;-> <p>

 

<i>Brian seems keeping that member just to lower overall increadibly inflated

ratings.</i><p>

 

You're evidently as good a mindreader as you are an example. Sheesh.

<i>When what I said is wrote the people of photo.net themselves</i><p>

 

Translated, that means: What I wrote is what the people who administer photo.net

themselves say about ratings.

I'm afraid I'll have to mark this thread as receiving a 3 for aesthetics, as I really don't like reading about people whine, and I give it a 1 for originality (this sort of thread is more common than kitten & baby photographs, I tell you!).

<br><br>I motion that not only should Photo.net abandon the aesthetics/originality rating scale, but that they implemend a <b>whining scale</b> of 1-7. The higher that a thread/photograph/column is rated the more likely it is to be deleted! Using that scale I give this thread a 7!

All I would like to state is that it is great to have non-photo contributors on this site. They are an invaluable source of information and guidance, when appropriate comments are offered to back up their ratings. Leave the comments out and the ratings mean nothing. 25000 ratings is an awesome contribution, but constructive comments on the photos considered and rated as poor, would be more useful.

 

No hard feelings AZ, you have your opinions and I have mine.

<i>No hard feelings AZ, you have your opinions and I have mine.</i><p>

 

How can I have hard feelings when your argument is reduced to avoiding the issue

and taking personal potshots? You're not worth hard feelings, Danny.

"Mysterious" A Z - just what is your problem? Daniel's final post was a peacekeeping effort and seemed like a fair sign off, drawing a line under this. But you just don't seem satisfied with that and had to take a swipe at him. Why? You completely missed the point of the original post, only to go on and post a complete load of unintelligible psychobabble. As was suggested earlier, maybe it's time you found an alternative hobby!

A Z stop by my portfolio any time.

 

I noticed the original poster had a bunch of ratings of 5, 4 etc and a rating of 1....ratings are for the site, comments are for the photographer, the current system is imperfect...and so it goes...Me, I am going out to take photos once the damned rain stops.

 

regards to all

whoops wrong thread about the 5, 4 and 1, time for more coffee for this dullard. sorry about that.

How silly. Original post was about one thing. Rest of thread about another. Stupid bashing of AZ. Consider:

 

Certain TRP's have rated thousands of photos wiht average ratings of 6/6.

 

AZ/BS has rated 25928 photos on this site, with average ratings of 4.32 for originality and 4.6 for aesthetics. That seems about right, even generous. There are not 25928 4/4's on photo.nut if you ask me.

 

Most importantly, for those that care about the ratings, who check their photos to see what ratings they have, are happy to get ratings. Well, that means, on his own time, without pay, without ulterior motives (ratings on his own photos) AZ has helped out 25928 of you with a rating. Pretty damn generous if you ask me. And, he *does* comment at times. Feeling seems to be that there should be more comments, which, broadly, I agree with. Maybe you simply meant to politley ask him to comment more, and the bitter foolishness just slipped out instead.

200% agree with you Andrew!<p>

Be happy to get rating then you can get known and possibly commented.

People who rate over thousand pictures around 4.5 in average cannot be accused of abuse (although you may desagree with his taste, subjective notion if any).

<p>Daniel compared this 'hobby' which looking at picture and rating them as collecting stamps,... may be so what... other are posting picture in a site to be viewed, rated and possibly commented... world is made on this basic model.

<p>Personally I dont get the point to give a 1/1 to some picture (better to go next or leave a comment). I see much more abuse on the other side of spectrum, where some received too easily 6/7. The problem here is not the rating itself (generally you rate what you like or more exactly who you like, whatever you expect in return ...) but the system of sorting is mainly based on this criteria. So that if you dont get rating, you will hardly get known by many people so the chance to get comment is thin...

Your response is typical for someone who doesn't actually

participate in the ratings process very much.

 

Here's how it really works: If someone gives you a 4/4, it means

'I don't think your photo is 'all that' and the computer puts the

image pretty far back in the queue if it's one of the first ten rates.

If everyone gives you a 4/4, you are not likely to get more than ten

rates and probably maybe one comment . . . if you're lucky.

 

If, on the other hand, your image averages above 5/5 for the first

ten rates, those rates were probably acquired fairly rapidly and

your visibility on the three-day and 24-hour pages will get you

quite a few more views. People will respond or not, but at least

your number of views increases your odds.

 

A bell curve analysis suggests that most images do indeed

deserve a 4/4. What you're forgetting is that you have no way of

knowing if those 4/4s have been placed on images averaging

3/3 or are they more often found on 5/5 images? If it's the latter,

then you'll have a hard time explaining to me who benefits from

these many hours of downgrading.

Getting a rate is easy if your images are half way decent. Only

the poorest images fail to get ten rates if a critique is requested.

The question becomes, how quickly will you get those ten rates?

 

If the first five are high, the next five come quickly. If not, you will

be one of many who gets ten rates - eventually - without a

comment. There have been numerous posts from people

who've made it clear this doesn't help them at all.

 

I do agree that 6s and 7s without discresion are also abuse, but

we're really at the point where there is really only one noninflated

rate that you can use to promote an image. . . . a 5. Most of the

raters on the list just signed up and don't understand all this.