Childish Behaviour

Carl, you keep harping away on the issue of all the "quality" folks who have stopped participating. This is tiresome. While it would be great if "quality" folks kept on participarting indefinitely (and subscribing, and renewing their subscriptions), and all the "non-quality" folks went away, a certain rate of attrition is unavoidable -- of both "quality" and "non-quality" people, whatever those categories are supposed to be. Some of this attrition isn't even attrition: people go away for a while and come back all the time.

 

It is unavoidable that a certain number of people will get what they are looking for (visibility, a confidence boost, some feedback) from the Gallery and then move on. A certain number of people will realize that they are not going to get what they want from the Gallery without more effort than they are prepared to give, and they also leave. Nobody is shackled to the site. Also, if you let yourself get drawn into the competitive aspect, seeing every low rating as a setback to your "Top Photo" prospects, it can be a pretty intense experience. People get burned out, and personally I think it is good for them to take a break.

 

The question is not whether there is attrition but whether it is increasing or decreasing and whether people are being replaced faster than people leave. It so happens that the attrition rate is declining steadily, and furthermore the number of new participants is increasing constantly. This is shown by the increase in the raw traffic statistics, subscriptions, memberships, photos uploaded, comments written, ratings given, forum postings, etc, etc, etc. Of course, anyone can retort that all these new people are "non-quality" people who don't replace the "quality" people who have left. That is entirely a matter of opinion.

 

Incidentally, just yesterday we had 8.5 million hits on the site, a record. (Monday and Tuesday are generally the big days on the site; so it will be interesting to see what happens today. In May and June, we were struggling to handle only 7 to 7.5 million hits per day, and we wouldn't have been able to handle this number.

Have not had a chance to read any of the new posts yet but for the moment am just posting two new ones below.

<b>Brian</b><p><i>�Many people already don't upload their photos to the Gallery because they don't want to be rated and critiqued by any Tom, Dick, or Bailey on the Internet, and they don't consider that receiving a share of 3 million photo views per day on photo.net to be worth the aggravation of receiving ratings and comments from people who they think are less knowledgeable or cultivated in taste than them.�</i><p>Yes I dislike numerical scores for images, but your statement above is certainly not my position in regards to comments. As an example, I have made alterations to several of my print files as a direct result of comments given on my uploaded images by various contributors some of whom by their own admission are less than experienced. Comments can be of great value no matter whom they are from or whom they are addressed to. OK, some comments are less than helpful, the �Sorry don�t like it, don�t know why� or the �Wows� but on the whole I really value them. I just feel more could be done to encourage people to comment as well as or instead of rating. But there again it�s not my site and I don�t have the daily grind of running it and dealing with bloody awkward geezers like that Laban chap.

<b>AZ/BS</b><p><i>�Rating your photos fairly is not childish behaviour, yet you chose to use that word to describe it�</i><p>Rating my photos as such is not childish behaviour. Going through my entire portfolio the day after I made it perfectly clear that I had no respect for your scores was I believe pure spite and very childish.<p><i>�despite later admitting that I was not abusive in my rating�</i><p>As I have already said your scores were not abusive and I have never said that they were, however I believe your intention was.

"your scores were not abusive and I have never said that they were, however I believe

your intention was."

 

So I *meant* to be abusive but was ... unsuccessful? That is just too funny. And this

lack of success helped to drive your photos off a site which you joined *knowing* that

anyone could rate any photo at any time? Hmm. And you say you *don't* care about

my ratings? Really.

Keith, I'm not sure the AZ Fomerly Known as BS was being spiteful. Maybe he's demonstrating a sense of humor that's not mutually appreciated.

 

And you've gotta admit, asking someone not to rate you is kinda like a dare. I understood that when I uploaded some technical illustrations that didn't merit ratings and said as much in a note attached to each photo. Some folks rated 'em anyway. No biggie.

 

Kinda like a kid running up to you and saying "Don't poke me!"

 

So you poke him.

 

He runs away, then scampers back and says, "Don't poke me again!"

 

Poke.

 

It's irresistible.

"Maybe he's demonstrating a sense of humor that's not mutually appreciated."

 

May be. And maybe some folks don't know a poke from a tickle. In any case I rated

fairly, as Keith admits, and I did nothing that he shouldn't have known from Day 1

was permitted here. I'll rate any photos I want to, and I usually rate whatever photos I

see, good or bad ... dared or not. :-)

" I did nothing that he shouldn't have known from Day 1 was permitted here."

 

Forbidden here, that is

It's interesting to read comments from people who do not

participate regularly in the photo critique forum. They say we

shouldn't take it so seriously and that nothing will change.

 

Things have changed. I've made more than my share of

complaints, but always with ideas for ways of improving this

forum. Several of the problems have been corrected and I would

like to think I played I role in shedding light on the behaviors that

caused them.

 

Again, you wouldn't really understand unless you uploaded,

rated, and commented on a regular basis. If you don't do all

three, then this forum should be of no interest to you.

 

It should be obvious that raids, pokes, jibes, and/or 'humor' have

nothing to do with discussing photographs. If it has never been

accompanied by anything positive, then it's just mean spirited.

oh puhleese, now we can't add an opinion unless we've rated, critiqued, and commented "regularly"? Who in the world appointed you and your whining-in-arms mates arbiters of all things important around here? I've supported this site financially, participated on and off here for a year and a half, posted, and commented on people's pictures just fine, thank you. What I haven't done is turn every discussion about this site (or every POW for that matter) into a personal gabfest like you and your mates. That truly doesn't mean my opinion is any less important than yours. Try to get a grip on your arrogance.

While not going quite as far as Kochanowski I think he has a point. The rules are pretty clear and it would be a real help if people accepted that (a) anything they post can be rated and/or commented upon and (b) didn't take it all so personally.

I�m just about up to date with the posts now and the following are a few responses.<p><b>Hanna</b><p>You took the words out of my mouth. Well said.<p><b>Peter</b><p>I find all the numbers annoying when not backed up by a comment. I know it�s probably not going to happen, but I really feel that comments should have more emphasis than ratings.<p><b>Brian</b><p>I admit it, I am the stereotypical temperamental artist, very sad but I guess it goes with the job.<p><b>Harvey</b><p>I�m disappointed. Do you really believe that the numerical rating of images without the backup of comments are �<i>performing a public service and should be congratulated.�</i>?<p><b>a. kochanowski</b><p>I have never sent an e-mail to anybody concerning ratings or the gallery. Please, get your facts right.<p><b>Lex</b><p>Can we agree on a �spiteful sense of humour �?<p><b>Comment for no one in particular.</b><p>I admit it, I am confrontational, I wear my heart on my sleeve and say it as I see it, admittedly sometimes without enough thought. I't's got me in trouble on more than one occasion, but that's who I am.<p>Instead of just reacting in my usual hot headed fashion and having given matters much uncharacteristic thought, taken on board many of the points made in this thread and also haven taken a lot of advice, this is what I�m going to do. I will take a complete break from the Gallery for the next couple of months, will leave my images untouched where they are and add no new images. I will also take a complete break from making comments about the Gallery and the ratings system and post no contributions to the Feedback Forum. Generally chill out.<p>If at the end of this break I feel I can just accept things as they are I will resume posting images, If not I won�t and I will delete my images. Either way it will do my blood pressure the power of good and make the work of the administrators that much easier.<p>Time alone will tell.<p>OK, let's be 'avin yer :-)

Puhleese, yourself. You have a bit more than a hundred rates

and comments in your rather long tenure, so it's fair for me to

conclude that you don't care a whole lot about this forum. It's also

reasonable to conclude that you're therefore not familiar with the

changes in the dynamics of the forum as changes occur , ie

'normalization', change in default top page, images placed in the

rating queue, etc..

 

Have you made any helpful suggestions about how to improve

this forum?

 

Your POW reference is curious. Maybe you'll notice that there

have been a few changes made there, too.

What bothers me most is the defensive attitudes of the moderators, Bob and Brian [less so Brian in this case]. In my days of moderating one tried to take a more middle ground. And this doesn't seem to be the first time either, nor will it be the last. There are enough harsh word from subscribers, heros, and the rest of rest to go around.

 

The ratings system is one of the flawed parts. maybe a simple change of requiring comments with ratings would be a solution. In this case it does not appear to be like what James O'Niel pointed out in another thread. And I wish I had as many comments in my portfolios as some here. (As a note, I care not about the ratings, but the comments. Yet in todays world of not enough time we have to take the ratings as the comments.) Though opting in or out is not a solution that I think works. Maybe its time to make those that rate work for their ratings. And in the end the people that post photos will see what makes their photos work or not work.

 

I for myself would hate to see Keith's gallery go. I haven't yet to go through and rate the images WITH COMMENTS, but loosing is images would be a loss for those of us that wish our images matched his own.

 

 

Please Keith, keep your images in the ratings portfolio.

oh, OK, so I have to spend all my waking hours rating others' photos in order to both have an opinion that your whining is irritating and be aware of the ratings changes over the past year. Yes Carl, some people can read without necessarily feeling the need to write long forum posts and impress their opinion in every debate. But have it your way, yours is obviously a mind immune to logic. As to POW, I quit participating in part because I was bored to death reading your and your pals mind-numbingly long exercises in going nowhere, including in my own POW.

Somehow I knew this was about your POW.

AZ, my question was not a rhetorical one and not intended as a criticism. I would really be interested in the answer.

"I�m disappointed...�performing a public service and should be congratulated.� "

 

That was written partly with my tongue in my cheek but, on reflection, I rather think I stand by it. Given that photo.net is a collaborative effort where the viewers are, to some degree, the curators, I'm warming to the idea that we should all take the trouble to rate images when we look at them.

 

If AZ is actually prepared to go through the images and give an indication of how much he likes them then he's doing us all a service. It's certainly causing me to rethink my policy of commenting on everything I rate. Given the interesting responses I've had, it's making me think that perhaps, in future, I'll copy AZ and just rate without leaving comments. I'll probably still get as many flames but what the hell - it's time to live a little dangerously...

 

:-)

Harvey, you can start on my folders. Tear me a new one. ;>

Harvey me old dude<p>Cool ~ be real groovy if you�d score for me tooooooooo<p>Hey, this chilling is way neat :-)

Hit me, Bailey! My masterpieces have been neglected long enough.