A way to improve the rating system

Kevin, thanks for the example image but only one 3/3 and you are complaining about the system? You have been on PN for almost six years and are dissillusioned by one low rate, I think I'm missing something. Cyrus, sorry, not much sympathy for your example either, your image did quite well for an over-sharpened and over-saturated macro bug photo in my opinion. The image in question not climbing as high on the TRP as you expected may be disappointing but not every one likes the same things and rates accordingly. I post a lot of dog and red umbrella photos, some people like them and many others are nauseated by them. If I was a viewer and rater, I wouldn't like many of my photos either. Darius, maybe the administration will change the rating system more to your liking, you laid out a well thought out plan that would work out nicely in an ideal world.

<P>I nearly always respond to these complaints about the rating and I really shouldn't. It's like poking a bad tooth with your tongue - you know it'll do no good and it'll probably hurt.</P><P> People get upset about ratings and do all this number crunching and rule juggling without really addressing the question of where all these ratings come from. The answer is the pnet rating process is a game played by many different people for many different reasons. Some people just like to hand out random low ratings for fun, some people are actively trying to manipulate the rankings of photos. But it's a game and if you want to play, it's no good always griping about the rules. If you want to see your picture high up in the TRP list (though why you should do, beats me), do what you have to do. And don't whine if other people are better at it.</P><P>Like the guy with his bee picture that's only at no. 171. So what? Does anybody outside photo.net give a xxxx? It's only a game.</P>

I'm not seeing where you're contributing to this thread, you both seem way off track presuming it's simply about 3/3 ratings and haven't addressed any specifics. If you're happy with the rating system as is simply say so and move on. You've cast your vote and that's sufficient. Certainly appears you are more interested in being antagonistic and bordering on personally attacking people than being participative or productive here. Some folks like the concept of the ratings simply for feedback, they just want to better be able to interpret that feedback and feel some changes need to be made in order to do that. It's not whining if you're constuctively trying to help the site, it is if you're just complainig about the thread and attacking the folks who are participating constructively.

It's nice to see there are people who care enough about the site to want to invest their time and energy into it, rather than just use it.

I was expecting you to come up with a response like that but again, I'm a positive thinker and tried not prejudge. Kevin DID NOT receive one pair of 3s after 6 years, he actually received 106 3s and 563 4s. Deservedly or not, the numbers are there for everyone to check. Your attempt to discredit the bee photo falls on the same line of trying to discredit the people behind the points raised so far, by calling them bad photographers. Even if you were sincere about your bee comment, I leave it for others to judge to see who the real "bad photographer" is. The fact is that some of do care about this great community and try to make it even greater.<BR>

Maybe the way to do it is what Brian is suggesting, making ourselves better at playing the game. Again, the fact is that we don't look at this as a game and we try to help make this the learning center that Philip envisions it to become.

"Kevin, thanks for the example image but only one 3/3 and you are complaining about the

system? You have been on PN for almost six years and are dissillusioned by one low rate, I

think I'm missing something."

 

Come on Tim, you know better. It's ONE image I chose as an example as it seems to me to

be far from a "below average" image based on this site's own ratings guidelines. Many

(most?) people are victims of the 3/3 bots and that's one of the things we're talking about.

 

As I made mention of above, because you are so prolific these issues have less impact on

you and it's a little myopic to use yourself as an example with which to compare with all

P.Net users. It's really OK to discuss ways to improve this site and recognize it's

shortcomings much the same as it's OK (for instance) to disagree with the U.S. government

about it's policies. One doesn't make you a Chicken Little and the other doesn't make you

a traitor, it's really quite patriotic to want to improve a system in which you participate. It

shows you care and that you're involved.

Ok it's taken me an hour to read all of this with great interest, you all have some great points .. some even bordering on personal :) ... Is Photo.Net taking any notice of this thread .. I doubt it ... whats going to be done? Probably nothing... The 3/3 raters are loving this thread I expect.. OK I know what I am saying is not constructive, but I feel its pretty realistic to say that after all of this things will not change unless you make them change.. I shall probably not be renewing my payment to PN until/unless the system is changed. If enough people do this then PN will probably make change of the system a priority.. Just my 2p worth. I have met a lot of good people in the few months I have been a member, (many of their names are in this thread). I do have one question though why do some people rate and comment when they do not have one picture on here? They could just be some sort of weirdo that got nothing better to do?

I have never had a good rate or comment from someone without pictures on their portfolio.. With Respect

Peter

Enough said on my part about the rating system. I can't speak for anyone else but I have learned a great deal here on PN the last few years. Most of what I have learned was from looking at the good work of fellow posters. I put them on my most interesting list so I can continue to be inspired by them. I don't think there is one person on my most interesting list that has complained about the rating system, new or old. I think they have more important things to do.

I bet mr. "Perfecta imagen de gran belleza, magnifica luz, color y un bello encuadre, saludos cordiales XXX." for example has more important things to do. While a "star" member draws the whole attention of the comunity regardless the quality of his "last issued work" and a beginner gets not comments and a fistful of 3/3, why should the first be worried about ratings?

I think PN may be keeping an eye on things as tonight, after being awarded 3 6's in a row, I started getting 3's .. I have just checked again and they have been removed... so something is happening ... I am really pleasedto see this action from Photonet ... Can anyone enlighten me to what is going on please....

I Agree all your suggestion Brian. There is just one thing you frogot to mention. There is not only the "low raters" problems, but also the "anonymous (or not) 7/7 freaks" that give 7/7 to many photos (or their own), even if they deserve not more than a 4/4. Also, in many cases, the problem is that the photo look very good as a thumbnail or its small size and people don't take the time to look at the larger size.

Well, I hope the owner of the site will try to fix the rating problems.

Personally, I've found that the rate recent TRP category is not very useful. It is much better to use the Photographer Sum and the simple average. Both of these give you a better chance of high quality images if you want to peruse the best the site has to offer. The rate recent is really too small a sample size to be useful. Usually it is the first 10 or so folks who see the photo.

 

Right now Cyrus has the top 2 rated photos in the Macro world if one goes to average for one month. Cyrus, to my mind, is in the top echelon of the photographers on the site. Technically his work is dead on. More often then not the photos he submits for ratings are not only technically excellent but artistically as well. He presents a unique, refreshing vision. To suggest that

 

Personally, I would argue that for a person to rate a photo anomously he should not have seen that photo anywhere else on the site and the photographers name should not appear on the photo for anomynous rates. This would put a big dent in the buddy ratings. Someone might start posting a similar looking photo to give friends a heads up or send emails to friends alerting to a posting but let's face it, someone that obsessed with beating the system is going to find a way to cheat no matter what system the owners of the site devise.

 

I'd also keep the practice of showing aonmynous rates as one metric and the totality of all rates as another. I think this gives one the best idea of how a photo is perceived. I'd also argue that the sum of the ratings points (ratings multiplied by the number of ratings received -- e.g. 3*2+4*3+5*9+6*12+7*4 = 163) is another useful metric. Some photos are weak but because they receive few ratings (think most members tend to just skip photos that don't interest them), they can end up beating the average an excellent photo.

 

Another observation is that some of the spurious ratings may come from non-paying members looking to rate as many photos as possible to "earn" the right to post more photos for free.

 

Last and most important observation is that its not worth ruining the community of well-meaning folks over a rating system that will never truly be perfect or just. At some point, I think Tim is right, you just have to ignore the cheaters, thoughtless, mean-spirited, altered state of consciousness (don't laugh, I used to host an online chat -- Friday nights were drunk nights) or even plain, unskilled raters. As the site grows this becomes more important.

 

The best way to keep your blood pressure down and a smile on your face is not to presume that someone woke up wanting to ruin your day. The one person who has serious reason to have a high blood pressure is Catalin Soare who was shot at with real live ammo. Now that is someone who is gunning to ruin your day.

Been with PN a little over a month, a newbee for sure. I offered my genius time after time and got ratings lower than I experted. Alas, my genius is rebuked complained Macbeth. The more of other's work I saw, both better and worse than my own, the more I accepted that my work is fairly placed on a continuum. The ugly fact that I must confront is a lot of pics are a helluva lot better than mine, not that I love mine any the less, but I have a lot to learn, and I am thrilled to have a place to see such fine work in such prodigious quantity.

I rate and critique some pics myself. Some are of snapshot quality which I avoid rating or making comments on. Just don't want to hammer someone who hasn't come as far as I. I find I comment on pics I like and perhaps perceive could be tweaked a bit. I am grateful to those who stopped to comment on my pics even though some of the comments sting a bit. Time is such a precious commodity, that I am really grateful to the fine photogs who dole me out a bit with the intention of being helpful. I seem to have forgotten what all the fuss was on this thread. Thanks to all who took time to help me.

Bernie