Photo Rating Suggestions

<I>Recently, I exchanged in some email with one of the "top-rated" photographers (he's in the top 20) after noticing that each of his submissions had quite a few 10/10 ratings...His latest email states that naturally he entered the ratings himself, as everybody did that...</I><P>

Have we gone completely mad? I have yet to see, and granted I didn't read all 300 posts, a reasoned defense of the ratings system. What real, concrete benefit does anyone derive from it?<P>

<I>There is an old saying; Those that can do. Those that can't teach. :) </I><P>

That's because those that can are rarely able to teach. Teaching is an art/science of its own (yeah, I'm a teacher and a teacher trainer). Dean Smith, one of the great college basketball coaches of all time, was a benchwarmer for Kansas. Artists are notoriously bad at writing or otherwise commenting on their own or other's work. Obviously there are exceptions and counterexamples, but I believe it is generally true. The author that I wrote my thesis on (Jurek Becker) compared the artist/critic relationship to that of the bird/ornithologist relationship. The most important difference being, in the context of this thread perhaps, that the bird is oblivious to the ornithologist. Oh, and of course precious few of us are actually artists, present company excluded :>)<P>

Okay, I read through ALMOST all of this post....

 

A few comments. I like the ratings system. When I first came here a few months ago, it frustrated me to no end; gradually as I came to understand how people here generally rate photos, I appreciated it. I REALLY like the new feature that lets you see the average rating a person gives to the photos they critique. If someone rates me 7/7 I'm usually elated but if I go and see that they're average rating is 7/7 then I take it with a grain of salt that they think the photos average (normally I'd think a 5 is average). I've rated over 1000 photos and it still averages pretty close to 5/5.

 

Some thoughts on the above:

 

"Not allowing membership creation with hotmail-type accounts would be another good step."

 

Some of us only HAVE those type of accounts. It's often more convenient/cheaper to have a Web-based account (if I'm traveling in Russia I can still access my Yahoo accout pretty easily).

 

"Do not allow 1/1s and 10/10s, as they clearly are wrong (ever seen a perfect photo? or a perfectly bad one?). "

 

Yes, and yes. But regardless that would be pointless because 2/2 and 9/9 would just become the new 1/1 and 10/10.

 

"such as entering a valid credit card number and checking the name"

 

Enter a CREDIT CARD number to verify???? To a Net site you maybe know nothing about? I hope not...Not to mention there really are still a few folks out there to don't have credit cards and are actually thus free of debt...

 

I definately vote to keep the ratings. As someone pointed out, sometimes you just can't put into words. Also, if someone says "It's really good" you have no way of knowing whether there's a "for an amatuer/novice" tagged on the end. Numbers help quantify this (the difference between a 5 good and a 8 good).

 

Frankly, the ratings system is one of the reasons I'm still involved here. It gives me relatively fast feedback from numerous sources, all of whom have an interest in photog. Which is good because I'm not able at this point to actually enroll in a seminar/course/workshop to get "real life" feedback.

 

Having a limit on the number of photos people can post into their own gallery would be highly obnoxious. I sometimes have a chunk of time to scan and upload a bunch of photos, but I don't have time to do one or two every day/week. Also, as people upload more and more photos, it gives you more of a feel for what they're style is.

 

I see no reason why people have to post photos to critique others. Some folks (highly qualified photogs.) simply don't like mucking about with scanners and PS.

 

As for group interaction - when I'm out to critique some photos I usually will go to the galleries of people who have critiqued and/or rated my photos. I also like to go to the "Top Member-Rated" and randomly chose names from the list, one from every hundred (one from the 200s, one from the 500s, etc). This seems to work best for me.

 

So, anyhow, there's my vote. Take it as you will!;)

 

Elaine

Ok, some of these posts are getting my goat so much I have to toss something in and blow off some steam.

 

Elaine's opinions on how to proceed largely mesh with my own.

 

I would make one other proposal; that is there be TWO sets of rating criteria, say "A" and "B". The "A" group is for snapshots, novice photogs etc. "B" is for when you get too big for your britches and want to be rated on a professional basis. You pick where to put each of your shots.

 

The reason for this proposal: at one time, I was putting on a few ratings, thinking maybe it was useful to people. Eventually, I quit because I don't think I was doing anybody any good. I felt that I should rate on a constant basis across the board. I decided to use halfscale (5) for a shot that I (personally) would not be embarrassed to have on my wall (on a quality basis). A '1' would be unbelievably bad and a '10' equally good. Here's the rub; if you are a novice, needing encouragement, you'd likely get a 2 or 3 from me; not very encouraging. If you do serious good work, about the BEST you'd get from me would be 8 or 9; for the most part my ratings would pull your average down; not doing you any good again. So I generally don't rate photos anymore.

 

Regarding this line of thinking: "Having those who wish to rate other's work be required to have some of their own posted makes perfect sense."; I think it is nonsense. Struan already made some good arguments related to this, so I will not repeat any. I would personally be well pleased to hear Struan's opinions of my work (and about a dozen other photo.netters; many based only on the strength of their text postings) and I would like to think that I am substantially more qualified in general photography than most of the persons wanting to restrict comments to photo posters. I realize this is a "low blow" without showing anything, so here is a link to the only photo of mine I have ever scanned; it's from a 5x7 print, I did it for "relevance" (New Orleans) and I would personally have rated it about 7 aesthetic and maybe 5 or 6 originality.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/uploaded-file?bboard_upload_id=16041

 

Regarding requirement of a paid subscription first, I would probably simply depart this site. Not to act egotistical, but it's easy to suggest that when you have a lot to gain. Maybe the volunteer moderators could also pay a fee? That was very tongue in cheek; I have great respect and thanks for all the moderators, the only ones I specifically know of being Bob A, Darron and Russ. I apologize if I'm acting like a jerk, but I'm getting really toasted by what I see as a lack of respect (by a relative few) for many of the well qualified people who have contributed greatly to photo.net over the past few years.

The misuse of the rating system is the ONLY problem. The misuse by very little few abusers is the only problem we have here prople. KEEP THE TOP MEMBER PAGE THE WAY IT IS. You cant put a carrot up there and not expect unscrupulous individuals to abuse it. Top Member page is not a problem so lets keep it. I won't ever get up there anyway but legitimate users do like it, use it, and don't abuse it. Let's just solve that one problem without taking anything away from the site and by ENCOURAGING participation and not DISCOURAGING participation by charging for subs. I would like to add that I think an email verification before allowing members to just create multiple new names at will, is a good idea also. This cost nothing and hurts no one as well. We legitimate members don't have to give up ANYTHING to solve this problem. Please read this carefully!!! It will only effect the ratings abuse without in any way penalizing legitimate comtributing members. READ READ READ. This IS the answer.

 

Reposted from another thread.

 

Hello all. I started a thread on this subject last week. Though it had many responses, I think it was too political to make the permanent archives. Some of the individuals mentioned above have rated some of my photos as well. Some of them quite favorably, some not. The problem: It is too easy for people to make multiple names. The 1/1 raters and the people who create multiple names to rate their own photos 10/10 as well as having friends and family members rating their photos are what is destroying the integrity if the ratings system. Among some possible solutions that were suggested was to charge for a subscription. This might work but would discourage participation. I thought my suggestion was better. Here it is again. IN ORDER TO RATE PHOTOS ON THIS SITE THE MEMBER MUST FIRST HAVE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) UPLOADS OF HIS OWN AND THREE (3) OF THEM MUST HAVE BEEN RATED BY MORE THEN TEN (10) MEMBERS

If members don't meet this criteria they would still be able to comment on all the photos they want, and use all the other features in the rest of the site. This also encourages two-way participation as well as making it more difficult to create bogus names. It would not be difficult to incorporate this simple code into the server. For the people that are legitimate contributing members that "choose" not to upload their own photos, this will in no way exclude you from participating as that is not my intent. I believe that most of these people (the legitimate CONTRIBUTING members who don't have any uploads), not the phoneys, are NOT interested in ratings anyway, but more interested in sharing constuctive critique. Am I right? If they feel they have to rate photos as well as critique them then let them upload some of their own work. TWO WAY PARTICIPATION! This is really the way by which we all improve, by sharing thoughts and photos, not by trying to climb some meaningless ladder. I hope photo.net is listening and considers my suggestion. The alternative is to scrap ratings all together. I would bet that my suggestion as well as the email verification will solve the problem and stop 99.9% of the nonsense. Email verification by itself is not going to work. The real screwballs can create as many hotmail accounts as they like. The verification only slows the process down a little for them. I have has the same hotmail account for seven years but there is nothing to stop people from using multiple personalities is they so desire.

 

-- Dennis Keizer, August 04, 2001; 02:38 P.M. Eastern

 

 

 

 

Ok flame away, but I think this is the best answer and suggestion given to date toward solving the problem without giving up any of the wonderful features of this site that makes it the best of it's kind on the net. That is all for now. Whew. sorry no time for spellcheck.

I will try to offer my comments based on the constructive thoughts of the last three contributors.<p>

 

1. Elaine Robbins, August 09, 2001; 10:50 A.M. Eastern: <i>If someone rates me 7/7 I'm usually elated but if I go and see that they're average rating is 7/7 then I take it with a grain of salt that they think the photos average (normally I'd think a 5 is average). </i><br>

Elaine, I would disagree with that thought. When I first started rating photos randomly, I gave overall markings from 1 to 10. I recently found out that my average was around 3/4. But I had rated too many photos. Then I deleted my ratings on the more irrelevant ones (which were actually not worth looking at) and my average changed to almost 6/6. <br>That means that a member may tend to rate only the "better" photos and ignore the rest. His/her high average would not necessarily mean that he/she is way too generous. In this respect I would be in favour of Struan's latest suggestions with the <i>histograms</i>. <p>

 

2. Bill C, August 09, 2001; 09:04 P.M. Eastern: <i>I would make one other proposal; that is there be TWO sets of rating criteria, say "A" and "B". The "A" group is for snapshots, novice photogs etc. "B" is for when you get too big for your britches and want to be rated on a professional basis. You pick where to put each of your shots. </i><br>

This proposal is sound and appears to be close to a real life situation of any photographer. When editing our photos we make selections, automatically divide our keepers and file them differently. Not all our photos are made to meet the same standards. Some are aesthetically and technically great, others have a subject which is more interesting than the execution of the photo as such (see for example <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/286635">Dennis' current POW</a>, a superb photo which would deserve an originality rating of 12(sic)) and still others are valuable "snapshots". <br>

The photo.net members sharing their photos would not have any difficulty uploading them in separate groups A and B and would possibly welcome such a division. Novices needing encouragement would be rated according to their ambitions and would not be compared to the pros uploading their best, serious work.<p>

 

3. Dennis Keizer, August 10, 2001; 02:41 A.M. Eastern: <i>IN ORDER TO RATE PHOTOS ON THIS SITE THE MEMBER MUST FIRST HAVE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) UPLOADS OF HIS OWN AND THREE (3) OF THEM MUST HAVE BEEN RATED BY MORE THEN TEN (10) MEMBERS If members don't meet this criteria they would still be able to comment on all the photos they want</i>.<br>

This is a bad idea and I would rather agree with Struan's reservations. As an alternative variation I suggest that <p> <b>in order to be entered into the "famous list"a rated member must first have a minimum of ten (10) uploads of his own and five (5) of them must have been rated by at least 25 members.</b><p>

This last approach would ensure that: <br>

1. The legitimate contributing members that "choose" not to upload their own photos are not excluded from rating/participating. <br>

2. The "illegitimate" phoneys are slowed down and discouraged by being forced to create many hotmail accounts and multiple personalities. <br>

3. The uploading members deserving high rankings are judged on many photos and not just three or four accidental successes. The "famous list" would include only members with a <b>high average</b>.<p>

 

Final remark: The requirement of a paid subscription will be difficult to enforce and could scare away many contributors, who would stop sharing their experience and valuable advice.<p>

 

Thanks to all the moderators for their great efforts and contributions over the past few years. And many thanks to who is patient enough to read this complete thread and evaluate the members' opinions!!!

If anybody is currently curious about the reasons for these ratings discussions, here is an open invitation to see what is happening right now in the <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/top-rated-photographers">Top member rated photographers list</a>. I personally like the newcomer's "creations" very much, but this Blitzkrieg reminds me of the other recent invasion from the Near East.

I don't know if this has been mentioned (I stopped trying to keep current with this thread a long time ago - best of luck to the photo.net administrators), but when browsing through the gallery today, I thought how nice it might be to have a content filter. For example, when someone uploads their photos, they could select from a drop down menu the TYPE of photo it might be... i.e. B&W, landscape, portrait, street-candid, nude etc. It may even be helpful to have sub categories (i.e. B&W would be the main category, then maybe landscapes under that, then maybe sunsets under that etc.) Just an idea.

I'd like to see it be mandatory to make a comment when someone rates a photo 1 or 2. It doesn't help the photographer improve his/her work if people express their dislike of a picture but don't explain why. If others are giving the same photo 6 or 7, a 1 or 2 just doesn't make sense, unless there is something specific the person who gave the low rating noticed that others did not.

 

I also don't think that there should be any requirements other than being a member to rate a photo, because someone without the equipment or who doesn't take pictures themselves can still appreciate photography.

Apparently, my comments about the ratings system offended a member, who systematically came by and ranked every singe one of my photos 1/1 in a span of 15 minutes -- boy, he sure showed me! Woe is me, someone without the guts to address my words directly has decided to snipe me. Whatever will I do? (btw, Denis, you <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/200137">missed one.</a> I wouldn't want you to miss your full sweep).

<P>

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier, and the fact that it was targeted at me is immaterial: It's <b>impossible</b> for photo.net to legislate maturity. It's impossible for them to perform an age check. I still maintain the percentage of Denis' in this community amounts to less than 1%. I'd hate to see the other 99% of the members, who are almost entirely composed of rational, mature, creative people looking to exchange knowledge and ideas, be denied a potentially useful tool because of some undermedicated miscreant. It's worth it.

Mark, I love your sense of humor. I had the same thing happen by someone who didn't agree with my opinion, but he gave me all 2's :)

I still like looking at the ratings, but think that rating should only be allowed with a comment. As someone who does photography for fun, the low ratings don't bother me as much as they do others. I am a beginner and expect low ratings, but would prefer comments to go with them. I have received a few high ratings and comments from some of the better photographers on here, and that has given me inspiration.

1. Go to a 1 to 5 scale.

 

2. Three rating parameters: 1. Content.

 

2. Technical merit.

 

3. Beauty.

 

3. Improve text entry format by enabling indents and paragraphs.

Well it appears that someone really did not like my suggestions in this thread. They went through the trouble of creating names to rate all my photos with 9's and 10's and immediatly posting comments accusing me of rating my own photos. You can view it here. http://www.photo.net/photo/286635 . Maybe the Top-Member Page is not such a great idea after all. I think my suggestions would have eliminated this problem. I don't need to contribute my own photos for any kind of compitition. I shared them to learn how to improve them. I will no longer rate or critique any photos here and I have deleted all my photos except the POW and I won't upload any more as long as this stupid rating system is in place. To the friends I have made here over the past few months It was a pleasure to help and learn from each other. Good-bye all and keep shooting.

There's a malevolent force operating within photo.net that

threatens this community like a cancer.

Why should top rate people like Dennis be forced out by ill-bred

non-contributors or aliases?

Please photo.net admin reassure those following this thread

that remedial action is being taken.

Fellow members I trust your silence on this outrage will soon be

broken, and that your support is on the way........whatever

consequence it might have on your precious ratings. I promise to

10/10 any image that "picture man" happens to 1/1 - just speak

out, Dennis is one of us - a crime against one is a crime against

the whole.

Dennis my thoughts are with you, we'll get there my friend.

Before you, I was attacked by some one who disguises his or her ID like all cowards and I deleted all my photos and reloaded again and I am at about the same row now on the top member-rated photographers before deleted. Yes I accepted my photos were contaminated in this or that way and I did the correct thing but as to the photos. of yours, one can not suspect any contamination by you or your entourage. Before you, I told and wrote many times, this sistem is open to abuse and must be corrected and your proposal is one of the best solution to me as well. I would like to state some of my ideas about this sistem. These are taken from a letter which I sent to a member:

 

"As you see, I am No.-- at the moment in the row of top member-rated photographers and no one cliaim that these ratings include any phony ratings. There are some others photos of mine better than these ones and when they got ratings more then 10 (some of them are about to) this situation can change on behalf of me. This just prooved me one thing, "I am not someone loafing with an expencive camera in his hand and taking snapshots and boasting on the photo.net"

 

That does not mean that I am a good photographer, or better than the other photographers who have ratings less than mine. These are only numeric values and vice versa could be correct. But now I would like to ask you what is the rivalry problems between the top member-rated photographers. Have they got any benefit from this list. I am an amateur and being on the photo.net is just a hobby for me. I spent and can spend thousonds of US Dollars for photography as a hobby, and I did not earn a cent from the photography and I do not intend either..."

I would like to share my feelings with the members but I am painfully sorry about things happened to Dennis and I want to see him soon on the photo.net again...

 

Aslan Oguz

I was until recently blissfully unaware of the toplist of photogs, and any competition amongst fellow members for placement there. It was not until climbing the toplist I received some congrats which brought my attention to the list. Coincidentally since then, I have been vulnerable to private email abuse. I have been sent dozens of infected files from a Greek person who has a connection with 'Jetoil'. This may or may not be related to my position in the toplist, but the coincidence is there. I don't feel anything ought to be changed in the ratings system except making individual rating records visible to others. What I would like done is to have a specialised investigative team appointed, in order to protect members from competitive abusers. Should this incur a fee I would be happy to pay.

I review my previous statement from further experience. Members with no uploaded photos should not be able to rate. Furthermore, the number of uploaded photos should not be less than ten.

I completely agree with Geraldine Allen!

First let me give a big deep belly laugh! Ha! There are a lot of good suggestions, and a lot of silly ones too. :) I really like the rating system and would definitely like more comments/feedback but that is dependent on the user community at large so I agree with the person that said if you try to enforce them, you'd get "asdf". I also like the idea regarding dropping off photos from the critique that get X number of less than X for ratings. It's a pain in the ass to look at 50 pics of someone's camping trip before you get to a pic that someone put a lot of work into. It'd be nice if after X number of poor ratings if they'd just kind of stop showing up. Of course that'd eliminate half my stuff but so much the better! Tee Hee.

people:

 

show some liberalism, for Christ sake:

 

1. Accept diversity of opinions: some people like the rating system some don´t. I think keeping a sort of rating system is the smallest-harm-solution. Maybe one single grade to replace the obscure cleverness & aesthetics would not be so bad (bad-could be better-ok-good-excellent).

 

2. Do regard any kind of rating as a simple expression of an opinion, nothing more. Maybe the administrators of the server could make somehow that fewer things should depend on rating (i have the impression that some members are more concerned with what rates they and others receive than with what air they are breathing, which reminds me of my most annoying colleagues in the primary school who were taking notes of other people grades and of the occasions i was skipping this and the other class). Anyway the last week debates which turned into bloody fights, horror images of red-faced-with-veines-pulsing-on-their-forehead outraged guys ready to stab enemies or even sue the s**t out of them are a clear example that tolerance towards opinion is not exactly the strong point of many fellow members.

 

3. have some understanding with sensitive egos: IGNORE THEM. Most of the rating-related problems are rooted in egos of participants, deeply sensitive in their infantilism, they go to fight on a you-rated-bad-i-take-revenge kind of attitude which drops over their eyes a thick veil behind which photography is nothing but a pretext for showing their byceps of vanity.

 

4. i think restricting access of new members to the site is deeply discriminatory and would be a worst consequences situation, first of all because ghost-rating will anyway continue to exist and second because it would associate the photo net with the immage of a self-sufficient are-you-good-enough-to-be-one-of-us exclusivist community which would be against the very principle of it: LEARNING. And Vuk, many people don´t have any kind of e-mails than web based (i for example have a bussiness e-mail which i rather don´t use for private purposes and, becuse i am always moving from a place to another i have no reason to contract a dedicated private e-mail account, for the simple reason that in the last two years i lived in four different countries) you can´t put that against them.

 

5. rating involves a combination of so many factors that are not only impossible to quantify, but their action differ from individual to individual: no matter how many criteria you will formalise to make rating better: experience, age, own photos, studies, race, richness, if you get my point, or hell knows what else, there will always be one criteria you didn´t think at and that will overrule your system: mood is worth to mention, along with taste (de gustibus...).

 

6. choosing a jury every week among members of the pn community, on a random basis, to vote for the POW in a system in which, let´s say, their votes are calculated in an algebrical average with average of all the votes of all the other members, could be a way to make the choice of the POW more openly, but i personaly have nothing against the way it is now.

 

in any case, show some tolerance use some generosity in aproaching debates here and don´t forget that many (i´m one) members just want to learn how to make good pictures.

 

take care,

 

ic

First maybe I'm confused. I see such intense displays of emotion regarding the possibiltiy of tampering in the top photographer ranks. Did I miss something, is there a prize or a cash award for being the top rated photographer on photo.net? I guess since I am an amatuer I cannot fully appreciate the intensely competitive nature of professional photography.

 

Secondly and more importantly I believe you there would be more comments and ratings if there were a convienient way to do both at one time. I for one sometimes choose to do one or the other because if you rate the photo you have to wait for the screen to reload before you can then add a comment. Now with the upgrade to the way the database is displayed you have to change tabs to rate the photo to begin with then add the comment. If it were possible to do both actions in one place I know I would personally be more likely to do both.

 

Mind you I think it should be an option not the only way to do it. I know there are times to go through and rate an entire folder and you don't want to have to leave a comment every time.

Can't there be a simple software solution to this? Why not scour the registered members list for duplicate IP Addresses? My guess is the cheaters are using the same computer anyway, and this would weed them out real quick.

 

I have been a target of some of these attacks, and suspect that there are also some that are giving their own porfolios high ratings in conjunction with bombing others' work.

 

An IP address ban from this site should be enforced for anybody caught cheating, IMHO.

Chris I empathise with your situation, many of us have been

"attacked" by accounts that seem valid (i.e. they have 5 or 6 pics)

but are probably secondary and tertiary accounts for a "front

man." What to do?

 

Your solution is flawed. Consider this one example : a

photographic lab employing 10 people. 3 are members of

photo.net and using the same ISP and computer/ network. Run a

search for same IP and then accuse these 3 of being 1 and ban

them from the site?

 

I don't think so. I have said I too was attacked - let me add, I am

no poorer for it, no blood was spilled, there are no contusions on

my body, my ego is much as before - in a way I took it as a

compliment.

 

As someone stated, there are no prizes for being #1.

Before I begin, two things need mentioning. First, I have not read all of the above, but I do know that many (valid) arguments have been made both for and against a rating system. Second, whatever may ultimately be done, the fiasco we are presently experiencing on the POW page is a clear indication that the system MUST be completely overhauled or eliminated. While I have advocated the elimination of ratings, this need not be the path chosen, but PLEASE elves, do something. In any event, the following is reposted from the POW thread of this week:

 

First, I have been involved in photography for about one year, and a registered member of this site for nearly as long. I am pleased with my progress, but readily admit I am not even close to the caliber of some of the better photographers here (Dummett, MacEachern, Julian, Bayer, Heller, Allen, Spinak, Vuksanovic come to mind - but there are MANY others). For me, this site has proved an invaluable tool in learning, recognizing, and appreciating the fundamentals of photography. It has shown me the possibilities that this wonderful medium can offer. And I truly appreciate the fact that I have an opportunity to *interact* with quality photographers such as those I have mentioned.

 

For me, I find myself somewhat neutral to the *idea* of ratings, but given the exponential growth in abuse of the system, and the generally lowered atmosphere of this site as a result, I now find myself absolutely opposed to the *practice* of ratings. Many on this site will know who I am by the comments I leave, but none will know me by my ratings *because I do not rate*.

 

Now, I recognize that ratings *can* serve a useful purpose in directing people towards some of the more generally acclaimed work that can be found here, but it seems to me that, at this point, the negatives far outweigh this meagre benefit. As such, why not simply *stop* rating. Tris has talked about the absurdity of ratings, yet continues to practice this dark art. Again, why not just stop? I have benefitted greatly from this site without rating a single picture and without receiving a single rating since I don't have any uploaded photos to rate (a matter I hope to rectify by this summer since I think it a valid assertion many have made about the diminished credibility of a critique by a photo.netter with no uploaded photos (me), vs. a critique by a contributor with uploaded photos of marginal quality (Tris) vs. a critique by a contributor with a magnificent portfolio (any of those photographers previously mentioned)). So if I can benefit from this site without giving or receiving ratings, why can't others? (BTW, when I do upload photos, I intend to attach a disclaimer discouraging, although not necessarily prohibiting ratings if the photo.netter feels compelled to rate). The bottom line is that the benefit of this site comes from the discussions it stimulates, and the exposure it offers. Ratings, while theoretically intriguing, have become an absurd reality.

 

I'm not sure if I can encourage a ground swell of support or not, but I would propose that the core group of contributors to this site simply stop rating. Through a considered disassociation such as this, perhaps we can encourage quality photographers to remain active and valuable contributors to this site. That is my hope.

Should you have an interest in a couple of 24 hour photo.net discussions on this subject they have been retained <a href="http://billhocker.com/photonet/ratingsgame1.htm">here</a>.

The only thing I think will work is what I've suggested to photo net and what many other members have supported. A 15 member jury made up of an honest, talented, and diverse group of anonymous members. Anonymous to us and to each other... that take a look at "nominated" images (with a special box where any member could say they nominate this image) and the 15 or so vote on whether the image meets the tough standards to get on a separate list of "Best Photos". That would be a true list and would also be under greater scrutiny just as the POW is. Some would agree with the choice and others would not agree and there would be great/stimulating debate in the comments. There would be no silly worries about how the comment/rate would effect the standing on the Top Member List which would just continue to be the farce it is....OR maybe, just maybe people would go out and shoot really good images and hope and try and learn and improve and be honored for their effort with a spot on the honest list. We, as members could benefit from a list of voted top images where we could go when we want to learn from the best. That is something I'd like to see.