A change in the way that the critique forum is presented - IMPORTANT

To eliminate the issue of images getting shoved down the critique forum too quickly, we have changed the way that

it is presented.

<p>

Critique forum images are now presented in a random order. For 24 hours after an image is submitted for critique,

it stays in the critique "queue". The server then randomly chooses 100 of those images to display on the Critique

Forum. Those 100 images are re-chosen every minute.

<p>

So you may not see your image instantly after you submit it. But your image WILL appear many many times over the

next 24 hours. Which is a large improvement to getting high visibility for 30 minutes or an hour, then getting

buried down at the bottom of the page.

Good move, Josh. With the new change, now everyone would have an equal chance to see the images submitted in every 24-hr cycle. So for myself, I won't miss any images submitted last night at 3 a.m. when I was deep asleep. Thanks.

Fabulous idea.

Brilliant. Great idea.

 

This is how I handle my voicemail, too. :-)

Great solution to a tough problem!

Josh, et al., very, very cool idea! I noticed that something was up as I saw a couple of my postings that I had put up last night. This will benefit those who post for 'Critique Only.' Keep up the good work, and thanks! Chris

I seldom submit images, but agree that this is an excellent improvement to the Critique Forum and Rate Photos queue. Keep up the good work.

That explains why I have 0 views after several minutes :-)<p>

 

A good move in the right direction!

 

Some quick calculations: If we assume 25 requests per minute, we have a 0.278 % chance, that our picture makes it

in a given minute (1440 minutes per day). Obviously, average exposure per day is 4 minutes. Chance to make it

into the top 10 of the queue: 34%. <br>

<br>

Positive: <br>

The system is much more balanced among all photos submitted. <br>

People don't have to worry anymore, when to submit the photo<br>

<br>

Negative: <br>

The chance to be in the first 10 of the queue decreased from 100% to 34% <br>

Since on average, each photo is only picked 4 times, there is still a wide spread and a slim chance to make it

into the "rush hour" of the critique forum. If we assume the phase of high activity to last 6 hours a day, you

have a 37% chance you won't make it in that phase.<br>

There is a 2% chance your picture will never be shown.

<p>

I repeat: This is all valid under the assumption of 25 requests per minute. The less pictures submitted per

minute, the better the new system.

<i>The less pictures submitted per minute, the better the new system.</i>

<br><Br>

Which makes the case for a quota-based submission system all the more compelling, to be sure.

Certainly a great idea for the whole bunch. But for fellows like me who go through te categorized critique queues this can be somewhat disturbing, in particular for low traffic categories. How about defining a minimum number of photos to be displayed per category, say 40 or 50?

"If we assume 25 requests per minute" The total queue indidcated on the right has currently 6250 pictures. It dates back days afaik. This makes about 0.6 requests per minute, not 25.

Thomas: Thanks for pointing that out. I really had no reference, since it is impossible now to find old submissions. Clicking on "astrophotography" for example reveals only 2 images right now. Let's assume there are 4.34 submissions per minute (all 6250 from the last 24 hours).

<p>

Here are the adjusted values:<br>

1.6% chance for an image to appear in a given minute<br>

Average exposure per day: 23 minutes<br>

Chance to make it in the top 10 of the queue: 91%<br>

0.3% probability picture will not show during high activity phase<br>

Near 100% probability that picture will be shown<p>

 

As stated earlier, the system is drastically better with less requests. But even with 25 requests per minute the system scales in the sense that easy adjustments could be made such as changing pictures every 30 seconds or showing 150 per cycle.

Folks, without knowing it, you are mixing up a few things. I'll clarify at some point. But at the moment I'm waiting for my steak

and visiting with an old college friend.

 

Trust in me on all this stuff. We're moving forward, but I need your patience while we do it. And help keeping others correctly informed.

On another note, I wonder how the total number of ratings given is influenced by the fact that now, submissions are distributed equally throughout the whole day while ratings still are given mostly during peak time.

 

In other words: More pictures than before are shown during times with few rating events, and less pictures than before are shown during times with many rating events.

 

Depending on the ratings/submissions-ratio this could or could not affect the total number of ratings.

Come on people, let me eat my (undercooked) steak!

 

Seriously though, this currently only applies to the critique forum. The ratings aspect will wait for another day.

Josh, enjoy your dinner and many thanks for a great improvement to Photo Net.

GO JOSH GO! (I would have put in more exclamation points, but I'm told that one is sufficient!) Wonderful idea. I've

stumbled across many nice photos tonight. It made my rating/critique "quota" more

palatable. Thanks!

<i>"On another note, I wonder how the total number of <b>ratings</b> given is influenced..."</i><p>

 

Oh, he shoots, he scores! Yes! Less than 4 hours between an improvement to the critique system and the inevitable digression into the totally unrelated ratings system. Well done. My faith has been restored in the ability of photo.netters to turn any and every topic back toward the ratings game. Even the blogosphere takes longer than four hours to turn a news report about a bigfoot sighting into a rant about the presidential campaign.

Sorry Lex. Originality 1, Aesthetics 4. (You got uprated for including a bigfoot reference.)

I hope it will work well.

Lex:

I'm sorry, I have used the terms "rating" and "critique" completely interchangeably here. Probably, the fact that I am not a native English speaker plays a role too. For this discussion, please just read it as "opinions given" since for the system it really doesn't matter whether it's critique, rating, or anything else.

 

Just look at it on a more abstract level :-)

 

PS: also note I have not rated - I mean criticized - the new system :-p

OH! Now I get it... I was about to submit a feedback about "critique forum behaving weirdly"... <p>

On top of my mind, I would say I like the idea, I have to sort out the numbers a bit, but just now I'm not sure I share some concerns I read in the thread. <p>

I hear mentioning "the 6 hours of forum rush". I had the feeling there is something like this, but I do not know when they exactly take place: I would be curious to know a figure of this (I mean observed figure, not guesswork) if admins have one...<p>

Ciao L.

Excellent! These improvements are what I love about pnet.

It sounds like a good idea. However, since I have a life outside pnet, I have yet to see either of the two shots I posted last night. I did check during slow times last night while watching "Ghost Rider," very guilty pleasure. It doesn't bother me all that much, since I'm still getting critiques/comments.

 

If that steak isn't still making noise, you've overcooked it.

Lex, I'm guessing that your glass is half empty.