ENOUGH IS ENOUGH - Ratings Abuse

How long is the abuse of the ratings system by two members of this

site going to be allowed to continue for?

I won't go so far as to name the two involved, but I'm sure that

enough of you must be as suspicious as I am about them. The Gallery

is filled with many mediocre photographs by them and yet they garner

so many ratings.

I'll stick my neck out here and say that I reckon 8 out of ten of

these raters to be bogus. Look at some of the names - they're

hilarious! They all seem to post the same or similar one or two word

superlatives followed by an exclamation mark. In fact, some of the

more imaginative three to five word comments are as hilarious as the

names they've made up.

If, as I predict, you are as suspicious as me, have a look at some

of these "users" and the pictures they've made comments and rated

on. None of them have uploaded any photos or a profile. When I

looked at my raters I came across very few of this type of "user".

Now, I know some of you are going to say "sour grapes" and "but

these people you say are made up have rated many other photographs".

Well, to the first point I will say that, if and when I do get a

very highly rated photo, it will be through my own merit, and to the

second point, if you were going to invent fictional raters, wouldn't

you do the same?

The odd thing is, is that these two have some good photo's in their

folders and I don't know how or when this addiction started - it

isn't necessary.

There are some fantastic images condemned to the lower pages of the

gallery, whilst this pair artificially boost image after image.

By the way, I think if one of them left their lens cap on, the other

would still give them a 6/6 or 7/7.

I reckon the abuse of the ratings system will go on about as long as they have a ratings system. Pretty much has since the first hour they started I suppose.

<i>I won't go so far as to name the two involved, </i><p>

 

It's your own fault if nothing gets done if you don't alert someone at

abuse@photo.net <p>

Ok- so you don't name names, you don't provide links- you've given no alternative to the current system, or any plan of action- you haven't confronted these "abusers" and you haven't notified abuse...

 

 

so, basically the purpose of your thread was just to bitch and moan, right?

 

 

I'm sure Brian and the mods will get right on driving out your faceless/nameless "abusers".

Erin, I didn't think it appropriate to "name names" in a public forum.

For your information, the moderators have been informed and are looking into it.

She can rub her legs to make things click,

She's one groovy yankee chick.

Maybe she's a southern hick,

but don't you call old Erin thick.

 

Anyway, back to the case in point. I rarely bother coming here because people just bitch and moan about the ratings, or ask the same dumbass questions. Look through thearchives to see what's been said on this before.

Is photo of the week really that important? Let's just ditch the rating system entirely.

I too have been abused by this RATING SYSTEM. My pictures are the best yet they are rated just 1 or 2. I will not stand for this anymore.

For some reason, my indifferent photos seem to be getting mediocre ratings; I would like that fixed while y'all are at it. : )

Hmm, Leonard "0 uploaded public photos" Whistler has posted a sarcastic response. Seeing as he's only been a member for all of five minutes, I'll ignore it.

And thank you so much to "A Z" , who has seen fit to go into my folder and rate practically all my images average to low - and who also has no uploaded photos, like Mr Crame.

You people just don't get it. Why do some of you take it as a personal attack? This wasn't about my ratings, how would it improve them? It is about everybody on this site (who uploads their photos) having a mockery made of them by two dishonest individuals.

Marc, the answer is that the rating system is a big turd. And no matter what photo.net does to try and make it better, well....you can't polish a turd.

People need to stop looking for affirmation from faceless nameless unqualified people on the internet. I would venture a guess that 80% of the people rating photos on photo.net don't know anything about image critiquing or even photography in general. But that's okay, because 98% of the photos posted here suck, so it all evens out.

<i>thank you so much to "A Z" , who has seen fit to go into my folder and rate

practically all my images average to low - and who also has no uploaded photos, like

Mr Crame. You people just don't get it.</i><p>

 

Hmm, Some cheese with your whine...<p>

 

No, actually you don't get it. If you bothered to pay attention to the rules of this site

you'd know that uploads are not and have have been required in order to rate. <p>

 

Also, notes of abuse should be sent to abuse@photo.net. If you think that I or anyone

else abusively rated your photos, please complain. But I rated your photos fairly and

no differently from anyone else whose photos I've rated in the last four years

here.<p>

Report abuse to abuse@com if any.. and I am sure there are in Pnet ... agree with you about mate rating a Pain In The A## .... but as far far as AZ is concerned I think he/she made quite fine/nice job to you... In My Opinion... the fact that he/she has not post any pics should not be of a concern. Actually he/she was nicer with you than some other raters that came to your pictures... Non posting pictures doesnt mean no ability to critic... isnt it?! ...and dont worry he went mine too...:-) ..rating them average or better sometime and I thank him for time spent. We need more people like AZ here <p>

PS: I am not AZ!!!

Please, allow me to stress that this has NOTHING to do with my ratings. The reason I laboured the point of people having no uploaded photo's is because this issue of bogus accounts doesn't really affect them. Just suppose that I am right and justified in what I stated in my original post about bogus accounts, are some of you suggesting that it is okay? It's very hard to prove, I know, but, if you have a suspicion of who I'm talking about, have a look at their lists of raters and click on some of them.

<<How long is the abuse of the ratings system by two members of this site going to be allowed to continue for?>>

 

Mr. Sintchak said it best I believe. Remove two rating abusers and 4 more will rise up to take their place. There simply is no way to end it w/o completely removing the rating system.

 

It's just not worth getting worked up over. There will always be those that judge their self-worth by an arbitrary number on a website. They will do anything they can to raise that number. Ignore them and search out the truly spectacular photos on photo.net.

Hello everyone, I just got burnt on a photo I put up today. I got a 1,1 and a 2,2 rating by two members(?). These 2 people have no public photos to show of their own, funny. I agree with most of your comments, I don't think this will harm the site if it is looked at with an open mind. There are many bitter photopgraphers in this world and this site is perfect for them to vent by abusing the rating system. I look at it this way, if they intentionally low rate one of my pictures, it must be because the are incapable of producing such a shot and they are jealous. I'll take that as a compliment any day!

Dimitrolos Krajci & Xavier Cobos, how about some feedback on the ratings you gave me?

Mark, read again Richard's post. I sympathize with you generally speaking - though I have no idea who are the 2 people you are refering to. All I can say is that I can name at least 10 more - but what for...? :-)

<p>

Write to the abuse department ? I don't know. Doesn't seem to be of much use either, so I've stopped. Have a look here:

<p>

http://www.photo.net/photo/1753235

<p>

Is this in your opinion a 1/1 ? Can it ever be rated that way ? This picture has been published by the way. You may like it or not, but you don't see this sort of images very often, so it's not a 1 in originality. And in aesthetics, it's sharp, it's at least a more or less decent composition, so no matter whether you like the angles and the colors or not, you can't say that this belongs to the *worst* images on the site. Fact is that there are all kind of folks on the site who rate based on their own preferences, regardless of the actual (objective) merits of the picture at hand. If a picture is reasonably well done, eventhough I don't like what the author tried to do, I'd never go below 2/3, and that would be very rare. 3/3 or 3/4 is more like it. I've received quantities of 2s as well, from people who just registered on that day itself and disappeared for ever a day later. I can name at least 3 people using fake accounts on this site - yes, I'm sure, but I won't name them, because nobody cares anyway.

<p>

The entire rating system has been changed into a farce by those who abused it, be it on the high or on the low side of the scale; and there are thousands of abuses out there which make it quite impossible to find really great pictures via the long term top-rated pages. If you log on every day and go through most of the 3 days top-rated above 5, chances are you'll see good and great shots, but if you don't, the long term will be hopeless.

<p>

Basically, we are left to browse pages more or less at random, and I regularly find a great picture rated at an average below 5, with 2 or 3 or 10 or 25 ratings. That's photo.net. The top-rated pages are no longer really presenting us with the best pictures (not sure if they ever did anyway), but rather showing us, mostly, those who succeeded in manipulating the system well enough. The highest number of comments and other non-average searches are far more interesting than the highest average searches anyway - at least that's quite okay.

<p>

Regarding averages, what hope is there at all when you consider that photo.net can ban members for abuse, and yet let their thousands of ratings remain on the site ?

<p>

Forget it. Just try to find better photographers one way or another, and mostly, don't expect this site to ever be fair. It has even stopped to *try* to be, as far as I can tell - probably because too many of its members were abusing the system. I gave up. Couldn't care less anymore. I upload a picture now and then, not as much as I used to. I don't take the ratings from unknown folks even half-seriously, I more or less stopped commenting on the site, I still look around and rate the few shots I really like a lot (that's not many), and that's it. Forget about ratings or forget about the site - that's the choice you've got.

I look upon both the ratings system and the comments as a way for identifying photographic "kindred spirits".

If someone rates one of my images 6/6 or 7/7, chances are that I will also find some of their work to be of equal value. Intelligent comments (of the favorable sort of course <grin>) will also prompt me to examine their portfolios. Using the ratings system in this manner results in my getting the opportunity to evaluate and comment on work of photographers that, in many cases, have escaped the notice of the photo.net "crowd".

Mark has made a fair point here, but I get the message that it is

useless to try and stop it. What a pity. Lifes not fair and neither

is photo.net and we have to live with it, OR DO WE.

 

If there were more Marc's around and we all complained and

reported it, maybe, just maybe, it would lessen.

 

I have noticed something similar, but have no proof, but I know I

thought I would challenge one of these photos the other day, and

lo and behold it was removed, without any reciprocal comment.

 

Surely, if more of us challenged, then perhaps these mediocre

photos would cease to get on the top pages.

 

Way to go Marc, very brave of you.

 

Now I'll just sit back and wait for the hate rates to start on my

folder too.

 

Alethea

<i>"I more or less stopped commenting on the site"</i>-Marc Gouguenheim

<p>

-well, that is a pity.

You mean you take ratings seriously?

Marc more or less stopping to comment really is a pity. There are many ways to search besides ratings (e.g., number of comments, requests for critique, etc.), and I recommend all of them.

 

But, at the end of the day, my motto here is simple: A comment is worth a thousand ratings!

 

Forget the ratings - more comments!

<i> I just got burnt on a photo I put up today. I got a 1,1 and a 2,2 rating </i><p>

 

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'll rate it later. ;-> ) <p>

 

<i>These 2 people have no public photos to show of their own, funny. </i><p>

 

It's not funny, it's how photo.net has always worked. You did know the rules of the

site before you uploaded, didn't you? After all, you registered at photo.net over a year

ago.<p>

 

<i>I don't think this will harm the site if it is looked at with an open mind. There are

many bitter photopgraphers in this world</i><p>

 

Lots of thin-skinned ones, too.

On the old FIDOnet, which I think is still limping along somewhere, one of the main

(maybe unwritten) rules was codified as, "Don't be too annoying, and don't be too

easily annoyed."

 

Complaining to the proper individuals about a concern over abuse is fine. Whining

about it publicly when it you may not have proof is annoying... and useless.

 

It's natural to feel bad after liking your own photo and finding that your feeling is not

shared by others. Complaining publicly and demanding to know why the photo was

rated low (from individuals who probably aren't even reading this thread) is clearly

being too easily annoyed.

 

Enough is enough: indeed.