Jump to content

Exclusion from the Gallery Rating System


mottershead

Recommended Posts

We have decided to institute a policy under which the Gallery

moderators will be able to exclude individual portfolios from the

photo rating system. This will be done when in the judgement of the

moderators this exclusion would be in the best interests of photo.net

and the Gallery.

 

 

 

 

In particular, it will be done when an individual portfolio is at the

center of too many claims and counter-claims of abuse, "mate-rating"

and retaliatory rating, and where in our opinion the ratings on that

portfolio have lost any possible objective meaning or usefulness or

where the continued inclusion of that portfolio in the rating system

would be divisive, time-consuming for the moderators, and an ongoing

distraction from the aims of the Gallery. We expect such exclusions

to be quite rare.

 

 

 

 

Photos that are excluded from the rating system in this way will still

be available for view and comments, and may be submitted for Critique

Requests. But the photos will not be ratable and will not be visible

in the "Top Photos" feature, and any prior ratings will not be

visible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 368
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's certainly a constructive and efficient action to take IMO. One question though Brian, will an excluded portfolio photographer still be able to rate others? Because disabling ratings of their work might then stimulate them into an all-out retaliation without fear of damage back in their folders. It would in effect be a case of having 'nothing to lose'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume that some sort of warning would go out to an individual

before the ax falls.

 

Mate rating and retaliating should perhaps be defined in very

concrete terms - both quantity and quality.

 

I can think of several people who should be very worried about

regular high rates from groupies who have received no

encouragement at all and over whom they have no control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carl, this action will be taken as a last resort.

 

In some ways it will not always seem fair, since we may remove a person's portfolio from the rating system because of the behaviour of other people which might not be within the control of the person in question. (In any case, he or she will always be able to claim that this behaviour is not within his or her control.) However, when a person's portfolio becomes a battleground between warring factions, and a high percentage of the ratings are not related to the merit of the photo, the rating system has ceased to operate in any rational way with respect to that person, and it makes more sense just to remove that person's photos from the rating system. In the end, it seems to make much more sense to deal with "singularities" in the rating system in this somewhat arbitrary way, involving moderator judgement, rather than trying to come up with complex rules and heuristics to ensure that no singularities can ever appear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would seem that depending on the time frame, Tony's and

Marc's would be prime candidates. Would that be good for the

site?

 

I guess I'd rather see the people handing out excessive sevens

and ones prevented from rating rather than assume that the

recipients are at fault..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anna: I'm not looking for a flame war so please take my comments as sincere and not meant as a personal attack. They are written in the spirit of respectful candor.

 

"I find this discrimination fully illegal, arbitrary and detrimental to a PN member. I will take severe measures to protect my rights."

Since May 2002 you have rated 3425 photos on this site, with average ratings of 5.93 for originality and 6.03 for aesthetics. This is a perfect example of why something needed to change. Giving everyone high marks makes it difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff.

 

Please tell me know where I can find the legal references to support your contention that excluding someone's gallery from the rating system is illegal. My understanding is that we have no rights other than that given to us by the administrators. And what "severe measures" can you take? Quit the site? Give Brian a bunch of 1s on his photos?

 

We are powerless to force changes to the site. We can only persuade the administrators to see our way of thinking. I am willing to thoughtfully listen to an explanation why Brian's plan is poor. And since you don't like his suggestion for stopping the abuse of the rating system, how would you suggest he change the system to prevent the buddy system from ruining the rating system? Can you help me understand why your ratings are so high?

 

Sincerely, Christopher

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Why not just remove the ratings system all together?

It serves no useful purpose. At least without comments. Why

not require anyone leaving a rating no matter what level to leave

a comment. And require comments to be of a certain length.

Summation: If you rate, you comment, if you comment, it has to

be yeah long.<P>

 

You already have this mechanism in place. (Commenting

required for certain ratings) We may get less ratings but who

cares without constructive critism?<P>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like this thread not to become a discussion of whether the ratings system should be eliminated. That is not on the table for discussion and the rating system isn't going to be eliminated. If you think the ratings are stupid, then ignore them and surf through the Gallery however you please, or ignore the Gallery entirely if you prefer.

 

The reason that we have the ratings is to help people find the better photos from the more than half million that are uploaded. Since we started counting views, photos in the photo.net Gallery have received more than 740 million views from literally millions of people. We want the time people spend here to be rewarding. We want to provide them with some reasonable entry points into, and paths through, the Gallery. If they are drawn to the site, and spend enough time here, eventually they will find their own paths through the Gallery.

 

But our computers can't read and understand comments, any more than they can look at photographs and decide which ones are good. We could let elite gatekeepers decide which photos should get attention, as we do with the Photograph of the Week, but that isn't how we generally do things on this site. Rather, we let the members of photo.net decide which photos deserve the attention of others -- through the rating system. When you rate one picture higher than another you are saying: "I recommend this picture to the attention of other Gallery visitors more than this other picture." That is all. If you rate only the photos of people who have befriended you on the site, and rate them uniformly high, your ratings aren't helping anybody. It is not our intention that the ratings be a form of communication or social interaction between the rater and the photographer, a way for the rater to flatter, solicit, or thank the photographer for the attention given to the rater's photos. The ratings are there for the benefit of the entire Gallery audience.

 

One might argue that *none* of the ratings on *any* of the portfolios are meaningful in the slightest way -- that it is all a fun little social/political game that some people play better than others. I do not agree. While the behaviour of some participants supports this argument, generally, the rating system works. It breaks down in certain cases. Rather than adding rule upon rule, restriction upon restriction, twist upon twist, to try to compel everybody to be judicious and reasonable, we prefer to keep the system simple -- stepping in only in isolated cases where, for whatever reason, it does not work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's sad that you deleted all ratings from Anna's photos. Though I have read your posts I don't understand the reasons. Let it be. And let people rate as they want. Don't try to educate them. Me too rates mostly between 5 and 7. Jim McNitt and others do too.<p>

Hey, and she's a paying member. Don't you think you should have asked her at least? I think at the point where you have paying members you can't take a position "only the admins can decide whatever they want". At least I would recommend not seeing it this way. I really appreciate all your work, Brain, but this move was a fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is a very difficult one, and I don't think there is an easy solution.

I think the rating system works on some levels and not on others, some photographers pay a lot of attention to the ratings they get for photos and other photographers don't see ratings as important.

Having read a lot of the threads on various photos it is evident that there seems to be 'mini wars' going on.

 

Critique of a photo is an important way to learn, I have learnt much more from posting photos on this site than have from any book read. Looking at great photographers work is inspirational, on photo.net I think as a community we have a fantastic wealth of amazing images from around the world.

Forming friendships on photo.net is easy, I think that is the beauty of the site and because of those friendships 'mate-rating' is inevitable to a certain extent.

Often it is not from a favouritism point of view that people rate certain photographers, it is because something drew you to their photos in the first place and when they upload a new one it is exciting to look at and to rate/comment on it.

 

I think that Anna Pagnacco brings a lot of attention to the site. I don't always agree with the ratings she is given and there are times when they are not justified BUT she has a lot of EXCELLENT work and I know that as a photographer she is a source of inspiration to many many people. I don't know to what extent mate-rating or retaliation has gone on in this case but I am sure there are just as many people that will give an honest critique to her work.

 

I understand that there is probably no right or wrong outcome and appreciate that you have had to come to a difficult decision and one that you have not taken lightly, I just think it is a shame that it has come to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot rate the photos of Anna Pagnacco.<br>

I would like to know whether the person who rate photos with a 1/1 without leaving any comment are also excluded from rating .<br>

I think it is not the best way to patronize members. <br>

May be, this poor policy will prevent users to get a paying member.<br>

I also think that photo.net needs money to keep this growing system running.<bR>

But when this system will stop growing then there is no need for money.<br>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Superbissimo Brian!<p>

 

This is an executive decision made by one of the Executives of this site. As far as I am aware, these decisions are to be made by the people who own and operate the site. I think they have been patient with all of us for long enough. In that regard I would suggest anyone who wants to rehash all of this go and read this forum, for one, (there are numerous such forums) where they have tried to get people to pay attention to the purpose of this site. <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0054hW">a rating reform</a> </p><p> Speaking as one who has lost her equilibrium on this site recently and behaved in an extremely childish and outlandish manner totally foreign to my nature, I think it is time we all stood back and had a look at our reasons for being on photo.net and the actual reason for the existance of the site. Let's try and give our Executives a chance to run the site in the manner it is meant to be operated. Let's give them a chance to get some enjoyment out of their time and money spent on this, too. Let's have a look at all the other information on this site, other than the top photos pages. You may be pleasantly surprised to find how much fun is going on in other places, and how much excellent information is available on this site. Check out some of the forums that actually address any number of problems to do with PHOTOGRAPHY. Check out articles on the site. You can use the search feature in forums to find anything you need. Try 'monitor calibration' in that search box. Just that one item will keep you occupied in a usefull manner for quite some time. From having had a look around these 'back pages' of photo.net recently, I am convinced that they are the real reason people actually come to photo.net, not the gallery or the few faces in gallery who are perpetually making a big noise. Quite a few of the comments in some of these forums that I have come across simply imply that the ratings system if a 'wank'. Brian has tried to fix it by appealing to our adult reasoning abilities. No one has been listening, so extreme measures seem to be the answer to children. Until we learn to behave like adults, we can expect nothing else. </P>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian...I'm very disappointed that Anna Pagnacco's photo ratings were removed from her photo�s here on the photo.net site. I feel Anna is constantly one of the most prolific contributors of hi-quality work on the site. Yes there are shots she produces that I don't like, yes she may date rate (I pay NO attention to that), yes she may come across as rather stilted and yes she probably makes some of the biggest anti-Anna squawkers quite jealous But in the everyday scheme of things she contributes much more good than the average photo.net squeaker...pardon me, user contributes. <p>Brian I believe this to be an unjust decision and I ask that you reconsider. Respectfully...jim vanson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has never been clear to me if the people who exchange high

rates and frequently appear on the top pages understand what it

is that so many of us are concerned about. Do you not

understand or simply disagree, becasue the debate that will

ensue for the next few days will be a lot less constructive if both

sides find they are unable or unwilling to recognize the position

of the other side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took a wander through the photos that I have rated (top rated photos by this person function)and looked at my history of 7s.

 

I found too many....but anyway.

 

I found two or three of Anna's photos.

 

here is the url for one: http://www.photo.net/photo/901695

 

The comments are still viewable and the number of viewings.

 

I suspect that my use of 7, although not too bad or too heavy, was in part influenced by the use of 7s by others.

 

I must confess that I have had the odd worry, that there are several photo netters who through the great flood of phots I have found there work to my taste and in some cases they have liked my work as well...a good example is Stephen Hickel. I have gotten to the point now where if I see he has rated my photos with a 6 or maybe even a 7, I almost cringe because I wonder how the moderators will view this. So I go less often to look at his work, and I do not rate his work as often as I used to. Not to pick on Stephen, but I find that he posts a lot of photos, some to my eye are average, and a few are well above average. On the basics of technical merit, focus, exposure, tonal range, etc. he knows what he is doing.

 

I am not complaining, I hope, I do too much of that from time to time on here....I just thought it might be worth adding the effect for me, and if it is affecting me, then I am sure it is affecting others....

 

I am going to try and comment more and rate less, and certainly rate less highly..... I imagine though that I will always find it difficult to rate average or below average photos.

 

I absolutely agree that the gallery and ratings are the important tool to allow photonet millions find a variety and range of good to excellent photos and I hope useful, educational comments that can help that viewer of the image to understand how their photos work well or less well and how to improve their technique.

 

regards and good wishes to all from

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should feel free to rate your friend Stephen's photos. If you

feel some not to be as strong as others, have you ever given that

image a 4/4 - or lower - and explained what you though could

have made it better? If you have been reluctant to do so because

he may somehow think less of you and not visit your portfolio as

often, then you have succumbed to the all too common social

pressure that defines the problem. If you have given an

assortment of ratings and comments to the same member, then

we need you to be more active with both your rates and

comments, not less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what your rating habits are. (The only one who can

easily check for patterns is Brian). I'm pointing out that if you are

surprised or take exception to the action taken against Anna,

then I'm wondering why because many of us can give you a long

list of reasons why this was considered to be in the best

interests of the site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...