Is there something wrong with the system?

When a member rates or comments on one of my photographs, I generally

visit that member's folder in return. I find that it is helpful to me

to understand the rating or comment (good, neutral, or bad) if I have

some background information regarding the member. If this member is a

posting photog so much the better, since I believe the old adage

about "a thousand words". If the member does not post I try to look at

other photographs that he rated.

 

As we all know, this function is available in each of our home folders

under the heading of..."You can browse some of the highest rated

photos by this member".

 

Well, I was visited by a certain member who, has no background info,

no posted photographs, and who leaves no comments. No, it wasn't

Bailey Seals. I tried to examine some of the reported 1889 highest

photographs that he rated but all I get is the following message:

"Either no photos satisfy your search criteria or the photo.net system

is doing your search in the background. Please try again in a few

minutes". It does not matter when I try the search, the result is

always the same. If anyone is interested in this I can supply the

person's ID. Regards.

What it means Walt is that he has rated no images at least a 6/6. Could be another bogus account... or not. 1889 images rated with not even one 6/6 is quite unusual though! Don't send him my way....

No Vince, I would not do that to you. I clicked on his request for email address (I don't know why) and five minutes later he was trashing my stuff.

Walter, you are aware that now, when we request an email address, the system sends an email to the other person as well?? So, for people of a certain psychological disposition, a request for email address could be interpreted as a personal attack... hence, they come to trash your stuff. It shouldn't be like that, but these people are out there...

Sounds like this could be a case of abuse, try e-mailing abuse@photo.net.

Portfolio raids motivated by site activity are not considered abuse. Neither are rates in the 3/4 range. Statistically, he is exactly what the database loves. The fact that he has no images and has never said a word on this site is immaterial.

No Carl, I did not consider it to be a case of defined abuse. I just think the guy is a flaming moron. I am going to email him (what's the harm now?) and politely request that he refrain from rating me. Regards.

Sorry, I wanted to add this to the above: But Vincent has a point, don't you think? This fellow as now rated nearly two thousand photographs and not one of them is highly rated. If I recall previous threads on this subject, such a prediliction is, at least, suspicious.

Welcome to the "club", Walter. Like it or not, your new fan will most likely rate every photo that you upload. And don't be surprised if s/he brings company. (-:

Perhaps this person has just looked at the wrong 2000 photos.

 

Walter sorry to know you have been found by such a person.

 

Someone explain to me why a non posting compulsive rater is the best type of p'netter. Is it they take up no room?

Count me in as part of the club... I got a 2/3 on one of my better images. I have reported it to abuse@ but I know it won't do any good... I find it impossible to believe that this person has not seen one image that satisfies "good" in it's mind. I guess it counter balances the 7/7's out there a bit...

The image that prompted this post appears to be your color landscape shot with a grad. It has roughly 80 rates and a 6/6.5 average.

 

That's higher than any of my images - ever. So let me ask you this - how would you rate the image yourself . . . and why?

 

(Perhaps we should carry on this specific issue over on the photo in question.)

Why not just ignore him?

I don't think there's anything wrong with the system, it's humans that are the problem.

 

For myself if I see a picture I like I give it what I think is a deserved rating either with or without a comment. If I see a picture I don't like but I think it had potential or I usually like the photographers work, then I rate it and leave a comment. If I don't like the picture and have no interest in the photographers work I move on to the next picture. Hence I have a high average rating score for rating others. Nope I'm not trying to be a saint just a human. BTW according to the system a 4 isn't a low score just average.

 

I actually experience something this week which did wind me up a little. I rated a picture quite well and left a comment. The picture was deleted and re-submitted as someone else had given that person a 3/3. Hence wasting my time and effort, I'm sure the photographer had his / her own reasons but it's a new one on me.

Just to be somewhat fair I did receive several ratings from this same person just this morning. Here was one of them. This was obviously the highest.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/ratings_breakdown?photo_id=1492135

 

My only real wish is when an image is generally well received (or even if not) if somebody does not like it, why not share the reasons why? That is really the best way to help us all improve. Even if I disagree with the points of view, it is still beneficial for all of us to put the ideas on the table and think over. Unfortunately we cannot make others do what *we* would like to see being done. But we can however make it a point to do the same ourselves.

 

I like the pic in question Carl. But also agree with your comment to some degree. However, I am sure that if the lower rating was accompanied with a comment, Walt would have actually appreciated having that visit altogether.

 

On a side note: You have a distinct style Carl that is definitely unique. You have inspired others to do likewise. I certainly hope you are content by having had such a positive effect on many others. If ratings were your goal, then perhaps posting some lovely scenics such as what we see in Walter's folders should be tried instead of the "Ballroom Window" and "Scratch One" whatever they are images. While very good in originality they just are not going to be as popular (generally speaking) with the general public. Bet if you did try to post some lovely Skyline Drive images you'd be pleasantly surprised. But then again...that just wouldn't be your cup of tea now would it!? Fortunately we all have something a little different and unique to put on the table. Aloha.

As far as I am concerned, my original question has been answered by Vince, I initially thought that something was wrong with the PhotoNet system.

 

But, in addition, this question was motivated by my trying to understand the reasons for the ratings that this virtually anonymous person has given out with impunity. Primarily to me, I don't deny that, but also to many others who deserved better treatment. A lucid comment, good or bad, would have been sufficient. My opinion of this person was instigated by this. The fact that my request for an email address triggered a flurry of activity from him was the last straw.

 

Carl, I took your suggestion and posted how I feel about my "Clover Field" at the appropriate place: the photograph's page itself. Thanks, and regards to all.

Oh, one last thought. This thread was started early today, the 25th. Vince, I took a look at that link that you posted. It was rated today, the 25th. I have a couple of photographs now, rated today, with much higher ratings from this person. I would like to be fair too, but it looks fishy to me.

 

But like I said, my original qustion has been answered. Best regards.

S/he wants do it because thought,that rates is to high. If this person give 1/1 or 2/2 this would be evident abuse and...

Photonet have a "hand of justice":-)

I know 2 persons which gave me systematic downrate.

Regards BB

Bartek, knowing your portfolio I find it amazing that anyone could give you low scores for genuine reasons. But there's some sick people here as on all sites that like to hide behind the screen and snipe for no reason other than they are sad and need to get a life.

Tony, you've said that the system is fine; it's human nature that's the problem. Well, a system that doesn't factor in human nature is lousy by design if it can be completely subverted as easily as this one.

 

You were discouraged when someone deleted an image with one of your comments on it. That happens all the time, and makes it clear that high ratings for some people are more important than participating in a good discussion on their image for the record. That's one of the things that discourages people from offering meaningful comments on any images.

 

Vincent, you think people should leave explanations with low rates. Many can't, but equally important, you've set up a double standard where people who leave a 7/7 are not under a similar obligation to explain to the community why this image is truly exceptional compared to other similars. Most of them can't or won't, just like low raters.

 

If we leave an explanation and a 4/4 on a popular phot, we'd get ridiculed, either by the next fan, or by the photographer, or both, so we don't do either. The result is that everyone thinks that the most popular images are truly unique and flawless.

 

Most of them aren't.

Carl, you said: "Vincent, you think people should leave explanations with low rates. Many can't, but equally important, you've set up a double standard where people who leave a 7/7 are not under a similar obligation to explain to the community why this image is truly exceptional compared to other similars. Most of them can't or won't, just like low raters."

 

 

Wrong Carl. When somebody leaves a 7/7 or 6/7 or sometimes even a 6/6 (which in the ratings business means excellent or very good) they are in effect saying they like the image just as it is. Sure I, and perhaps most of us, appreciate hearing why an image works as well. We can also learn from doing just that. However if nine out of ten people like it and one or two do not like it, then the natural question would be why not? What about this image do you not like?? No it's not essential that it be expressed, but for the hope of *improvement* it can sure go a long ways. I've said before that anytime you get a lot of attention and or ratings you can expect all sides of the issue to get covered. In the end it all averages out regarding the ratings. It's the comments that can help us to improve. Those comments are the whole point of using a site like this. Ratings (and the exposure that might come along with them) as well as mutual *participation* are what garner those very much appreciated comments.

"I've said before that anytime you get a lot of attention and or ratings you can expect all sides of the issue to get covered. In the end it all averages out regarding the ratings."

 

Chances are that SOMEBODY will come along and say something constructive, but you just demonstrated on an recent upload why more critics simply don't bother anymore. This obviously skews the statistics, wouldn't you think?

 

(Ever notice how seldom people downrate a POW even though quite a few make it clear they don't think much of it?)

The image you are referring to was one where I received a lower rating as well as a somewhat sarcastic/negative remark. Then another photographer contacted me because he too recieved a comment from this same individual accusing him of photo manipulation. I in turn left a comment seasoned with a trace of sarcasm on one of his images saying I expected to see a bit more from such a touch critic than what was posted. (Which by the way I did apoplogize to him for afterwards). He then in turn came back to my image as well as the other photographers image, apologized for the false accusation and then gave a very thorough comment as to why he did not like my own image. I in reply sincerely thanked him for taking the time to share such a reply especially with his being specific. I should also add that another person rated that same image even lower without any comment. I did not reply to that one at all, because that is what happens from time to time. It was the sarcastic and accusatory remarks that caused my first reply. Lets just remenber that when somebody is percieved as unfair, we all have the ability to share a thought in response. If the one rating/commenting IS sincere, he can certainly defend his position. In fact how much better if he defended it at the time he leaves the comment and or rating to begin with. Honest ratings are never discouraged. Low-balling or balance brigade ratings are!

What <i>I</i> don't understand is this: why does a beautiful and well-composed (and technically perfect) image often get a 6/6 or a 7/7 when it is almost a duplicate of 50,000 previously uploaded beautiful photos?? Surely a 5/7 or a 4/7 (or even a 3/7 or a 2/7) would be more believable (I'm listing O first, A second)...<br>

All 'genuine' responses welcome...

Carl, The problem with anything that includes subjective appraisal is that I don't think any system can really cater for it. I know their are guidelines that should induce some objectivity, but take any subject which requires grading other than where there is only one answer (such as mathematics) and it will always be viewed differently. So as systems go there isn't anything wrong with it, just the people who abuse it.

 

Neil, Possibly in some way you have "hit the nail on the head". For originality just about everything has already been photographed. Aesthetics well I guess thats in the eye of the beholder. We all set our own mid point for both and grade according to that. If a subject has been shot 50,000 times do you rate the next one as a 5 average or 1 very bad?