Rate Recent Sum

Discussion in 'Photo.net Site Help' started by david_anderson|13, Apr 10, 2005.

  1. How exactly does the new rate recent sum work? Is it the number or
    rates or critiques in a certain amount of time?
  2. There we go. The TRP that's based on images going through the RFC, "Photographer Request for Critiques." David, I believe this is what many members, at least based on the Site Feeback Forum, feel is the level playing field, and evidently the admin had responded to the, "Suggestion Box." The, "Rate Recent Sum," images can be found in the, "Rate Recent," under the, "Gallery," header. This is the images where one would rate and/or comment based on an image alone without the knowledge of photographer.

    On a side note, I would really like to know the definition of the rest of filters, such as, "Photogs Sum, Ratings," "Photogs Sum, Photos," "Folder View," etc.
  3. Oops, I guess it's not the RFC, but rather all uploaded images, with or without request for critiques. Very interesting! It's kind of fun to see the TRP get cycled around with different filters just to mix it up a bit. I'm not quite sure as to what the TRP resulting quality might be. Better, or worse. Sure is worth a try, I guess.
  4. Just guessing at how this works also and correct me if wrong but... rfc requested are sorted in absolutly random order? With images not requested stuck at the back and rates are not shown on them, until opened? And even if no rates at all they are on there?

    Sure appears so and maybe a glitch cause this image was submitted for rfc but is in back with no numbers...so whats that mean?


    Also this image of Jayme's was submitted, has 13 rates total but only shows 1 rate on the thumb...now totally lost....but like the concept, just wondering the criteria for it.

  5. Everything about this sort was explained when it was first set up. It appears to be working exactly the way it's supposed to.

    Thank you, Brian.
  6. Thank you indeed.
  7. I think what's happening is, the sort for "rate recent sum" totals the rates given for aesthetics and originality that are posted through the RFC. In other words, if the rate is posted through the members page and not through the RFC, it won't count in this sort. What this does is eliminate photos that are not submitted to the RFC until the photo has garnered sufficient mate rates to push it to the front.

    I suspect that any rates posted through the TRP will also be ignored by this sort. So....the only rates that count for this sort are the rates posted directly through the RFC and no other place.

    I could be wrong but that's how it seems.

    The beauty in this sort is that it eliminates the mate rates and the "halo" rates from determining placement. Only the rates closest to anonymous will count. It also means that the TRP will be driven only by those who post rates through the RFC.

    I suspect this will change the rating habits of many people on this site. I look forward to seeing how it evolves. I applaud administration for finally taking this step!

    It will be interesting (and perhaps fun) to see who starts posting complaints in this forum about the new default sort.
  8. Right away something has returned to the TRP: diversity!
  9. Carl could u please post the link to that explaination, thanks?...would help a lot.
  10. And to really level things PN should remove the author and title from the "rate recent" interface. As it stands it would still be possible for mate raters to constantly be clicking through until they find a buddy.
  11. Laurie. I'm not sure if that is correct. My reason is all the photos I've checked have only about 9 out of 25 or so rates counted. If I vote directly from a photographers photo as opposed to the rate recent que and the photographer has requested a critique does my rate count or is it only through the rate recent que?
  12. David,

    Not too long ago, Brian explained how this particular sort worked. I tried to find the thread but couldn't. If I remember correctly (about a 50/50 chance)my understanding is that this sort only looks at rates posted through the rate recent que.

    It's possible Brian has changed how this sort works.
  13. WJT

    WJT Moderator

    I appreciate Brian's efforts. The TRP looks good for the 3-day view. However, as you advance the time line beyond a month the diversity changes dramatically. What you end up with are pages with nothing but nudes. You might as well be searching with the Ratings filter selected.<p>

    I still think that we need a good old fashioned Spring cleaning around here instead. The problem with Spring cleaning is that it takes elbow grease to do a good job. The boss needs to higher some help. Regards.
  14. Congratulation to Brian. At last, diversity and non-forumulaic talent have returned to the TRP. A pleasure to look at. I'm sure this will encourage people to rate through forums as well. Goodbye flamingos.
  15. Walter, I just looked at the rate recent sum for the period "all". You're right - not ONE SINGLE picture wasn't a nude. It doesn't bother me at all - I'm sure that things will even up if this new default is left in place long enough. I think that if somebody only wanted to see nudes, then going to the critique forum and selecting nudes was probably their best way of achieving that.

    I only hope the mate raters don't find a way around the new sort. The interesting thing will be to see if the familiar names start appearing. After all, they don't like the general masses rating their pics, so what are they to do? I think we'll see a sudden volte face on their part for sure.
  16. Remember The Red Queen? - she had to keep running, just to remain still!
  17. That's it Laurie "I suspect that any rates posted through the TRP will also be ignored by this sort. So....the only rates that count for this sort are the rates posted directly through the RFC and no other place."<p>

    Very clever indeed. It brings out diversity ;-)
  18. When people will adapt we will have new reasons to complain ;-)
  19. . . and how do you imagine they will 'adapt'?

    If the usual suspects start rating off the RFC queue and if their rates are inordinately high or low, I would think those rates could be defined as dishonest.

    In the mean time, the one weakness that remains is that we still have popular content due to the prevailing tastes of those who have been rating off the list. What we should be encouraging is a serious increase in the use of the RFC queue by experienced photographers and long time members who gave up on the gallery long ago because it was so corrupt.

    Well folks, It's time to support the new improved version by going to the polls and voting. It's your civic duty.

    Of course you'll have plenty of time for this new activity, now that there won't be as many interesting feedback threads to read.
  20. Well, adapting will mean smoke signals to pals to go into the Rate Recent cue, and even then there may be a lot of hunting. Essentially, if they're going to find a way to mate rate with this setup, they're really, really gonna have to work for it.

    Agreed, too, re the diversity on the TRP. I'm happy, and too thank the administration for making the changes!
  21. First they need to notice the change SSS still simulate a RFC with a comment today. Hehe<p>

    Look these ratings from the spanish mafioso 8 - 5.50 / 5.75 in the new view and 60!!! 6.12 / 6.27 in the old.
  22. Just an FYI for how bad it's gotten to get us to this point? One frequent recipient of mate rates is on page one of the TRP now, with 8 ratings having pushed it there. The total number of actual rates given to the image for it to count? 8. 52 friggin' halo and mate rates. Pretty indicative...
  23. Those figures make for interesting reading, don't they. As I said above, I wonder how long it will be before these guys start requesting RFC or find a way to circumvent the new default?

    However, the new view is great, but does it need some fine tuning? The view is pretty static and without some minor modifications or changes in rating practices, will the same images not fester there for too long? As the view is only based on ratings received in the RFC queue, when images get to 10 rates and fall to the back of the queue, is their place on the rank not more or less fixed from thereon? Or, have I misunderstood how this is going to work?
  24. Have any of you tried going to the last page of the default TRP
    search. Although it's quite funny there right now, I think it shows
    that some tweaking maybe required.
  25. Hmm. Couple of familiar names starting to appear already.
  26. Carl, I just did it sure is a difficult task. I hadn't been there science my first days on this site.
  27. Some of the Mate Raters are actually very good photographers. I'm confident they'll have images near the top of this sort from time to time.

    Carl is absolutely right! Admin. did their part. Now we need to support that move and post our fair share of rates through the rate recent que.
  28. Yes, the Rate Recent Queue. Just tried to do my bit, got hit by the dreaded "rating insert failed". No more for me today, I guess!

    You know, I don't think I've ever seen one official response to that bug - what causes it? Is it when an image you've already rated appears?
  29. Mark, yes it seems to happen when you've already rated via another means, or if they've taken the picture off and you get a white square with a red cross in the centre. I always find though that if you go out of the rating queue and re-enter, then it's fine and gives you a fresh lot of pictures. So only a nuisance. Keep rating! Isn't the TRP refreshing now. A joy to look at :)
  30. i've been rating and commenting through rate recent for awhile now and notice the following. yes, sometimes I get booted and and can go back in. eventually, the photos presented to me have fewer and fewer ratings and eventually none, meaning i am getting photos just posted. and eventually, there are no more for me to review until more are posted. rough guess, can go through about 50 photos before this happens.

    folks, PLEASE PLEASE remember when you can to comment. lets not let the ratings controversy obliterate sharing thoughts about the photo, which to me is the real benefit of posting photos here.
  31. Ben, may I suggest NOT commenting when you rate off the RFC queue.

    You're doing it for the site, and commenting will only slow you down. We need volume output from people who understand the rating guidelines. If anyone wants me to justify a rate and is willing to email me, I'm willing to do it if it seems sincere, but it will cost you a critique on one of my images first. Too many people upload pictures and think that "the site" (whatever that means) somehow owes them thoughtful feedback.
  32. Ben, well said, comments are more important than ratings. BUT I find less than 1 in 10 actually reply to comments made, which is a little sould destroying. Sometimes I've even posted a picture to illustrate a point, yet still no reply. Hardly a conversation. So its a two way thing.
  33. Carl, in real time, it doesn't slow down my rating very much and, in fact, it helps me determine my rating a lot of times. but also, while helping the site is valuable, your comment demonstrates my point -- to get lost in the ratings controversy is to ignore the real purpose of many photographers' posting photos -- which is to get meaningful feedback. if we ignore that, we may allow people to grow discouraged and stop posting, leaving the place to the competitors more and more. so there are trade offs, whatever one does.

    ivan, your percentage may be about right, but i've enjoyed my experience so far. i review a mix of photos from people i've run across before and new people, using, alternatively, the interesting people feature in my workplace, rate recent, and the photo categories. i mark people as interesting regularly. when i'm interested in a photo and/or the photographer's work or approach, i really try to take the time to leave a thorough comment (it helps to be specific, constructive and not get personal, though i can't say i maintain that approach all the time). when someone leaves a comment on my photos, i try to respond, both on my page and theirs. (lots of people check the follow up feature and come back.) i'm not shy about asking questions about shooting or photoshop technique or sharing my own, which also furthers dialogue and enables me to learn things. over time, i've been in touch with numerous people on some consistent basis, and we've gotten to know each other a bit and help each other out with tips and critiques more and more. it kind of builds over time. and when you do find someone who really tells you what they see, that person can be invaluable. i can think of a half a dozen people immediately who have helped me improve my work in the last year by their comments and tips, for what its worth.
  34. btw, i've just checked the all-time rate recent sum leaders, and one particular category of photos clearly dominates -- every one of the top 100 photos all-time are from the same category of photo. is that where this is headed? if so, is that an improvement? is there some way to avoid it from happening?
  35. mg


    Really an interesting change... I just saw the "new" TRP default (after face-lifting), and it was indeed completely different from what it used to be. I have to say that it wasn't really better than usual, but at least it showed new names and new styles. I guess I'm going to have to wait a bit before complaining again...:)
    And Carl Root is right when he writes this: "Well folks, It's time to support the new improved version by going to the polls and voting. It's your civic duty. Of course you'll have plenty of time for this new activity, now that there won't be as many interesting feedback threads to read."
    Let's see how all this works. Thanks, Brian.
    PS: Now can you guess where I'm off too...?
  36. Is there an explanation as to how the new rating changes and rate recent sum work? I've searched and only come up with this thread which doesn't make it clear to me how the new system works. I can't make any sense of how the images are ordered in rate recent sum. I like the looks of the new system, though. It looks like it has great promise, I just don't fully understand how it works. Thanks.
  37. The new default view works for me, I am no longer made nauseous when I select the menu item... thanks and I dont care how it works.
  38. I agree and support very much the new Rating system through RFC! I would only add that it would be good to remove the name of the author and the title of the photograph in the RFC, as someone already suggested it!! So the rating would be more honest!
    Still, photographers are giving rates without leaving any comments, and I would like to have more constructive comments, no matter the rating!
  39. Biliana, I have noticed that you have been commenting on many
    pictures. You will get the reward of comments on your photo's as a
    result. I will now prove it to you ....

Share This Page