AntonioC Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 That's interesting. I don't know if it's a temporary bug, or a permanent decision, but I'm curious to see if it will limit someway cliques activity and revenge rating (at least for a few hours). Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntonioC Posted July 1, 2004 Author Share Posted July 1, 2004 Sorry, I just noted two other people posted the same argument while I was writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertbrown Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 Brian, I'm really glad you turned off the rating names--perhaps this will encourage some honest ratings. Over the past year, there's certainly been some very cliquish rating going on, along with the rampant rating inflation. I think it would be nice to take away the photographer's name for the first 3 days, too! The top-rated pages would look quite a bit different! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venicia_l Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 I agree, But the "clubs" would eventually get around the impediment by emailing each other, including identifcation in the image, etc. There is no way to really control this kind of thing, just slow it down from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertbrown Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 Venicia, of course you are right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knicki____ Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 whats the difference in hiding the names if there is link to view the names. Seems it just made another place to click on to me. Going to have to think about this change a bit before I exclaim enthusiasm. Honestly, I dont see how hiding ones name will make anyone more honest in their rates. Perhaps I just dont get it. Robert, if you would like to explain to me how my name not being on a rate will make me more honest or more comfortable with handing out numbers please do so. Or how not being able to see what others have done in their folders after they have rated me makes me more honest or them please do so. If you were to rate something of mine but I didnt know your name and didnt know you existed how would I have ever gotten to appreciate where you come from behind the camera? Knicki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_oneill Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 <B>Brian</B> I've been keeping track of all my scores since I joined photo.net, this means I can no longer see which of my pictures do well among those who've rated several (as opposed to the drive by raters), or see who persistantly gives generous or mean scores. Or whose "top rated" pages I appear on (and how many times). <p> SO... I can see it as a way of stopping revenge rating, and some of the griping about people with no pictures scoring. But I'm not happy at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhawks Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 We could really make it anonymous and eliminate the names of those who comment on a photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knicki____ Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 We could take it a step further and take the names off of everything. I still dont see how it could possibly stop revenge rating. Someone that is into revenge rating will figure out a way to accomplish just that. Like trying to make a dog stop barking without ever training it first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 The really active thread on this subject is the one that precedes this one. regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry_franklin Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 I like seeing who rates me and what rating they give. It tells me if an experienced photographer has done the rating. I get a better feedback on how I'm doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1000wordsphotography Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 To my way of thinking, this change now makes the comments even more important. A rater can now drop by my shot, rate it say... a 3, all without leaving a name, or comment, and I have learned nothing about why he or she feels the shot is bad. At least if I had a name, I could check out their photos, e-mail and request some feedback if I was inclined. True, I now can't revenge rate their images, something I don't do anyway, but now I am not only unable to understand why a poor rating was given, I have to look at a list of rates and wonder which one on the list rated it. One way around it I guess is to leave your rating within the comment. As in... "great shot.. I give this one a 7/7". Or... "needs work, rates a 5 for composition, but only a 4 for originality". This change will take some getting used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbs Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 Does this mean that the argument FOR ID as a way for everyone to "assist" the abuse department is now no longer valid? Have we now increased the rate patrol~ or ~ how do we find the abusers now? ....;)...J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 I first thought that this was very negative allowing people to drop their 1, 2, and 3's without batting an eyelash - not that they would anyway. Then of course their is the "clique" thing that I only noticed in the past couple of months - guess I'm slow. I suspect the positives and negatives will balance out as usual. If I want someone to know how I rated them, as I often do, I will merely state it in my comment - but of course others would lie about that. As many of the veterans to this site point out, all the ratings must be taken with a grain of salt. Take pride in the odd wonderful comment that you may give or receive and the opportunity to connect with those who share your interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxhaynes Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 I believe the phrase "opportunity to connect" is an important one. Yes, I love pictures and I love to show pictures but I come back to this site for the community. Take away all the names and you diminish the sense of community. Sure there is revenge rating and people who are engaged and engage others to rate their images beyond their due, but there are also people working out differences and maybe getting a little education on world cooperation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timnichols Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 I haven't been a participant in the discussion forum, so bear with me if this has already been considered. I don't claim to know how to fix all the issues that seem to concern participants, but I had this thought. What would happen if all initial rating of photos were done blind, the rater not having access to the identity of the photographer? Then, after a brief period of time, this is revealed and folks can continue rating. I would really value the opinions and suggestions folks might make while they're rating blind, more than those of friends. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timnichols Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 What would happen if all initial rating of photos were done blind, the rater not having access to the identity of the photographer? Then, after a brief period of time, this is revealed and folks can continue rating. I would really value the opinions and suggestions folks might make while they're rating blind, more than those of friends. What do you think? [i originally put this in an earlier thread, but feared in might be lost in the shuffle.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timnichols Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Sorry. I thought I was starting a new thread with my last comment and I can't figure out how to delete it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrossi Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Personally, I like to know who is rating me high or low. I can more easily handle a 3/3 from someone with breathtaking work since it's inspiring to see how to do better, but I would also like to know who gives 1/1's so I can send them positive vibes to assist them in their miserable lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timnichols Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 I also like to be able to see who is rating, as so many others have said, in order to try to form a judgement as to whether or not to take it seriously. Some great photographers rate low, for good reasons, and I like to try to get the rationale. But if the raters had to rate, at least when the photos are first displayed, without knowing who is displaying them, then there would be less of both revenge rating and favoritism rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_chilson2 Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 What this opens the door to is people leaving unfairly low ratings on photos that are of subject matter of now interest to them. In other words if someone is a sports fanatic and doesn't appreciate floral photography, what would prevent them from giving florals a rating of 1-1 , secure in the knowledge that the rating will no longer be traceable to them. I think this is a mistake that opens up the possibility of more abuse. At least under the old system you knew if you posted a low rating just to screw with someones score, you were answerable for it. Maybe I'm too cynical and this wont happen - but I tend to think it will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marco ussi Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 I think that a big problem of this and other sites is the lack of commentary on photos. I mean, it seems to me that many people think they are at a beauty contest rather than in a constructive forum for thoughtful photographers. Where's the point in giving a high rate or even worse a low rate without saying why? There's no point for me. In fact I've decided to rate fewer photos but give more comments. I may not be a professional but at least I deliver my point of view. The hidden identity of raters, for me is pretty useless. I've just found out that the main reason for its introduction was to prevent revenge rating and I could not believe it. Hey guys, where do you think we are? At the kindergarten, it would seem to me. My forecast. Hidden identity will just lead to more low, unexplained, useless, ratings. Would you like to improve the site? There's only one way: making the comment mandatory! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhenry Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 ... hiding the link between the identity and the rate level, while keeping visible the name of the person who visited, has the immmense advantage to attract you to the portfolio of the rater, at least a person who spend time (short or not), without any anger or too favourable opinion that could affect seriously and quite naturally your judgment and eventually your back rating...<p> so Brian, you set is definitely a great tool to both limit the revenge but also the mate story and back-scratching however you name it which seriously pollute the visibility and drag down the whole quality of the site... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now