Can you have a rating removed?

[jc5066]

Can you have a rating from your photo removed? Once in a while you

get somebody who rates way below everyone else. Is there a way to

get this removed? I'm not trying to have the top rated photo but it

really pisses me off when someone gives you a 2 and everyone else has

given you a 4,5,or 6. Did these other nine people over rate and have

one honest person? I don't think so. If I'd recieved a 3 or two I

could understand a 2.

Ok I feel better now that I got that out.

[anthony_m1]

Jon,<BR>This is a pretty well documented subject here at p.net. <BR>To answer your question: The only way to have a rate deleted is to write to abuse@photo.net and state your case and if the abuse department agrees, they will delete the offensive rate.

[WJT]

Well Jon, perhaps you should take a look at this:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo.tcl?photo_id=1183112

It would appear that you rated it as low as you could. You did include a comment, however, but obviously you did not read any of the technical details or comments beforehand. How do you think that photographer feels about YOUR rating? When I originally read your post here I was sympathetic; we all get the odd, uncommented low rating from time to time. They're called "drive-by-ratings". If you can show a pattern of abuse, then report them, otherwise ignore them. But you know, Jon, after seeing how you rate some of the other PhotoNet photographers, it is very hard for me to be concerned about your situation. Regards.

[Jerry_]

Easy way: delete the image. Wait 2 or 3 days, then repost it.

[jordan2240]

Jon,

 

Ratings measure subjectivity. Subjectivity has no logical basis. Therefore, ratings have no logical basis. Take them for what they're worth, and be glad that your work stirred some emotion.

 

Bill

[marshall]

Jon - All it means is that someone didn't like the photo very much. Would it be more useful if he explained it? Yep, but that's not the way the system works. Nonetheles, I see no pattern that suggests abuse.

 

On the other hand, your comment, "Next time you low ball someones photo, let them know why you did!" on his portfolio doesn't belong there. And your 1/1 seems worse than the 2/3 because it seems to an outside observer to be in retaliation.

 

But I'll stay out of it, really, other than to say that all it means is one person thought the image to be below average. Don't get worked up over it.

[james_fraser]

Jon, I think your points are valid, because I've experienced the same thing. I'll rate someone's photo with a 3 or 4, and lo and behold someone will go and rate a photo of mine with a 1 or 2 when 90% of the ratings of my photo are 5+. Too bad that people can't take their criticism and use it as a learning experience rather than an insult.

[mike dixon]

I used to get occasional low-ball scores on pics that were

otherwise highly rated, but they couldn't have been retaliation

since I never rated photos. I just assumed that they didn't like

the shot. Or I checked their portfolio and realized that their idea

of good photography was radically different than mine.

 

In the past, I've proposed a solution for this whole problem of

people receiving unacceptably low ratings: Let people set the

minimum scores they think each of their images should receive.

Sure, it makes the whole ratings game even more useless and

farcical, but it would certainly cut down on the number of crybaby

threads.

[spohn]

Great post, Walter. Pretty hard to sympathize with Jon's situation given the gruesome evidence you brought to light. Talk about glass houses...

 

- Al