ken dennis Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 She got 11 ratings - and an average of 5/7. She ain't complaining! See Bob, I knew I was on the right track! HEE, HEE! Ken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholasprice Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 Are there nudes on this site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken dennis Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 Kieth www.photoboobshot.net is still open! Ken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertbrown Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 Nestor, over the last month, I've started a number of threads about mate-rating . . . which is the real cause for the decline in the ratings of your photos. The administration has made it clear, through their lack of action, that they either don't care about the problem or they can't figure out a way to fix it. Several members have suggested ways to tweak the system that would make mate rating far less attractive. What's sad is that photo critique/rating is what brings most to the site--and the rating system has become seriously corrupted. However, the rest of PN runs very well: the forums, the classifieds, and articles on variety of subjects are all terrific. There's absolutely no reason the rating system shouldn't work better. Until the site gets fixed, it will continue to lose it's longer term members--the list of good photographers who have left the site (or stopped participating) over the last year is getting longer. On an academic note, I'm wondering how high the ratings will go. . . . Soon it will take 6.5/6.5 to get on the front page. Some statistician or socioligist or political scientist should be studying ratings behavior--as well as forum complaints-- for a thesis or dissertation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurie_m Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 Nestor, I hope I didn't offend you. That wasn't my intention. I don't care one way or the other if you view nudes or not. That's what's good about a separate category, if you don't want to view them, you don't have to. You can puruse other categories, whatever appeals to you. As you stated you have no issue with them. I'm also not suggesting you accept things as they are. I just think you've mis-dignosed the cause of the problem. I'm all for positive change. I just happen to think, before a change is made, there's should be some consensus that the change will have the desired effect. If you think changing the nude category will result in a greater number of rates on your images, you're likely to be disappointed. Since I don't shoot nudes and don't mind if they're intermingled with other categories, it wouldn't bother me at all. I just have no expectation that it will result in more rates on other types of images. To get more rates on images, the hostile rating environment needs to improve. You've been around this site long enough to see how the mate rating game works. It discourages honest rates. Therefore, those that don't want to play the game, or suffer the consequences of honest rates, simply stop rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomade Posted April 7, 2005 Author Share Posted April 7, 2005 Laurie, there's no way you could offend me, I'm still hearing, maybe my answer was a tad harsh...? :-/ Probably you and others are right, and it's me diagnosing incorrectly. But (to answer also Robert) numbers are really clear -see second paragraph of my original post. I'm still thinking that this issue with nudes is a totally differente thing to mate-raters. The first have to do with human (men's) voyeuristical attitude; the second one with a more "mutual admiral club" that we all know. One doesn't imply the other and viceversa, although sometimes are yuxtaposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tijean Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 Mike Smart & Ken Dennis, This truly is a great site, but unfortunately, it suffers from human nature. I have learned more here than in the photo classes that I took both in high school and college, through both members and the Learn section, as well as meeting some wonderful people. The ratings matter if you let nature take it's course. An average of 4/4 on a photo still means that it is average and needs to be reexamined for opportunities to grow, assuming that you haven't have your entire office log onto photo.net and rate it with 7/7s. The mate-raters are a problem, but the resourceful member can find easy ways to enjoy photography that they believe is of quality and interact with photographers that share their values (quality work, shameless promotion rank, whatever you happen to be here for). For example, I believe my "people I find interesting" list is up to 8 or 9 now. All interesting portfolios and all regular contributors. Mike, there has been an active effort on the part of the powers that be to not alienate the nude photos and photographers. There are a number of pros and cons involved in separating them out, but they've been weighed from time to time over the years, and I believe it's been decided that to treat the Nudes section differently than any other section would be detrimental to the site as a whole. I, on the other hand, wish I could pull up pnet on a break at work, and be able to avoid the flying boobies (then then "unfilter" the site when I get home and enjoy it in its full glory), but hey, that's life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mondiani Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 Simple problem simple solution: post nude pix Nestor ;-)<p> Maybe there is also some changes into photo.net rating system: number of ratings are more closely related to the ratings received by the photo. Now if you don't have more than 5/5 for the first 5 rates your photo is put out of the queue. Etc etc.<p> Ancient pnetters who don't mate rates seldom rate: if you don't participate to the ratings don't complain if the number of ratings decreased... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nestor: I did a study of ratings of nudes one night about six months ago and found 6x as many ratings as for any other category. Problem isn't new, though it may accelerate over time. I'm afraid I side with the human nature theorists. As long as the site allows such photos and an open membership, disproportionate numbers of people will flock to them. Mate Rating Whiners: god, it gets tiresome. Its funny, the so called mate raters work together and you don't. If you are so troubled by it, band together and rate the troublesome top photos fairly every friggin' day, whatever the consequences to your own ratings. you keep blaming the site when you all are reluctant to do what you think is right yourselves out of your own self interests. so what if everything you post gets 1s? it doesn't matter. if you are so concerned about the integrity of the site, give up on your own self interest. i guarantee that if twenty five of you did it every day for a month, you'd get some results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurie_m Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Ben, Speaking for myself, I don't care about retaliation rates. It's the barrage of direct e-mails and nasty comments on photos that got to me. In most instances, the rate I gave was a 4 or 5. That resulted in bloated e-mails about how horrible I am-comments like "I thought you were my friend", etc. Even after asking them not to e-mail me, they continued sending e-mails requesting, no demanding, I change my rate. It just isn't really worth it. If all they did was plaster 1/1s on my photos, I wouldn't care. Yes....I'm acting in my own self interests. If you want to see what I mean, go the the TRP and post some honest rates on the top photos. The funny thing is....I also post comments. Often I'll post a constructive criticism (and not post a rate) and get no reply or acknowledgement. Then, someone will post a rate below 5 and almost immediately, the photographer, having determined the identity of the rater despite 25 rates, will blast out a response condeming the rater as jealous or vengeful or something along those lines. Ben, it's clear this particular group is interested only in high rates and lots of them, not comments (good or bad). I'm sorry if you feel I'm whining. The subject of mate rating was brought up to respond to the original post in this thread. It's just frustrating. If I rate honestly (based on the sites guidelines), I get hammered by the mate raters. If I complain about it, I'm whining. It's just not in my nature to ignore a problem or inequity. I lost my rose colored glasses a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Laurie, since you replied (apologies to Nestor), I wasn't particularly thinking of you as whining, sorry. I was thinking that writing comments about specific people, or self-designated specific groupings of people, rather than talking to them directly isn't going to work or do anything but create bad feelings. Perhaps whiners was a mistake, because I am trying to avoid insulting people personally. Bad karma and it just gets in the way. So please accept my apology for my sloppy generality. My point is, the site management has made its position pretty clear -- and its entitled to its position, since it carries all the risk. So try collective action yourselves. btw, when I do look at trp, which isn't that often, I do here and there rate and comment on photos that strike me, good and bad, and in a way that I think is fair. I see the problem you all describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ned1 Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 If you count the number of ratings on the TRP it seems that birds and sunsets are what's sucking up ratings these days. What we need is a seperate rating system for birds, nudes, sunsets, bees, foggy trees, autum leaves, and anything with a mime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 and Laurie, this is a way to do it. One of you posts a new thread that says you have honestly rated or commented on every one of the first one or two pages of the TRP for the last three days or whatever, and asks everyone to join you sometime in the next 24 hours and, if they do, to post that they have done so as well in the same thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 and for those who wonder why I care, as I've said in other threads, people who want the mate rating to stop sometimes urge changes in the site that I think have or would result in negative changes. I'd rather keep the site the way it is and have those opposed to mate rating act for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 like for example, join me in this test case. click on my name here, go to the last comment on gallery photos on my portfolio page, click on it, comment and rate. its easy. its fun. its real. its direct. and the site doesnt have to change a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_breazeale1 Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 "I think a lot of people are doing nudes now because all of a sudden they think it makes their photos art..." There are some of us here who do post nudes and do it for nothing more than the love of photography.To hell with worthless ratings and bring on those constructive critiques all day long!!!!!!!1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panyitu Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Christopher thank you for your excuses.</P> Accept mine if, as we say in Spanish, "mi piel es demasiado fina" (my skin is too thin) on this matter, entiendes.</P> Jessica:</P> there is a Catalan saying that goes "estas pixant fora the test" (you are ping out of the pot). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panyitu Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nestor I agree with you, make it more inaccessible and users that are not interested in photography will go with the tide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappoldt Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Cristain: I'd feel the same way, and again, please accept my apologies. While my words may seem to over-generalize, I am able to expand and be more specific upon request - I just get tired doing all that typing sometimes:) Ben: Echoing the level-headed Ms. Elmer, I do apologize if I seem like I'm whining, and too if you're tired of reading it. But as Laurie, I'm not typically one to sit idle. However, I'm also not particularly one to rally people to charge over the hill when we all know there's a machine gun dug into the side of a mountain waiting for us all. I'll be responsible for me alone in cases like that! Besides, many other photographers on this site have tried that, and now, not unlike myself, they are haunted by ghouls who change their identity and sometimes even create extra identities with the sole purpose of maliciously attacking images on this site, their ego-driven dementias fueling their rage. So - I do comment and rate the images often in question, and do often suffer consequences as Laruie describes. My own self interest? I'm a friggin' hobbyist - no delusions here about the quality of my work, or what kind of rates my pictures deserve objectively. I'm just at a point where I've had it. While I could sit here and hammer away at these keys ranting about how often society as a whole seems to embrace greed, perpetuate fraud, tell lies and place high value on things unimportant to personal happiness in general (no, I'm not wearing Birkenstocks), to see the behavior that is allowed to continue on this site just taints one more thing that seemed to be pretty darn wholesome a while back. Three years now I've been cruising Photo.net, and will concur with your own observation: I see the problems. No blinders on here. I dunno...maybe there SHOULD be a ring of us starting a Fight Club. But you know what? We shouldn't have to. There ARE entities who can make changes that last. I just don't know why they don't, instead observing only, god-like in their silence and occaisional distribution of punishment and meaningful, positive implementation of change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomade Posted April 8, 2005 Author Share Posted April 8, 2005 "Maybe there is also some changes into photo.net rating system: number of ratings are more closely related to the ratings received by the photo. Now if you don't have more than 5/5 for the first 5 rates your photo is put out of the queue. Etc etc." Are you positive about that or just making assumptions? If that's true: could you please point out where were those "rules" communicated to p.netters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mondiani Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Just observation right now I have some photos sticked at 5 ratings... Before it never happened. And you were right I had some highly rated photos (average) much higher than before and they collect hardly more than 15 ratings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mondiani Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Maybe it's because they are much more requests for critics than before... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomade Posted April 8, 2005 Author Share Posted April 8, 2005 ok, now go to the TRP, make a selection of whatever period you like, but with the "ratings" criteria, the selection you'll see is an arrange according to the number of rates received (BTW, this one was the default page not much time ago). Tell me what you see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomade Posted April 8, 2005 Author Share Posted April 8, 2005 Last but not least: if you make this search criteria, things change radically only for 1 year ago, 2 years ago and 3 years ago. All the others show the tendency that I'm trying to point out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandeha Lynch Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 Nestor - did you try Folder Views? That's the only selection that offers a broad range of genres on one page. 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