rod_melotte Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I say only let paying members - rate! Let anybody critique but ratingshould be for members only.<p>I KNOW these 6 names are all the same guy,<p>Mohan Al-Granhi Stan Blanford Candy E Markus G Demoutis Ghatun C Tahalem Gill Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zcreem Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 There are more important ways to contribute to Photo.net than just finacially, without the photographs you have no site, without the consdered comments of reviewers you have no site, without finacial support the site will struggle to provide the best service but will continue, it started as a free site and I am sure will continue to do so. In fact should it become a payed members club it will surely die or at the least dissapear to the fringes.<br> I contributed to the running of the site for 3 years, at the moment I do not contribut for financial and time related reasons (I do not have the time to participate as full as I did before). However I am still a part of the site, and do not feel secondary to the paid members.<br> Or do you suggest we judge the value of comments on the size if ones wallet?<br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattvardy Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Perhaps a limit on the number of ratings a non-subscriber can make per day/week would help the situation? I agree with what has been said in recent posts... things appear to be getting out of hand, though Brian assures us otherwise. Thomas' portfolio has been high-jacked by the "Avenger" and Dave's outstanding images are receiving 2's. Bogus, non-paying members continue to rate erratically and disturb the site - keeping moderators on their toes and dedicated members on edge. It seems that it is too easy to join photo.net and have all the freedom in the world to rate, comment, and sometimes terrorise - at leisure. I'm sure there's a lot going on behind the scenes, but Admin don't always respond to our questions and complaints, which adds to the panic and frustration in my opinion. If Admin could keep us all updated/informed through posts here or on the home page it would really be reassuring and some of us could finally take a deep breath knowing things are/will be under control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rod_melotte Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 I was not suggesting only letting paid members do ANYTHING but personally I would like to see only paid members RATE. People who contribute photos know what it is like to put your minds eye out for othes to views. If you don't have the balls to contribute you should not be able to rate others. <p> That sonunds rather harsh but when you get your 1st group of 1s and 2s you will understand. OR - get rid of ratings all togather as they are basically meaningless - when I have a photo with six 5's and six 1's sure I can look at the 5's and be happy but . . . . <p> There - I'm off my soapbox and happy again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rod_melotte Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 Sorry - I was just ranting after my 1st experience with getting the WORM on some of my shots. Going from 5.33 to 3.44 in one night is depressing even though I KNOW it was one guy with 6 names! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattvardy Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 No. Getting rid of ratings is not a good solution to the current problems. Limiting the freedom of non-subscribers (ie. their ability to rate and/or how frequently) is imho; not because non-subscribers don't know how to rate accurately (most people think this is rating high - which is another issue altogether), but because bogus members and terrosists, trolls, clones, "Avengers" etc. are likely to be non-subscribers with too much freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriella_lucia Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I never understood why non-paying members can rate. I believe legitimate users who are sitting on the fence would finally pay the $25.00 and the ghost members would be dramatically reduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmccracken Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I was a member of P.N for approximately 2 years before becoming a paying member. I found the site very helpful and so decided to subscribe. I do not think that the opinion of a non paying member is any less than a paying member. That said, the present system as is, is ridiculous. How about paying members can rate at will and non paying memebers are required to enter a code to have their rating accepted? I do not know how easy this would be to implement but it does sound sensible to me. What does everyone else think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dean_williams Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Mark Tomlinson , jan 04, 2005; 08:19 a.m. "it started as a free site and I am sure will continue to do so." Photo.net may have started as a free site, but at this time, it its not. I don't know how much it costs to run photo.net, but it is not free to the person/people who run it. You are expected to subscribe if you use the site. From the supscribtion page: "For frequent visitors who can afford it, subscriptions are not optional...." Many people have used the site for years without offering any support to keep the site running. Nothing is free. People who feel that they do not get 7 cents worth of "knowledge product" from this site on any given day should not expect to be able to participate in every aspect of the site. My opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattvardy Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I agree, Dean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriella_lucia Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I don't think it's just me but the Photo.net is unequivocally the best and most educational photo site in the world. I do not think the $2.08 a month is too much to ask from the members who can afford it Mark. Why you think this site is anyone's God given right to be free is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark lucas Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 No-one is suggesting that the site should be for members only, but that those that do contribute financially should expect something extra for their contribution. It would appear that members only rating is a popular opinion and I second Rod in his original suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmccracken Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 <b>Peter, </b>You are missing the point. The site may well be the best but it is being dragged down...<b> WAY DOWN </b> by those that do not take it seriously! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rod_melotte Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 Here's an idea that would really make Admin work harder LOL <p> If you are not a paying member you can ONLY rate other non-paying members. <p> I was a lurker for a few months and rated a lot. However I also understand that it takes a LOT of money to run and Admin a place like this. $25 is cheap if you love photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriella_lucia Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 No David that is exactly my point, if you are an active poster or an active rater with no photos than pay up. If one refuses to spend the $2.08 a month how serious can they be. Also this would reduce the number of B.S. low and high ghost raters who diminish the integrety of the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brncr6 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I used this site a little and then paid because I followed the rules when I became a member, So why do just the few that do whats right have to spend there money to support PN and other do not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garry edwards Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I like the concept - free for occasional users and for those who can't afford to pay, and we should all remember that PayPal doesn't work in every country - but for regular users in paid work who live in PayPal-friendly countries, what excuse can there be for not paying $25? $25 must be the bargain of all time. I can spend that in an hour just on petrol for my car. The problem, as I see it, is that people who are willing to put petrol in their cars but not to pay towards the upkeep of PN make that choice because they need to pay for the petrol but can get nearly all the benefits of PN without paying anything. And, as we all know, anything that is free is considered to be of no value, for example most people are more likely to follow the advice of a paid lawyer than that of a friend who happens to be a lawyer. The result? Most of the people who abuse the PN system are people who don't feel an obligation to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 If you read the subscriptions page and the information that is provided on the sign-up page, photo.net is not a "free" site. It is a subscription site. You shouldn't be looking at the extra benefits which subscribers receive as what you are paying for. You are paying for your membership in the site, and if you have been using the site for a while and are using it frequently, the understanding is that you will subscribe. If someone is not a subscriber, he or she is a "Trial/Guest" member. We welcome guests because we suppose that after becoming familiar with the site, many will want to become full members by subscribing. Guests who visit the site infrequently, or who are in the processing of deciding whether to become full members, still help to enliven the site, and most of them increase everybody's enjoyment of the site. Trial/Guest members have basically the full capacity to participate in the site, so that they can become members of the community and decide whether the site is for them. It is a premise of the site that there are no features that are fundamental to participation which are denied to guests. When you go to dinner at somebody's house, you don't get poorer food and less comfortable chairs to sit in than the regular residents, and if there are places that only the regulars can go, the fun is in places where the guests can go. Some guests remain so for long periods of time, with our welcome, despite visiting the site very frequently, because they can't afford the subscription at present or because they live in countries where it is too complicated and expensive to get the $25 to us. A few guests, and even some subscribers, abuse their welcome and when we find them, they are banned from the site. The site depends on Trial/Guest members who visit frequently to pay for the service they are receiving; that is the deal; and it would be fair if they honored it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark lucas Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Brian, how many people have been asked to leave for using the site but not contributing financially? None would be my guess. That's not what any of us want. But, unfortunately, given the choice of paying voluntarily for something or taking it for free, we all know which will be the most popular choice. I believe Photo.net operates a strange business model at present and resembles more a charity than the description you offer above. Do you not think that more revenue could be generated by the site by actually offering an INCENTIVE to sign up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 None, so far. We are in a transition, because the site was formerly free, and it takes a while for it to sink in that it is now a subscription site. But to be honest, I don't know that we will ever boot the freeloaders out. For one thing, the exceptions that we make for people who can't afford the subscription fee, who are visiting the site "infrequently", or "still deciding" make it difficult for us to tell who is a freeloader and who is a welcome guest. It is really on the honor system, and unfortunately, some people are not extremely honorable, which means that some people will exploit our welcome, and some members will feel that they are being exploited to pay for the freeloaders. However, to the extent that we can tell, we do intend to start having the software nag more often. For example, we might give people a reminder to subscribe every time they post something starting after a certain number or frequency of posts. I think most people ARE honorable, and that once the idea sinks in, many more people will subscribe than have so far. And if they don't --- well, we'll shut down the site, and that will be the end of that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 "And if they don't --- well, we'll shut down the site, and that will be the end of that problem." You need to stop beating around the bush and tell like it is. Don't sugarcoat it, let us have it straight between the eyes. Even with the site done and gone I will still have visions of 1/2, 3/3, 2/3, 1/1.....the damage has been done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 None, so far. We are in a transition, because the site was formerly free, and it takes a while for it to sink in that it is now a subscription site. But to be honest, I don't know that we will ever boot the freeloaders out. For one thing, the exceptions that we make for people who can't afford the subscription fee or who are visiting the site "infrequently" make it difficult for us to tell who is a freeloader and who is a welcome guest. It is really on the honor system, and unfortunately, some people are not extremely honorable, which means that some people will exploit our welcome, and some members will feel that they are being exploited to pay for the freeloaders. However, to the extent that we can tell, we do intend to start having the software nag more often. For example, we might give people a reminder to subscribe every time they post something starting after a certain number or frequency of posts. I think most people ARE honorable, and that once the idea sinks in, many more people will subscribe than have so far. And if they don't --- well, we'll shut down the site, and that will be the end of that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimi colteryahn - rep. of Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 hi<BR><DD>It is pretty tough to join this site if you happen to live overseas, because of Paypal. I'd love to be able to become a member, so that I can post more fotos, but Paypal says I'm not allowed to become a Paypal member. I'm probably not alone. Visa would be great option for overseas people. <BR> I've noticed more and more hard feelings towards people who aren't living in the U.S. I hope its not a trend that will continue, and you know, the admins could really put a stop to the hate and hard feelings by posting rules applying to overseas users. I read we could ENJOY the site without becoming members. Which I do.<BR>Thank you kindly for the great experience and I'm looking forward to a great year in fotos.<BR>Jimi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Im telling you we can take it! Don't make us read between the lines here. Tell us how it REALLY is. Whats the word on the street?? You need not mince words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zcreem Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Brian Please Delete my account and all my freeloader pictures, thanks. 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