bens Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 christopher, your last comment goes to the heart of why this thread takes on a very tough issue: "abuse" implies the intent to do harm; otherwise we'd be punishing people for being stupid or delusional (btw, that's how i've been able to continue to pick up a camera). and one of the values i bet you and i share is "innocent until proven guilty." site wouldn't work if it were otherwise; the venom and intimidation levels would go up to high. so there's a larger wisdom to giving people the benefit of the doubt until they hang themselves, despite the frustration. if we're going to point fingers, its better if we do it to get the subject to look in the camera (oh, i forgot, better to let them look away . . .) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappoldt Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Agreed, Ben - it's tough until the motives are discovered as deliberate- if there even are any motives. From where I sit, earlier I watched and read as a mate rater hung themself - and STILL doesn't get it. "Following work of those that appreciate and praise mine and liking theirs in return..." Is that punishable? I'd say no, if the perpetrator is oblivious to the way it undermines a critique forum and hurts rather than hinders growth -especially their own. (I'd say what I DO think it is, but there are ladies present.) There's nothing that indicates to me that Photo.net abuse enforcement is going to deflate a pedestal-mounted ego and "correct" the attitude. Only life expereince will do that, and I ain't holding my breath. Different cultural morays? Yup...I'll buy that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted February 10, 2005 Author Share Posted February 10, 2005 "so there's a larger wisdom to giving people the benefit of the doubt until they hang themselves"...Ben S. This is exactly what we are talking about Ben. Many, many are involved in mate-rating to a degree. However some are blatantly abusing the system, and have been doing this for many years. It is only these ones that we would hope management would address. Once the bad apples are dealt with, everybody that is involved to a lesser degree would surely take some notice quickly. There needs to be something done, some type of example where management shows the axe. Doing nothing at all only allows those gaming the system to become even more bold, more obvious, more underhanded. We all know who those obvious mate-raters are. They have already identified themselves... hung themselves so to speak. Just there is no rope yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saddleboy Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 I think the problem in itself is not mate rating, after all, who cares if some peoples whish to gatter to scratch each others back??? the problem is that the system is made in a way that because they mate rate their photos are more likely to make it to the TRP. After a while it feels like this site belongs to a handfull of peoples and all the others are left with this forum to beg for a fair system but hey, who gives a damn about what we hope for??? certainly not the admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_breazeale1 Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 I have been in and out of PN for the past few years and can honestly say it has been a growing experiance to watch and learn.I have pretty much given up trying to put anything up for critique anymore because the chances of me getting any feedback of substance is nil.There are the exceptions though and you know who you are and are much appreciated.Case in point...Over the last few days I have commented on over twenty images,most in depth,but have not recieved any constructive words on any of my work,this is frustrating to me and because of this I have deleted my portfolios completely more than once.The saddest thing for me is that I have been trying to expand into other genres(some contain nudity)but most of the photographers who I respect simply do not critique these images for whatevr reasons they may have..at this rate I ask myself why continue?I would love to get involved in some of the new suggestions mentioned above and would support in any way I was asked.I just want good constructive fedback,no matter what genre I participate in,and could care less about the ratings thing.Marc,Carl,Chris,Vincent,Kim.Bailey...anyone?Sign me up please!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul e. wog Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Hi this long post and i'm too tired to read it. Bout mate raters i think..anyway. I got this friend and pretty soon they gonna name page 1 after him. So in honour of that was gonna make him a comemoritive thing for Valentines day. Been messin with ps a lot latley and dunno can't find the ps forum so hope this is it....just wondering if someone here can tell me how to match the front white hues with that back colour...like how do u desaturate white?...thanks in advance and sorry to interupt ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul e. wog Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 whoops forgot the upload sorry to hog cyber space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kathywilson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Thanks all! I've been seeing this and wondered "What the!?" because, while I know most of my pictures are average, there are one or two that I think are pretty good and yet the ratings are so much lower than photos I've seen in the TRP that are, frankly, crap. So I just decided not to pay much attention to the ratings, and mostly I can do that. But now and then it rather ticks me off. I've mostly stopped rating other photos because of it. The comments are more useful anyway, and I leave plenty of those. I want to take better pictures... having someone fawn all over me is great if I deserve it, but otherwise I'd rather hear an honest list of faults. So sincere thank you's to those of you here who've given me your time and suggestions! I'm much happier to have that than slaps on the back and meaningless 7/7s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howard_foto Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 <p>"<i>We know who you are, many of us know who you WERE. We've also said IF you behave will not turn you in. The "no ratings" and "not interested in visibility" was a good start. Just a final reminder...</i>"<p> <p>that is quite an admission. so also know that I am not interested in what little town minds (with their email cliques and boycott brigades?) with nothing better to do than to demonize any newcomer who dares speak their mind... believes, nor their threats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Kim, you've rated over 6,000 images with a 5.8/5.6 average. You have given 7/7s to many of the most popular photographers on the site, so according to my definition, you are a mate rater. I agree with Chris' post that asserts that you are nice person, but my opinion on this issue is that everyone is either part of the solution or part of the problem. You would definitely become part of the solution if you stopped rating completely because most of the people you like are, in my opinion, already getting more than their share of visibility on this site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurie_m Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 I am in absolute agreement that Mate Rating is an insidious virus that has struck this site. Most of us have been "courted" by these people with 7/7-beautiful shot posts on multiple occassions. This is especially true if, against all odds, you've managed to get a photo near the top of the TRP. If you make the mistake of commenting favorably on any of their photos, their "yours" for life. Before labeling someone as a "Mate Rater", I think it's more important to take a look at how they critique other peoples' work. Kim is a great example of a potential victim of a witch hunt here. She's been on this site for a while, posts many photos, and frequently comments on the work of others. She can't control how people rate her photos. From what I can see, she's honest in her critiques and doesn't hesitate to offer suggestions for improvement or point out imperfections. She's also very gracious in accepting constructive criticism. These are not the actions of a Mate Rater, at least not my definition of a Mate Rater. The real Mate Raters stand out without any doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappoldt Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Laurie, you're spot-on. Kim is straightforward and honest with her comments, and her critiques always helpful and coaching. Sorry Kim - meant to write that earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Laurie, there are different degrees of mate rating. There is no witch hunt going on here. Kim and I comment on each other's images from time to time and our relationship is cordial. My point is that many, many people get sucked into this practice of using rates as social currency and turn a blind eye to the effect that it has on the distribution of views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 . . . . so I go to Laurie's favorites page and there are FIVE of Chris' images on page one. Then I go to Chris' front page where I see two of Laurie's. Don't you all get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurie_m Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Carl, thanks for the clarification. Perhaps I misunderstood your earlier post. Regardless, I do feel caution is important in Mate Rate labeling. We could all be guilty by some definitions. Personally, I limit the label to those who clearly rate for return rates and pour on the atta boys without any substantive comment. From my observation, there are plenty who fit this definition. Thomas, I've added you to my "circle". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 I agree that substantive comments are a distinguishing factor. I also think that there's tons of rationalizing going on when it comes to handing out numbers. I speak from experience. As I said before, mate rating is a natural reaction to the way the TRP is organized. As Brian said himself quite recently, rating is an addiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul e. wog Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Through contstant interaction and preferences of styles, this site is designed specificialy, that groups of people can easily monitor their friends. Similar interests...birds of a feather... i asked in the last post, nobody could answer. Define the line between friends and mates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappoldt Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 I'd say "guilty," Carl - save the X factor. First off, you're gonna have to admit that my 7/7s are pretty random in both photograhers and times, not slanted to particulars. (In reviewing, I saw Dave N. too shares two high rates from me. The guy blows my mind sometimes.) Second, while I haven't counted, I'd say that I've rated less than 3% of Laurie's portfolio pics. Third, if you trace Laurie and my posts on each others' pics, you'll see a lot of Laurie's earlier advice on my birds being practiced in my more recent shots. You'll also see my tracking of her body of work for her husband's vet clinic, and my frank advice on what I feel would improve them. You'll also see my delight in her blatant successes, and I'll not apologize for it nor feel ashamed. The "X" variable is going to have that happen from time to time. I hope you're not trying to group me in with someone who's handed the same 14 photographers 60 7/7s each:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurie_m Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Carl, If you look at the photos I've "rated" you're likely to see most of them are from only a handful of photographers. This is for two reasons. One.....as stated before, I limit myself to a small group of photographers whos comments I found helpful and constructive. Read the comments we've exchanged on each others photos. I think you'll find they're not gratuitous. You'll also note photos in there taken by a few photographers whose work you seem to follow. I know because I see your comments on their photos above or below mine. After my first few weeks on PN, I became very cautious of whose photos I rated (for the reasons listed above and several others). So yes, most of my "top rated photos" are from only a few photographers. Do you feel I've over rated them? You'll also want to take note of the number of photos I've rated since joining this site. It's pretty low. Many folks would rate that many photos in a single sitting. I've commented on a hell of a lot more photos than I have rated. I have repeatedly received ratings from a few people on this site that I know to be Mate Raters. It would be very easy to reciprocate if that's what I was after. Carl, I have noticed your comments on other photos and found them to be well considered and presented. I was looking forward to a healthy reciprocal exchange of thoughts on photos with you. If you truly believe me to be a Mate Rater, I will refrain from commenting on your photos. I invite anyone to disect my activity on this site. Well....not my boss, I might get fired for spending to much of my "work" time on the Internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Like I said, there are degrees and we're all most concerned about the extreme examples you mention. There is also the issue of similar interests. If you both like birds, it would be silly NOT to offer comments frequently. It then becomes a matter of being conscious of selecting the very best efforts from your friends, as you've mentioned. In my opinion, five on page one is a lot, but I think we agree in principle. I think I have given more than two on my favorites to only one photographer . . . in part because he's not a mate rater! Ideally, it would be great if you could go to everyone's portfolio and pick a couple of images you like best. Then comment the rest of the way unless they really, and I mean REALLY, outdo themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Laurie, mate commenting is always welcome. I guess I'm just trying to alert people to the addictive aspect of this. We all agree that the problem is a combination of rating high and often, restricting those rates to friends who you expect will reciprocate, and the lack of thoughtful comments. I'm also concerned about popular tastes, but that just makes the issue more complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappoldt Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Carl: yup! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurie_m Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Carl, I think we're singing the same song here. I'm looking forward to exchanging ideas with you. Yes...popular tastes can be a concern. I do comment more on landscape and wildlife shots than portraits etc. It's the subject I'm most experienced with. I do try to push myself in other directions. It's just easier to wear the comfortable shoes most of the time. Just for the record, I checked...I've rated a total of 4 photos with 7/7 since joining PN. Three of them were in my first week or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted February 10, 2005 Author Share Posted February 10, 2005 Carl, like you said there are differing levels of mate-rating going on. I would not classify Kim, Laurie or Chris as abusers of the system by any means. People are interested in certain types of images. I've rated a few of yours you a few of mine, so what? An abuser will rate a very high percentage of a photographers images all basically 7/7. Laurie gave Chris none of those by the way. Chris only a couple to Laurie. Kim often offers honest suggestions on people's work. We are talking about the example above, of cut and paste comments. The worst offender in my book basically says nothing more than "Nice shot" or "Excellent" and that is IT! (plus his usual array of 7/7s...of course). These are the ones needed to be removed. And I doubt we will see them here in this thread. The person whose example was mentioned above earlier, with several right now on the top pages, has now the highest rated image of all time...by a mile. It's a nice shot of a bird, need I say more?? If management completely refuses to do anything about it at all regardless of all the complaints about unfairness, gaming of the system etc.. then this site will self destruct in my opinion. I agree with Marc there. Hopefully before it gets much worse Brian will do something. It already is on the road to greater problems as we can clearly see. Hopefully all of us will be even more mindful and can learn from all of this nonsense. Ratings/posting can be addicting, that is true. But only certain idividuals go as far as they can, rating 7 after 7 over and over, pasting meaningless false flattering comments and as always rising to the top of the TRPs. They are sure easy to find nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimknowles Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Vincent - haven't you been reading all the feedback threads for the past couple years? Rating just doesn't matter. You are not supposed to have FUN with seeing how others rate your photos. The whole rating thing at p.net has become an anathema. It is, after all, NOT for YOUR selfish enjoyment. Rating here at p.net is done to provide the newby a semblace of excitement and wonder. You aren't supposed to care. The PTB will do with p.net what they will. It all vastly too complicated and confusing for regular whining photographers. What did you expect for a lousy $25 bucks? And there is no real cheating on p.net. There simply cannot be cheating on photo.net. It is NOT a contest. There is no prize. So how can there be cheating? After all, ratings don't MEAN anything. 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