ned1 Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Sorry to be posting this here but I already notified abuse a few days ago. http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=1525720 has just GOT to be a robot. A member just 5 days and already almost 4000 photos rated, seemingly randomly. Has anyone posted a picture lately that HASN'T been rated by it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomade Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Read this other thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BPY8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanna_reitsch Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 Forget about Nestor's thread, even Ray Charles could see it's a bot. This is a Pn bot, a strange way for the site admins to lower the average rating on the site. It's a game called Calvinball and a weird game at that. The bot is programmed to rate just about every photo that asks for a critique and keep the overall average at 4.25. Ratings are completely random. This of course accomplishes 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 Calvinball consists of software that mark ratings as "reciprical ratings" or "disqualified ratings", and the code that tallies up the scores ignores these. We have some other code that runs every day which removes 1 and 2 ratings from people who given an excessive number of them. We have no code whatsoever that creates ratings. People associated officially with the site (e.g. moderators) can rate photos if they want to. They do so using the exact same user interfaces as everybody else under their own names from regular accounts. I personally no longer rate photos, and I deleted all my ratings quite a while ago. This was a few thousand ratings given from early 2001 into 2002, most of which were made before I had any official connection to the site. I have rated maybe 20 photos in the last couple of years. One or two of them were to make a point and those are now deleted. The rest were just for testing. Those are also all now deleted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt_edmonson Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 But Brian, if this robot is not a PN robot, why haven't you removed it? Apparently admin is allowing this bot to hijack the site. I know folks are not sending images through RFC because you guys have allowed it to terrorize the site. Why are you tacitly approving this behavior? Ratings of 4000 images in a week. How ridiculous. How can you ignore this? What is your basis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 My basis is that it looks like a person rating photos at a rate at which a person could rate photos. If it is a robot, and the only reason to think so is the quantity of ratings, it is indistinguishable from a human at present Since I don't care to delete ratings that might be from a person, the robot writer gets to win for the time being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Assuming the account is not a robot, and gazing at the photos that got 7/7 ratings, I have to marvel at the mind behind such ratings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyr_. Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beepy Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 You have a point .[. Z. I looked at their top rated photos and MY mind was looking for linkages and relationships and I felt I was getting a thread of something which is perhaps disturbing:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william_linzenmeyer Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 My question would be.. even if it is physically possible to rate say, 1000 images a day. Of what value could those rates be? Look at a photograph for a couple of seconds and throw the first numbers that come into your mind at them? One of the most frequent complaints we hear around PN is that there are not enough thoughtful comments made. The "person" in question has rated over 4000 photos in a few days, without a single comment. Personally, I think that this sort of POwer rating should be discouraged. Even if it is a "legitimate" person doing it, why wouuld you want them to? Why wouldn't you limit the number of rates per day to something reasonable? Especially in the case of brand new, non paying members. <br>I rarely get involved in the rate debates but, I think it's worthless to allow this kind of mindless rating. If you can't find a few photos, in 4000, that deserve a comment or provoke a thought then you're not really looking at them. Just my, point oh too, worth... ;-)<br>Bill</br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 Jeremy Stein pointed out some additional evidence that established that this was a robot. The account is banned and all the ratings have been deleted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 None of my photographs were hit by this latest attack but, nevertheless, I'm glad that the account is gone. Unfortunately, the damage that it caused is harder to rectify. Hundreds (thousands?) of dishonestly rated lowballed photographs missed that ephermal chance for a little visibility because of this attack. It is too bad that PhotoNet seems to be powerless to prevent this from happening. <p> And, meanwhile, the hijack of the TRP continues full force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 to Mr Stein for his investigative efforts. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william_linzenmeyer Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Thank you Jeremy and Brian.. That was a tough nut to crack.<br>Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leepix Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Can we talk??? I posted a question regarding how to get a photo submitted for acceptance as a TOP photo last night. Since that posting, my photo LOST 1 rating which means someone or something removed 1 score. How is this possible? Was this deliberate? I love this community and except for several 'attacks by a few photo-less low-score ratings occasionally really enjoy the feedback and would love to someday get a photo into the lime light. Like Orphan Angel : http://www.photo.net/photo/3145307. With 26 (er, umm now, 25 ratings), at 6.40/7 and 6.32/7 score-- It seems possible that this shot might be good enough to fly. Yes? Maybe? If anyone can shed some light I would most appreciate. Please feel free to contact me off the air. PS My question posting from yesterday also disappeared. Respectfully yours Lee McLaughlin<div></div> 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