TRP by Average

[vincetylor]

I know that it gets little attention, and you know that it gets little attention, but most Brian, do not know that it gets little attention. When these mate-raters continue to delete lower rated images just to maintain their particular location on that page, the reasons are obvious. When it first came out, I think almost every photographer around understood where they were on that list. If you really wish to bring an end to mate-rating, then remove the list altogether. THAT is and has always been the main incentive in my opinion. Personally, I think there is some measure of truth to the list and order, but those gaming the system have manipulated the top pages somewhat obviously. I have posted almost 100 images and used to think that page offered good visibility, but in truth I have recognized the only significant visibility comes from the default TRP. The TRP that has been long filled with images of those mate-rate-gaming the system for a long time now, and that currently guarantees established photographers go to the TRP abyss. Pretty cool system wouldn't you say Brian??

[tijean]

Vincent, do know how aggrivating it is to explain to someone that the system is scheduled to be tweaked and then have then bombard you with regurgitated complains about the need to change something that you JUST SAID would be changed? ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRG! Please READ what I actually SAID!

[tijean]

Sorry for double post, but I needed get out that little scream before I could think.

 

Now, it should be noted that the majority, if not all, of mate-rating behavior is completely within the bounds of the rules. People's intentions can not moderated, even when those intentions are clear. If I see the new work of photographer whom I admire and give those pieces 7/7s because I absolutely adore them, then they go to my portfolio, LOVE my work (we're dealing in hypotheticals, remember) and rate mine highly - is that mate-rating? Is it against the rules to rate another photographer highly consistently if you believe their work is truly superior? How would Brian go about seeing into someone's head to find out their intentions? Or should he just pour over hours and hours and hours of data about who rated who how and when to try and give it a guess?

 

So what rule are the mate-raters breaking in a blatant enough way to warrant action? They are annoying. They are shameless. They aren't doing anything to warrant persecution.

 

And so what if people continue to mate-rate? It's human nature. The fact that mate-rating no longer gives the culprits top billing (in turn lowering the exposure of others' photos) means that something has been improved.

 

And will continue to be improved.

[mondiani]

want to see a poor photo mate rated? try this one 3327706

[tijean]

No, I really don't because its not relevant based on what I've already said.

[vincetylor]

Jessica, the TRP has had to be changed many times because mate-raters images have filled them up. These images are not on those pages because they are really that good or that interesting. In most cases they got their because people have developed a circle of friends that do nothing other than hand out 7/7 regardless of the image. Reciprocal ratings is completely within the rules and actually encouraged PROVIDED THAT PEOPLE RATE HONESTLY. If you like one of my images, ang give that a 7/6 for example, and I in turn go through your folders are rate one of yours in return a 7/6 even though I believe in reality it's just a 5/5, then I have begun the process of mate-rating that has harmed the site. It is in other words a form of cheating. Why might I (or anybody) be tempted to give you a higher score than it truly warrants? Because by doing so, you will be more likely to rate other images of mine with another high score. I have been rated very highly by some of the very obvious mate-rating crowd in the past. However when returning a rate, I could never give the infated, bogus 7/7. Now, I simply avoid these ones altogether, because what they have been doing has compromised the integrity of the gallery, bumped other more deserving images down the list and created a sense of "my work is great" attitude aming those in these little crowds. Nothing good comes from these people.

 

Brian is correct in trying to address these ones. When Calvinball was first implemented, I was optimistic and supported it. After months of watching honest ratings deleted, and still seeing these same people continuing on, I have since come to believe the only solution is to go after these people directly. Yes, Brian has said he will fix the current TRP view when he feels like it after some of these abusers curb some of their abusing habbits. But in my mind, that is not happening anytime soon, if ever, for the reasons already mentioned above. If he wishes to keep this unfair system until these Mate-raters change their ways, I'm afraid we all will be old men and women by then.

[tijean]

Vincent,

 

I am not a moron. I don't need you to explain the concept of mate-rating to me, but if you are going to harp on Brian for not going after certain people, than why don't you please tell us (at long last) what objective, data-driven approach he could use.

 

Note: "I think that pictures realy bad, but they rated it a 7/7" does not meet the "objective, data-driven" criteria.