cyr_. Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 is it possible for someone, (deleted) to have become amember on March 4th and have already rated 1792 photo's??? Please advise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_m_catino Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 (deleted) It's a robot rater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joachim.wabnig Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 Seems like I became a "victim" too. Rated 2/2. Who profits from these robot things anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyr_. Posted March 7, 2005 Author Share Posted March 7, 2005 I think the simple answer is: "If they can, they do." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joachim.wabnig Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 Strange things are happening. The rating miraculously increased from 2/2 to 4/4. I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomade Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 If it's a robot or not, only pnet's staff could tell by making the corresponding technical work. But for what I saw, she has rated with an average over the 4 for both aesthetic and originality, and her high rates went to very different people. So I wouldn't assume she's a robot, not even that her rates are going to anybody in particular. And yes, she could rate during the last week-end such amount of shots. When I first entered pnet and had more time, I used to rate 500 times a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joachim.wabnig Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 That would be exactly what I would program a robot to do. By the way there is no consistency in taste, when you look at the high rated pictures. To me it looks like a pretty random collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_m_catino Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 It's a robot Nestor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 I don't think this account is a robot. There have been a few stretches of time where she rated a lot of photos, but mostly she rates quite normally. She has just spent a lot of time rating photos over the last few days. I have edited some of the previous messages to remove the person's name. Actually, the photo.net administration DOES NOT APPRECIATE reports about potential problem users being made in the forums. We do not want people to be put on public trial in the forums; that is NOT what they are for. YOU would not like it if somebody starting yelling that you were some flavor of abuser in a forum. So, do like your mother is supposed to have taught you and do unto others as you would have done unto you. If you have abuse to report to photo.net administration please do it via email. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 I don't get it. My photos are as bad as anyone else's. Why don't I ever get more low ratings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlisle_mass Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 2100 photos in three days, I think Brian is a little mad these little kids can hijack his cute little site and he can't stop it. Now he is in denial. See ya soon. Bye bye now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 perhaps it is because you do not post any of them for critique. I assure you that low ratings would be forthcoming if you did. Not that you would deserve them, but you would expose the phtographs to the same low rater that everyone else is being hit with. Avoiding RFC's is protecting you. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 that's right; it's perfectly normal behavior. Yeah, that's it. We are the abnormal ones: those of us who submit photographs for critique, thinking that that is the way to use this site. Far better to sign-in as an unpaying, anonymous guest. Far better to sit for hours and mindlessly rate 700 photographs a day. Far better to have a cadre of friends to email everytime you upload something and sidestep the RFC. <p> Only those on the lunatic fringe think that honest behavior will attain what they are seeking here. And...they're coming to take me away, ha ha, ho ho, hee hee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 You're right, Walter. I forgot that unless I specifically request a critique now I'm unlikely to get one unless someone almost randomly stumbles across my folders. I have a couple of really boring photos in my folders that would be interesting to submit for critique, just for fun. Nah. Too many folks take this stuff seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mg Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 "We do not want people to be put on public trial in the forums; that is NOT what they are for. YOU would not like it if somebody starting yelling that you were some flavor of abuser in a forum." - Brian M. <p> Are you just joking, Brian, or do you perhaps have double standards...? I've been on trial for ages - always with the 2 same "judges" and always in the worst possible manner -, and one of them accused me in this very same forum, of abusing the site: and yet, their insulting posts are still standing, and my thread to complain about it got deleted. :-) <p> I guess the reason is that I don'talways agree with you, and that I don'tlike double standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afs760bf Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 I had a comment deleted by the forum police yesterday, and I didn't name anyone or anything. Just said it seemed strange that the site encourages people to rate photos so their's will get rated, then if someone whose photo you rated highly happens to see your moniker as a rater, come look at your work, like one of your photos and rates it highly, your rating disappears. But if they happen to rate it a 3/3, it stays. It was quite a rousing discussion, and now it's mostly gone - or at least I can't find it. There were several commenters axed. So it doesn't pay to take anything here seriously. I love freedom of speech - and Calvinball. That even sounds like a game, doesn't it? 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