A bit more democracy?

[liuyuan]

Here's a crazy thought. If you do care about the opionions of the

users and want to get some quick feedback from the users about how

they want this website to be run, you might consider setting up a

voting system. I've seen this function on other websites and viewers

can immediately see the voting results. I think this will actually

help you to make the website even better and you don't actually have

to show the voting results. About same time last year I saw around

2000 new photos every day, I see around 1550 now. Time for some

changes, if you know what I'm saying ...

 

BTW, I would vote for the old system. It was not perfect but better

than the current one.

[MichaelChang]

Yuan, I'm a firm believer that there can be no art without commerce. In fact, one might extend that to read 'there can be nothing without commerce'. I think site admin. is doing what they can to accommodate reasonable suggestions, but until sufficient (human and financial) resources become available, one can only add suggestions to a wish list. Financial support through subscription along with patient, civil and understanding behavior will go a long way in furthering the cause.

[mottershead]

Actually, the number of photos uploaded in August 2004 was 57728, and in August 2005, 57255 in ohher words, basically flat. The default view now requires a minimum of 5 ratings to be included, which means that there are fewer photos in the default TRP than before, but this doesn't mean that there are fewer uploads.

[skiphunt]

I basically just gave up on "democracy" here... I just upload images and look at others

images. If someone likes my images.. that's swell. If they don't.. well heck, that's swell too.

;-)

If I see an image I like, I'll tell'em. If it's almost there but not quite I'll tell'em my thoughts.

Other than that, I couldn't give a flip. The top rated section is nice and all. And, many of

the images deserve their slots, but I've basically just come to the conclusion it's more of a

crap shoot. A bit having to do with your "circle of friends".. a bit having to do with not

offending anyone ;-) ... a small bit having to do with whether the image is actually decent

or not... and a bit having to do with timing. Throw in the computer crap that's sposed to

level the field, and the whims of the collective mind here... and consider all of these

variables will vary wildly on a daily basis. Sometimes hourly.

 

So, like somebody told me... basically a crap shoot.

 

cheers,

 

Skip

[peter_daalder]

Skip, I know how to shoot crap with a camera, but I assume you're referring to the game that is played with two dice, as opposed to a session of really bad photography.<br>Just thought that there was a funny (pun-not-intended) quality attached to your last comment.

[skiphunt]

Heh! That's right, but it was unintentional. I usually do toss in subversive "crap" like that, but

this time no. Just a blanket statement, and back to uploading pics. :-) Good catch though! ;-)

[whinterberger]

I like and enjoy Photo.net and I'm not looking for any great changes.

I think , however , Skip has it exactly right with his philosophy and

his observations , I have come to much the same conclusions. I now know

what I like and leave the rest...

[Landrum Kelly]

I hate to say it, but democracy on Photo.net would be a disaster. All of those persons giving irrational ratings and comments would then be giving their votes as well on how to run the site. Would Brian have to be nominated to be president, and then be up for re-election in a run-off against somebody's robot, or would everybody just sort of "participate" and somehow keep the hardware, software, finances, etc. going rather magically?

 

Democracy is not going to happen on a privately-owned site, in any case.

 

If you want the easy-going rhetoric and illusion of pseudo-democracy, there is always flckr.com, but keep in mind that behind the breezy language and style of that site there is still the steel hand of the ultimate owners and administrators of that site, otherwise known as Yahoo.com.

 

--Lannie