Ratings System - I've had it

[mr. sullen]

Would the complaining be any different then now? I say probably not in volume but maybe context, at least everyone would have had their say in the matter. For the context of the post here I suppose we should have a vote on anonymous ratings however I think first we should have a vote on having a rating system at all to determine then which votes may be cast as to the particular changes if it's kept. One good thing is that all Josh would ever have to say is "You voted for it, you got it."

 

I realize this is probably a silly suggestion but I feel if that we are supposed to be a community then we should act like one. Really I think the only way to truly do that is to vote so maybe it's not so silly after all.

[joshroot]

Shay,

 

I get the idea. But for any number of reasons, it isn't going to happen.

 

Not the least of which is that being able to say "You voted for it, you got it." would do nothing to stop the complaining or angry posts.

[mr. sullen]

No but it would make life easier on you I would think. See I have your best interest involved Josh.

 

I do not seriously think something like that would happen, seems strange for a web site to do that anyway but hey a guy can dream can't he? Take it easy all. Shay-

[peter_daalder]

I think that the photo.net ratings system actually works quite well...<p>

Like Dan and other contributors to this thread, I have also been a member of PN for some time now.<p>However, I wonder if many of our current readers have experienced the period of <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003opA"> ratings normalization. </a><p>Just imagine... There used to be a time when photo.net raters were able to score your submitted photos from 1 to 10!<p> The reduced numerical scale was a great idea, but it never ended the on-going anxiety about receiving numerical values on our images.<p>

After spending four years as a relatively active member of this community, I deleted my entire portfolio in 2006 and decided to take a break from photo.net.<br>18 months later, I thought that it might be an interesting exercise to have another crack at the random ratings shooting gallery...<p>Guess what? According to the "All Time" rankings, it appears that I am generally just as "good" a photographer as I was a couple of years ago, when I was 'judged' by an entirely different group of random raters. <P>I just might go out and take some more photos now...

[timzeipekis]

I just think of 3's as 7's and viola I'm one of the best shooters on the site:) more seriously though, I think there is an elitist secret society that has seen my potential and feels threatened that I might one day be declared the King of Photography, therefore in a plot to destroy my rise to fame, I will be flooded with 3/3 ratings to kill my spirit and forever change the course of human history.

 

I really don't mean to make light of this situation, I'm just tired of being tired of it, you know?

[gdanmitchell]

Nothing is going to change here. Fortunately, there are other options for posting/hosting photographs. The PN discussions are still

interesting and worthwhile. Therefore...

 

I'm not going to continue to use PN as a repository for my photography but I will continue to participate in discussion threads that interest

me.

 

I'm disappointed that PN is obstinate about this, but it is clear that the folks running it are sure that they are right.

 

Take care,

 

Dan

[cmitchell]

Um, guys, is it possible that everyone just doesn't think your photos are a 5 or 6 or 7? Why assume that a 3/3 is an error, or revenge or anything else? Maybe someone just doesn't like your style? Maybe you overrate yourselves. Just a thought.

[mr. sullen]

Will you ever answer me as to where your frustration is coming from? Of course nothing is going to change. I have already demonstrated that this is a dictatorship. But then again, what web site isn't? But to be fair this site has changed many times with the consideration and thoughts of its members. Like I said though to be truly democratic we must all vote as a community for change. If we don?t then what are we but followers?

[Norma Desmond]

"If we don?t then what are we but followers?"

 

We're called consumers. I use Comcast cable, AT&T, buy Exxon gas and don't get a vote in

their companies (unless I own stock).

 

Josh is, at this very moment, having dialogues in emails (at his request) with several

people who are proposing ideas for ratings and critique changes. That seems reasonably

democratic. Besides, voting is highly overrated. Look at where it got the U.S. the last 8

years. (That's said with tongue firmly planted in cheek, by the way. I promise I'm not a

communist.)

[gdanmitchell]

Shay:

 

I had a fairly specific socially-useful idea for improving the situation that I though could make a positive difference without compromising the anonymity that seems

to be so important at this site. I tried to mail Josh, but just got an error message which I reported here. That seemed to be the end of it.

 

I'm not going to sweat it. I can post my photos elsewhere. As I wrote above, I'll will still contribute to the discussion threads.

 

Take care,

 

Dan

 

(FWIW: I have long experience with online communities, have build blogging sites before the term "blogging" existed, have taught online college courses since the

mid-1990s, worked closely with people at a Really Big Computer Company on related stuff, and so forth. I'm relatively familiar with the technical issues and social

dynamics of online communities.)

[joshroot]

<i>"That seemed to be the end of it."</i>

<p>

Dan, I posted my email address right after you reported the error message. I'm not sure why you didn't just send your suggestions there.

[troy_taylor]

I like your pics. Dont let the ratings bother you if someone like them thats all that matters.

 

It all can be skewed anyway because of the type of audience.

 

I might like pics of a bike junk yard, someone else might like a lawn full of frosted littered candy wrappers and yes the litter won first place at the local art show. With a larger biker audience at another show maybe the junk yard would win.

[tomaso nigris]

I agree 100% with Mitchel. Majority of photographer here in PN are interested in rating, because technical comments are disappeared it's a way to understand the value of the photo. But 3\3 anonymous rating without any technical reason is frustrating. But what I want to add is something strange happened to me recently. I received a rating around 5.5\5.8, minimum rating of 10 rating was 5/5 ( 7 anonymous) and it was in the top 50 pictures, suddenly after TWO days from posting two 3\3 are coming from anonymous rater. Is it possible to have anonymous rate after two day you posted the photo? why system do not delete alway the highest and lowest rating as in may olypic sport, like gymnastic, skating and so on?