Low Rater Jerk

[KenPapai]

Someone wrote: "What's sad is that Mike pulled all his photos -- didn't just remove them from being rated, but deleted them."

 

Really? Then what are those 16 photos still posted there, including said controversial macro?

[lex_jenkins]

Ken, if I'm reading the details attached to Mike's photos correctly, he resubmitted them on 3/25/08 after having deleted them.

 

While this wipes the slate for Mike's photos, ratings and critiques, it also wipes out the constructive critiques others have offered in the past. That may discourage viewers who took the time and trouble to offer constructive critiques.

[rachelfoster]

Myself, I would like to see a category "rating only accompanied by comment."

[Ian Taylor]

Ratings don't mean anything.

[frankphoto]

The issue of ratings just won't lie down and die because there will always be new members who take a little time to arrive at the same conclusion that hundreds of others have arrived at i.e., the rating system is being systematically manipulated to it's detriment by some person or persons who take the matter very seriously indeed, judging by the time and effort they expend making a complete nuisance of themselves. I will post below, a response I made last November, warts and all, when I was a new and gullible rookie on this site. This subject will never go away unless those who are in a position to do something about it, actually acknowledge that there is a problem and decide to do something positive about it instead of just dishing out more of

the same old waffle.

 

 

 

 

Everywhere I look on this site I see complaints about the rating system. It is quite obvious that it just does not work ...and it does not take long for people to realise this very obvious fact . I joined P.NET about three months ago for the same reason as most other people, to improve my photographic skills, but I feel that in the main I am wasting my time for the following reasons. When I post a photo, the first rating it receives is almost always a 3/3. Recently I posted 2 photos to be rated, and within SECONDS of their appearing in the Critique Forum they had both been rated 3/3. This has happened to me (and to other much better photographers than me)so often that I am convinced somebody out there is doing this systematically for some reason. The thing is that this reduces an already flawed rating system to almost worthless rating system. I have yet to receive a critique fron a 3/3 rater....I have a total of 138/3 ratings! There are basically two ways our photo are appraised on this site ...ratings and critiques. I find I get very few worthwile critiques, which leaves me with ratings which, as so many people before me have pointed out, is of very limited value. Lots of people tell us to ignore the rating system altogether...but why should we capitulate so easily, why should we not have the CHOICE at least? The Elves who administer this site must be well aware of the level of discontent on the site regarding the rating system .....what do they do about it....NOTHING as far as I can see, they don't even seem to acknowledge there is a problem ! Wouldn't it be interesting to have a poll of members to establish the level of satisfaction they feel regarding this and other issues. I suspect most people are quite happy with the site as a whole, but wouldn't it be very interesting to put it to the test! If this site were another type of service/business it would have to respond to so many complaints from it's customers.........perhaps we don't complain LOUDLY enough..perhaps I will in future ! A suggeston : when we post a photo in the Critiques Forum could we have the choice of selecting DIRECT RATING ONLY...I think this would be a progressive first step... but I won't be holding my breath waiting! SLAN....FRANK.

[lex_jenkins]

Frank, I've been participating on photo.net for almost 10 years, actively for 8. I still consider myself a rookie in many respects. Your frustration is understandable, but a few months on the site really isn't enough to assimilate the long history of this complex issue.

 

Since paying a bit more attention to the ratings system recently, and coming from the standpoint of a skeptic (because I remember well the mate-rating wars of yesteryear), I'm not seeing any *effective* systematic effort to low-rate certain people's photos in order to benefit a select few. While I'm not privy to the inner workings of the elves, they seem to have adopted an effect way to ferret out the bots, fakers and jokers. So even if there is a systematic attempt to influence ratings, it doesn't appear to be effective.

 

BTW, you wouldn't necessarily know whether you'd received a critique from someone who'd rated your photo, regardless of how low or high the rating. When rating via the anonymous queue, the numbers are anonymous, but any comments are attributed. Most of the time when I do choose to leave a comment on a photo, it's usually one that I've rated at or below average (3 or 4) because it showed potential. Chances are that others do the same. So a photograph might receive encouraging comments from a viewer who rated it 3/3. Heck, I've left comments on at least one photo I rated something like 5/2.

[mike dixon]

<i>The Elves who administer this site must be well aware of the level of discontent on the site regarding the rating system .....what do they do about it....NOTHING as far as I can see, they don't even seem to acknowledge there is a problem ! </i><P>

You're not looking very hard. There have been many, many changes to the ratings system over the years, some of them quite dramatic. Many of the problems with the system have been lessened, though not eliminated. Something that hasn't been seriously reduced by those changes, though, are the number of complaints about the system. People will clamor for a change, and immediately after every change, people will start complaining about that change.<P>

No matter how well the system actually works, even if it were totally free of abuse, plenty of people would still complain about it. There's simply no way to ensure that everyone will get the kind of ratings and critiques that they want.

[frankphoto]

Lex and Mike, thank you for your patient and informative replies to my response above. The point I am trying to make is that almost the first experience most of us have on P.Net is of seeing our photos systematically receive 3/3 ratings. In some cases, these postings are done with such speed that they can't possibly involve any worthwhile appraisal of the photographer's work. And I have never had a direct posting i.e. with name appended, by a 3/3 rater. This is confusing and discouraging for a beginner, so it follows that the subject is going to continue to be raised by confused and discouraged beginners.

 

My reprinted response is really just an illustration of the sort of thing (WARTS AND ALL) we can expect will be repeated long into the future if the rating system remains unchanged. As a rookie of 3 months

I must admit that I didn't delve into he archives to research the ancient past on this topic, I simply reacted to how I found it. In fact I don't really give a hoot about what tweaking of the system was done in the distant past, it's only of academic interest. Certainly nothing has significantly changed in my time on P.NET (Almost one year)

 

One response to the rating question that constantly comes up is that people will always complain, no matter how great the system. I have never heard ANYBODY argue that any improvement was going to please EVERYBODY, so why make the counter argument that it can't! All we can expect is to endeavor to please as many members as possible, which in my albeit limited experience on P.Net, does not seem to be the case. I will post below some comments by some photographers I greatly admire. These people are not airheads but intelligent and extremely gifted photographers. So it's plain to me that there is indeed something amiss with the rating system in it's present form. I don't seek out negative comments on the rating system but they appear all over the site and are certainly easy to find.

 

Furthermore, there is the question of choice: if I choose to submit my photos for rating it is my prerogative and I should at least be entitled to a fair crack of the whip, and not told that to ignore the system altogether. Surely this is one of the strongest admissions that the system simply stinks!

 

And Mike, I think it's a wee bit unfair of you to pick out one line for comment and totally ignore the fact that the line must be read in the context of the proceeding line and following line, which I went to the bother of typing out in an attempt to make my meaning clear.

Thank you both for your interesting responses...if I sound a trifle tetchy tonight it's probably because I went out this morning to a local wood to photograph some Spring flowers and decided to bring along our Springer Spaniel Jess for the exercise. While I was photographing some bluebells the dog simply disappeared and after more than 8hours (I kid you not) searching we have still not managed to locate her...so the wife is has definitely given me a 3/3 for intelligence and the three big sons have the demenour of a lynch mob!

As promised above:

 

Jacqueline Robertsphoto.net patron, January 15, 2008; 07:44 A.M.

 

3/3 rater(s)

 

thanks for dropping by...but what took you so long!

 

Laurent-Paul Robertphoto.net patron, January 15, 2008; 09:38 A.M.

 

Be happy with 3/3 raters : whatever their motivation, ( jalousy beeing porbably the most obvious one ), this means people are reacting to your art. And the stronger your Art, the more difficult it will be to please

 

 

 

 

Hekate Hek, April 14, 2007; 08:49 P.M.

Dear 3/3 anonymous raters,

 

have you heard of the expression "do not throw your pearls to the pigs" ? This is how I feel (like having thrown pearls to the pigs) when I see the anonymous 3/3 ratings on my picture (you can draw your own conclusions). Thanks for rating my work anyway (but you should really, I mean REALLY get a life).

 

I'd be more interested in advice and comments that I could learn from. or in which people would tell me what the image makes them think of..

 

thank you everybody...

 

 

[lex_jenkins]

Frank, something to keep in mind is that photos viewed via the anonymous ratings queue are recompressed and sometimes suffer in the process. The queue tends to favor simple, graphically compelling photos, either in color or b&w, and works against carefully prepared photos that depend on subtle preservation of fine detail.

 

When in doubt, I take a moment to look at the largest view provided by the photographers on their portfolios. This has occasionally caused me to reconsider my rating, and not always for the better! In some cases photos that appeared okay on the anonymous ratings queue turned out to have significant flaws. In other cases, the larger view revealed fine preparation and the rating improved by a point.

 

I doubt that all viewers using the anonymous ratings queue take the time to do this. It doesn't really take long to offer a legitimate opinion, reduced to a simple numerical expression, via that queue. With broadband internet access one can easily rate several photos per minute.

 

Don't assume that 3/3 isn't a valid opinion. Some folks simply don't like certain photos. I tend to pass on photo genres that don't appeal to me, such as digital alterations. Other viewers may offer a rating on everything, even if they don't like the genre. That's how the system works. Can't please everyone.

 

Nope, it's not fair to everyone. But some photographers on photo.net have expressed a desire for, very simply, *more* ratings, not *higher* ratings. More ratings means more views. More views means more opportunities for their photos to get attention.

 

Some folks want quality. Some want quantity, believing that some quality will come of it. Which is true to some extent.

[frankphoto]

Dear Lex, I have read loads of comments by you around the site, in fact your stats say you have posted 18,199 comment in the past 8 years!This works out at about 44 per month. I must admit I'm impressed...no wonder you are perpendicularly challenged.......I'd be flat on my back too! Any comments of yours that I have read have always been informative, calm, constructive, and intelligent. I may not always agree with your point of view but I always walk away with something to think about! People like you are one of the elements which makes P.Net work for people like me. I know I am totally off the point of this discussion but I always like to acknowledge plain old good manners. Thank you for your response. FRANK.

p.s., I still think the rating system stinks!