Ratings

[dandem]

This is directed at Josh - or anyone else who can satisfy my curiosity. Is there any particular reason that PN does

not allow reciprical ratings of 7's for 14 days if a fellow PN member has awarded your shot with 7's?

Thanks...Paiken

[tonmestrom]

mate rating (or the danger and consequent prevention thereoff)

[stp]

Even if a 7/7 is deserved for an outstanding photograph? Is there an equivalent for mutual hate rating, whereby if a 3/3 is

received, the recipient is not allowed to reciprocate with a 3/3 for 14 days?

[dandem]

Thank you Tom and Stephen. EXCELLENT point, Stephen.

[joshroot]

Stephen, there was at one point. But it got screwed up when the system went from 1-7 to 3-7.

 

At this point it's all a mess. Jin and I have been working on a new system that automatically takes stuff like mate-rating and high/low raters into account. That way people can cheat all they want, with no effect, and it won't require jumping through hoops for regular users.

 

There's just so much to do on photo.net and only so much programmer time. We're getting there, slowly. But we're getting there.

[stp]

Bottom line for me is that comments are so much more valuable than numeric ratings. I know that ratings are easier to

provide, but IMO they say far more about the rater (e.g., "I like this photograph," or "I don't like this photograph") than they

do the photograph being rated. Also, some comments are more meaningful than others (e.g., "Great photograph" versus

"Great photograph because....." I sure wish it were possible to have this site give more emphasis to comments rather than

ratings. Some recent changes have helped greatly: having a submitted photo rotate through for a certain length of time,

and the random image generator. Both of these help me find photos that I really like and for which I can leave a comment

(even if, in the random image generator, the image was submitted a couple of years ago). Last bottom line: photo.net has

a lot of good things to offer photographers.