mtfaidherbe1 Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 <p>Lately I posted two photos showing a medieval synagoga from Tomar, Portugal. These two pictures suddenly got many rates, so I went to see who was interested, of course.<br> :-(<br> The rates were quite low, what is quite possible "bien entendu"... but the strange is that the rates are all from people who put NO pictures at all on their pages, all subscribed to the site the same day and have no information on their profiles.</p> <p>names are: Fabien Acosta, Chris Brazelton, Brandy Lewis, Mimi rivera, Alan Ari Mohammed (with arabic letters), Gregory Ross..</p> <p>What is going on? Thanks for having a look...</p> <p>(of course, what bothers me if that the bad rates are on pictures of synagoga... maybe an intention there?)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtfaidherbe1 Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share Posted May 25, 2009 <p>another list of names (with not so bad rates this time, lololol) is<br> Megan Brooks, Mac Carter, Rhonda Fey , Loreta Reese, Jenner Samudra, Amin Taghehdrian, Bill Van Rhein...</p> <p>no details on the profile, no photos on their page, etc.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amitai schwartz Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 <p>I've noticed this too lately. I doubt it has anything to do with the synagogue inasmuch as these same "people" seem to be giving abnormally high rates to some nudes and singling out other images, as well.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.th Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 <p>that's what happens when one puts her/his pics up for public judgement, people judge. probably often by subject over other aspects of the pic, and - perhaps - naked women are more popular than most other subjects.</p> <p>personally i miss the ones and twos. i find it silly to have a rating system scaling from one to seven, and only allowing as low as three.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinwalsh Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 <blockquote> <p>another list of names (with not so bad rates this time, lololol) is Megan Brooks, Mac Carter, Rhonda Fey , Loreta Reese, Jenner Samudra, Amin Taghehdrian, Bill Van Rhein...no details on the profile, no photos on their page, etc.<br> I just noticed a sudden batch of low ratings by this whole group on a recently posted photo.I think I'm done posting photos for ratings. The system is ridiculous with no oversight.</p> </blockquote> <blockquote></blockquote> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pboraschi Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 <p>Again, this topic has be covered so many time for as long as i can remember. I don't understand your concern and frankly i am surprised you got so many ratings and/or comments. This is just the way P.net is. Please don't take this the wrong way, the members that rated your photo gave you their own subjective rating, I don't see what is wrong with this. Maybe you just so happened to upload during a busy time and you photos got a good attention...</p> <p>I tend to upload late at night, If I get over 10 ratings it's by luck i think...lol...I don't think my photos are tha bad, but I do get below average ratings so go figure...</p> <p>:)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cocasana Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 <p>It happened to me too. A pic of mine has been rated by 8 people. 7 of them did not upload any photo. In 7 years of memership never happened to me. Probably Photo.net is developing. From a photograper site is turning to a "pure critique" site!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcnilssen Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 <p>In my opinion, these compulsory low-raters are probably juvenile low-esteem high-testosterone attention-seekers, who have no interest in the pictures nor the values of photo.net.</p> <p>I'm ready for the flame-posts! ;)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeoday Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 <p>I think you may be right...<br> The accounts are created the same day, they have rated the same number of images with the same averages and rating distributions; and of all the thousands of images they could choose to rate, they all chose yours... At the very least it is extremely unusual.<br> All the best,<br> Mike<br> ps. Mine were from me :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeoday Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 <p>I think you may be right...<br> The accounts are created the same day, they have rated the same number of images with the same averages and rating distributions; and of all the thousands of images they could choose to rate, they all chose yours... At the very least it is extremely unusual.<br> All the best,<br> Mike<br> ps. Mine were from me :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stamos Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 <p>Generally I like PN but I would like to say something about the PN's rating system.<br> Tranquillity is nice, tranquillity with transparency is excellent. Excellence is difficult to achieve.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 <p>The ratings are <strong>OBVIOUS FAKES</strong> . Anyone who doubts this did not take the time to visit Ms Faidherbe's latest critique request, "Synogoga Medieval", and click on some of those who had rated the image. In addition to what Marie has already observed about some of them, for the most part they have similar rating patterns and have recently joined PhotoNet <em>on the same two days</em> in April 9 and May 25. I would hazard a guess that the accounts also are using similar IP's and email addresses as well. And it makes me wonder how many of the anonymous ratings are fakes? Regards.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
think27 Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 <p>We are dealing with this and are very aware of it. Found them yesterday - am waiting for Jin to take a look at them and they'll all be deleted. Please report to us through the Contact Us link at the bottom of the page whenever you see suspicious ratings. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtfaidherbe1 Posted May 27, 2009 Author Share Posted May 27, 2009 <p>problem is resolved. thanks.<br /> Thanks to the ones who have understood that I did not complain about the rates, but about the fake accounts. I have no problems to be rated by people who put photos on the site to be rated, but not by phantoms who don't do anything except rating people.<br /> For the other ones, take the time to READ what people write before taking time to answer.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimadams Posted May 31, 2009 Share Posted May 31, 2009 <p>Here's what's weird. I posted a photo today, May 31, 2009. It initially had seven or eight ratings, all anonymous. Most of them were good ratings, I think the lowest might have been a 4/5 or maybe a 3/4. I just checked, and now it only has five ratings, including two 3/3 ratings which weren't there before. Now, I don't get all cranked up about ratings, good or bad, but when they begin disappearing, I think something screwy is going on with Photo.net.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackcat Posted June 1, 2009 Share Posted June 1, 2009 <p>Jim, we have removed some fake ratings yesterday (up to 5 6/6 or 7/7 rates on photo), and your photo was one from the list, where several ratings were removed. <br> It's pity to loose high rates from any work, but still it is better if it will be real rates from real people, isn't it?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtfaidherbe1 Posted July 26, 2009 Author Share Posted July 26, 2009 <p>This time a lot of EXCELLENT notes to one of my photos (Peter Pan)... and most of them are by fake people... :-(<br> could you remove these people (and let the good ones by real people, lololol).<br> Thanks.</p> 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