POW

[rashed]

<p>First of all I am sorry if this is posted in wrong forum, I have searched and did not know which forum is the best for such post.</p>

 

<p >I also suggest that even if there is one POW picked by the site administrations there should be another one picked by photo.net members, the administrations picks 3 photos and let the member vote for them, the highest be posted as The Member choice.</p>

<p >I do not mean shall photo.net do that but just a suggestion, sometimes the good ideas comes from the most ignorant person like me.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Thank you all and wishing you a very happy new year.</p>

 

[eddes]

<p>POW (I believe you mean picture of the week)</p>

<p>in the site menu go to gallery->Top-rated photos<br>

choose photo category = all<br>

choose timeframe = past week<br>

click on find photos<br>

and voila your POW ranked according to the member votes. (you can even change how the vote gets counted)</p>

[rashed]

<p>Good Evening my friend <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=3898885">Edmond Desbiens</a>, I did not mean top rated photos, I meant photos for discussions which should not be the best in tis form but the best to improve.</p>

<p>Thank you my friend and wishing you a very happy and peaceful new year.</p>

 

[asafrye]

<p>From the <a href="../photodb/photo-of-the-week/about">About Photograph of the Week</a> page:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It would be a pretty boring place if everyone agreed with the POW choice!</p>

</blockquote>

 

[gordonjb]

<p>Rashed;</p>

<p>I think the biggest problem with your suggestion is that the pow is plucked from the trp pages and as such is already representative of the general PN aesthetic.<br /> Here are the stats , working backwards for the last seven pow's.</p>

<p>Total ratings - A an O breakdown</p>

<p>48 - 6.38 / 6.21<br /> 51 - 6.20 / 6.12<br /> 29 - 6.24 / 6.12<br /> 47 - 6.50 / 6.47<br /> 45 - 6.02 / 6.04<br /> 37 - 6.08 / 6.05<br /> 83 - 6.77 / 6.61</p>

<p>Anyone notice a pattern ?<br /> The Pow is already all about popularity, having a second pow chosen by the members rather than the elves would simply be redundant.</p>

[rashed]

<p>Thank you my friend Gordon for your input, this mean if an image not been posted by its person for the rating it will not be picked up for the POW.<br>

Please except my best wish's and regards to you and yours my friend for the New Year.</p>

 

[gordonjb]

<p>Rashed;</p>

<p>Yes it would seem so, although I became bored after going back seven weeks so there may well be some examples somewhere in the past.</p>

<p>The very best of the new year to you and yours from cold and wintry Canada.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I'm not one of the elves - the photo-folk behind the scenes who choose the POW - but if I'm recalling correctly the process already involves some members who are not moderators or administrators. I know of one member in particular who is not a moderator or administrator and who is highly respected by many photo.netters for ability and critique quality. So the process has been representative for several years.</p>

<p>And, again if I am recalling correctly, a POW nominee need not have appeared on the TRP to be eligible for the POW discussion process. Most of the photos I would personally nominate for POW consideration have never appeared on the TRP and received little or no attention in terms of views, ratings or comments.</p>

<p>In some cases the POW received most of its ratings and comments only after having been selected as POW, so we'd need to compare before/after data to get an idea of whether the TRP really influences the POW, or whether being selected as a POW is what triggers the additional prominence in terms of comments and ratings.</p>

[gordonjb]

<blockquote>

<p>In some cases the POW received most of its ratings and comments only after having been selected as POW, so we'd need to compare before/after data to get an idea of whether the TRP really influences the POW</p>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

<p>While that may be so and I would like to see those stats as they would be more informative than the ones I posted, I have noted , with at least the stats I posted, that most of those ratings where pre-POW. My observations are far from scientific , however I have for some time been looking at the rating numbers on Monday when the POW is posted and in recent memory they have all had large numbers of 6/6 & 7/7 ratings beforehand.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Most of the photos I would personally nominate for POW consideration have never appeared on the TRP and received little or no attention in terms of views, ratings or comments.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yup me too and I'd love to start seeing some of those photos show up in the POW.</p>

[rashed]

<p>Thank you my friend <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=172915">Lex (perpendicularity consultant) Jenkins</a>, I am not really acusing any one being not right, I was refering to something different but as you know my English some times do not help.</p>

<p>I have seen on some sites 2 POW, one which is selected by the adminstrations or their associates and the other by the site members, they admistrations usually post 3 images and lets the members vote for them.</p>

<p>This might sound not a good idea but it some times give more chances to the member to work on more than just one images during the week.</p>

<p>Also my friend, if the image hit the first page because of so many 7/7's then as you are aware there are some people get all of the 7s even if there images do not deserve so and of course this is not only on this site.</p>

<p>If an image been picked for discussion and how to improve it , then it should not be on the first page for its too much 7s.</p>

<p>My friend, you always been too kind and helpful with your input and very polite and gentlman to all, I approcaite that too much and have a great respect for you and wishing you and yours all of the best for the new.</p>

<p>photo.net tought me a lot, I hope they not ungery with me but happy that I did learn everything from this site which I love a lot and do care for.</p>