Lowball rating without comment - how possible?

[edlark]

It is my understanding that to rate a photograph with a 1 or 2 a

comment must be left. So how is it that the person who left me a 1/1

on this photo (http://www.photo.net/photo/1421829)

didn't have to comment? If he thinks it's crap (and he obviouly

does), that's fine, I would just like to know why he thinks it's crap.

[mottershead]

The only way I know for this to happen is that the comment was deleted after the rating was made. You can delete your own photo comments, and the software does not check whether there was a low rating that originally compelled the comment. As for why the person thought the photo warranted a 1/1, I suspect it was a political reaction to the content of the photo rather than to the photo itself.

[bobatkins]

I agree with Brian. It's a decent shot, but if you mess with people's politics or religion (..or brand of camera..) some people can no longer make an aesthetic judgement of an image.

 

In an ideal world with unlimited time for programming I suppose it would be nice to modify the software so that if you want to give a 1 or 2 you have to leave a 10 word (or more) comment, and that comment would be locked so it couldn't be removed. There's not a lot of point in requiring a comment, then allowing it to be removed and letting the rating stand.

[edlark]

Brian and Bob -

 

It is a little disappointing that this little software loophole basically allows someone to "hit and run" in the ratings game. I don't generally pay that much attention to ratings - especially on the "political" stuff, for the reasons Bob mentioned. I wouldn't even have noticed the 1/1 if I hadn't checked the ratings in response to the other comment listed. I get a notice of responses posted for pictures, but not for ratings.

 

C'est la guerre. Thanks for the response.

[nikos]

Now I checked the image and there is no such 1/1 rating. This suggests that the lowball rater was just reacting on a political basis and rolled-back his rating as soon as it became an issue in the forum.. well, with so many people here on such different backgrounds, you've got to expect some immature and irrational behaviours. So far it is not degrading the value of photo.net to its users (at least, so I think) but surely these issues should be brought up to the surface, because the rating game gets increasingly dirtier and creates effects that eventually could possibly endanger the community spirit of the site.

[bobatkins]

I thought Brian had removed the ability for users to remove or edit their ratings.

[nikos]

It is no longer possible to remove a rating, but one can change it. Just go to any photo you've rated and rate it again, you will get a confirmation screen quoting the previous rating and asking whether you really want to update it. It is a good feature. Sometimes I have used it by accident, rating an image that I had rated ages ago only to find out that my first, impulsive rating was not as represenative with respect to how I rate other images. I wouldn't want this feature to go.

[stephen hazelton]

Don't expect that people that rate a photo 1/1 because of politics are going to leave a useful comment even if forced to leave a comment. Would it make you feel any better if they had said "I hate you and the horse you rode in on" or words to that effect? It might just be better if they kept quiet...

[bobatkins]

It might also make them think twice and it would discourage "hit and run" rating. Since they can't delete their comment it ought to give them pause for thought.

[johnlund]

Please don't remove the ability to change ratings or comments. In the first case I once accidentally reversed my values for aesthetics and originality. In the second case, I once removed a comment because the photographer in question took offense at my criticism. (In retrospect I was a jackass, but at the time I thought I was softening a criticism by being cute.)