Oh boy! I do not envy people like Brian who have to face this avalanche of heated opinions, but I envy them for their patience and resolution in trying to solve some of the problems. It took me more then an hour to read all this thread and I would really like to summarize it in order to put some order in this sea of ideas (for myself and possibly for others).
Let�s start with the facts.
- Photo.net is an international site for the lovers of photography.
- Photo.net is interested to have as many members as possible.
- Photo.net is supposed to be the home of �the art of photography�.
This doesn�t necessarily mean that all good photographs are
artistic photographs.
- Photo.net uses English as a means of communication with its users and between users.
- Not all members master the English language to the level of intelligent and articulate English speaking person.
- All the members have some interest in photography.
- The age, experience, photographic abilities, talent, tastes and favorite genre of its members varies wildly.
- Some members love the rating system to the point that without it would give up their membership.
- Some members think the rating system creates animosity among the members and should be abolished altogether.
- Most of the members agree on the drawbacks of the present rating system.
- All members disagree with each other regarding a specific rating system.
- The stated purpose of the rating system is to classify the photographs, in order to allow other members to filter the photographs that are worth the time of the viewer.
- In order to properly criticize (anything, not only a photograph) one needs, first of all, time.
- Time, �nowadays� is a commodity in short supply.
How can anyone solve this impossible puzzle?
I think, this goal can be attained, by eliminating the conflicting �facts�. I won�t get into details because this would initiate another thread of heated but fruitless debates.
I will finish with a question.
How can two numbers quantify the quality of a photograph? Books were written about a single work of art and you expect an average amateur to summarize and classify it by two simplistic numbers?
Changes to Rating System
in PhotoNet Site Help
Posted
Oh boy! I do not envy people like Brian who have to face this avalanche of heated opinions, but I envy them for their patience and resolution in trying to solve some of the problems. It took me more then an hour to read all this thread and I would really like to summarize it in order to put some order in this sea of ideas (for myself and possibly for others).
Let�s start with the facts.
- Photo.net is an international site for the lovers of photography.
- Photo.net is interested to have as many members as possible.
- Photo.net is supposed to be the home of �the art of photography�.
This doesn�t necessarily mean that all good photographs are
artistic photographs.
- Photo.net uses English as a means of communication with its users and between users.
- Not all members master the English language to the level of intelligent and articulate English speaking person.
- All the members have some interest in photography.
- The age, experience, photographic abilities, talent, tastes and favorite genre of its members varies wildly.
- Some members love the rating system to the point that without it would give up their membership.
- Some members think the rating system creates animosity among the members and should be abolished altogether.
- Most of the members agree on the drawbacks of the present rating system.
- All members disagree with each other regarding a specific rating system.
- The stated purpose of the rating system is to classify the photographs, in order to allow other members to filter the photographs that are worth the time of the viewer.
- In order to properly criticize (anything, not only a photograph) one needs, first of all, time.
- Time, �nowadays� is a commodity in short supply.
How can anyone solve this impossible puzzle?
I think, this goal can be attained, by eliminating the conflicting �facts�. I won�t get into details because this would initiate another thread of heated but fruitless debates.
I will finish with a question.
How can two numbers quantify the quality of a photograph? Books were written about a single work of art and you expect an average amateur to summarize and classify it by two simplistic numbers?